MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni
-
I sort of agree with LOLMum and verykiasu2010.
Reduction of classes, etc is probably the main culprit of limited space. -
vratenza:
A national policy should not overly favour any single person, party or group. If at all, it is to help underprivileged groups, not the other way round. Granted some are indeed entitled to some privileges, but to what extent?
....On the other hand, I do agree that proven and popular school's P2A will bludgeon over time under the current system because the alumni all having experienced the school system and culture believe in replicating their pleasant experience for their precious offspring.
There lies in the balancing act by the school's management/alumni to grow the school in physical dimensions and classes to cater to the growing population and also manage the grouses of Alumni-From-Other-Schools-But-Gave-Up-Their-P2A-Rights-in-their-AlumniSchool-To-Compete-in- P2B/C- here group of parents.......
IMHO, 2A should not be scrapped but it should be capped. If not capped, it does gives the impression that this privilege is extended \"overly\".
I am more inclined to want to leave this balancing act to policy makers rather than someone else. But of course, like what you said in one of your earlier post \" Every change in policy means a potential loss or gain in vote for the MIW in the next election. So guess which side of (majority/minority) will the MIW favour?\"
Well............. :evil: -
Dino_Mummy:
Nonsense. Just check the size of intakes for Nanyang, Henry Park, RGPS, Pei Hwa, Tao Nan and the like, are they not already well above average?I sort of agree with LOLMum and verykiasu2010.
Reduction of classes, etc is probably the main culprit of limited space.
And it'd be ridiculous for popular schools to just keep adding places.
Sentimentality does not trump fairness. There is no fairness in a hereditary system of Primary school priority admission, just because some parents have a sentimental attachment. We are a democracy, not a monarchy. -
vratenza:
Yes. Fairness is subjective but still - i dont see why secondary students of FULL SCHOOLS should be accorded such additional priviledges - i mean - we are talking abt OLD BOYS/ OLD GIRLS for primary school admission right? The secondary school student would have a 'primary school' to begin with (well, at least most) - so WHY should these secondary students of these schools be given 'additional priviledges'??
Fairness is subjective I guess. And one should really understand the situation from inside better before lambasting the rule as being \"unfair\"vicki:
Hi veratenza,
Actually I hve another grouse which I hope the govt can look into.
Because u went to CHS in secondary (I presume) n CHS is a 'full school', therefore u will be considered hvg priority cos u are also a alumni. This will mean u hve priority into 2 schools.
I don't find this 'fair'.
Why should some schools be considered as 'full school' n some schools don't?
U may argue that culture same etc or even that if a kid changes primar school (he would also hve 2 'alumni' schools to choose from.
To this I say;
1) Alot of other schools hve same culture but not considered as Full schools - why the diacrepancies?
2) Number of kids changing schools (per school) each year is not overly significant unlike 'Full Schools' with one whole cohort of students graduating each year for 'O' levels.
Do away with 'Full School' alumni (2A) connections I say....
To me it's fair because CHS Primary and Secondary are housed in the same compound, share the facilities and even canteen, the same school management committee and during my days, I remembered myself helping out in the primary school's sport's day, excursions and such. There are mentoring programs for the older secondary school students to help the younger primary section students.
It is one big family. :snuggles:
I'm not sure if your \"alot of other schools\" have the same level of linkage? Or they are simply sharing the same name, uniform maybe school anthem but in reality minding their own business on the running of the school?
You talk abt same school compound - well - one example is CHIJ Toa Payoh. So whats the difference? Maybe just different principal (one for P n one for S) and 2 canteens. If full school just means one P n one canteen - then simply just get rid of one of the P and one of the canteen lor - QED? No?? So pls do tell me, what is the difference (the REAL difference) between CHS/ St Nics and the likes of CHIJ TP? Difference is 2 Ps and another canteen??
Culture wise - i dare say is the same - HOW much different can the IJ culture be? Ask any IJ gals and they will tell you - culture is same in both P n S - and how would i know? cos i was an IJ gal.
So back to this, since there is no clear distinction between CHS/ St Nics ( Full School) and a school like CHIJ TP - then why should the former be accorded extra benefits?
I mean surely if the difference is just for a P n a canteen - it cannot be too difficult to cut one of the Ps (just get 2 VPs lah - one running each section) and remove a canteen right in CHIJ TP right?
Ok - im probably asking to be slammed by the CHS and the likes BUT REALLY - i would like to understand the CLEAR difference between these schools and one like CHIJ TP. -
3Boys:
:goodpost:
Nonsense. Just check the size of intakes for Nanyang, Henry Park, RGPS, Pei Hwa, Tao Nan and the like, are they not already well above average?Dino_Mummy:
I sort of agree with LOLMum and verykiasu2010.
Reduction of classes, etc is probably the main culprit of limited space.
And it'd be ridiculous for popular schools to just keep adding places.
Sentimentality does not trump fairness. There is no fairness in a hereditary system of Primary school priority admission, just because some parents have a sentimental attachment. We are a democracy, not a monarchy.
:salute: -
3Boys:
You have chosen to sieve out sentimentality among other considerations to support your argument........let's put it back in perspective:
Nonsense. Just check the size of intakes for Nanyang, Henry Park, RGPS, Pei Hwa, Tao Nan and the like, are they not already well above average?Dino_Mummy:
I sort of agree with LOLMum and verykiasu2010.
Reduction of classes, etc is probably the main culprit of limited space.
And it'd be ridiculous for popular schools to just keep adding places.
Sentimentality does not trump fairness. There is no fairness in a hereditary system of Primary school priority admission, just because some parents have a sentimental attachment. We are a democracy, not a monarchy.
1) sentimentality.
2) assurance from 1st hand experience with regards to the actual school culture, programs and level of stress bestowed upon the students.
3) familiarity in terms of school staff, teaching style and environment giving the parents assurance that the child is in safe and familiar hands.
4) confidence in the school achieving the results because you had been through the same system.
5) avoid PV and balloting.
alumni = monarchy? might as well add in communism to for the added drama?
Fairness definition?
By your same notion and line of argument, where is the fairness in a system that favours the rich who can afford to outbid the average joe in the purchase of a flat/house/condo <1km to the popular primary school? Should I term it capitalism? :scratchhead: -
vicki:
Yes. Fairness is subjective but still - i dont see why secondary students of FULL SCHOOLS should be accorded such additional priviledges - i mean - we are talking abt OLD BOYS/ OLD GIRLS for primary school admission right? The secondary school student would have a 'primary school' to begin with (well, at least most) - so WHY should these secondary students of these schools be given 'additional priviledges'??
Fairness is subjective I guess. And one should really understand the situation from inside better before lambasting the rule as being \"unfair\"vratenza:
[quote=\"vicki\"]Hi veratenza,
Actually I hve another grouse which I hope the govt can look into.
Because u went to CHS in secondary (I presume) n CHS is a 'full school', therefore u will be considered hvg priority cos u are also a alumni. This will mean u hve priority into 2 schools.
I don't find this 'fair'.
Why should some schools be considered as 'full school' n some schools don't?
U may argue that culture same etc or even that if a kid changes primar school (he would also hve 2 'alumni' schools to choose from.
To this I say;
1) Alot of other schools hve same culture but not considered as Full schools - why the diacrepancies?
2) Number of kids changing schools (per school) each year is not overly significant unlike 'Full Schools' with one whole cohort of students graduating each year for 'O' levels.
Do away with 'Full School' alumni (2A) connections I say....
To me it's fair because CHS Primary and Secondary are housed in the same compound, share the facilities and even canteen, the same school management committee and during my days, I remembered myself helping out in the primary school's sport's day, excursions and such. There are mentoring programs for the older secondary school students to help the younger primary section students.
It is one big family. :snuggles:
I'm not sure if your \"alot of other schools\" have the same level of linkage? Or they are simply sharing the same name, uniform maybe school anthem but in reality minding their own business on the running of the school?
You talk abt same school compound - well - one example is CHIJ Toa Payoh. So whats the difference? Maybe just different principal (one for P n one for S) and 2 canteens. If full school just means one P n one canteen - then simply just get rid of one of the P and one of the canteen lor - QED? No?? So pls do tell me, what is the difference (the REAL difference) between CHS/ St Nics and the likes of CHIJ TP? Difference is 2 Ps and another canteen??
Culture wise - i dare say is the same - HOW much different can the IJ culture be? Ask any IJ gals and they will tell you - culture is same in both P n S - and how would i know? cos i was an IJ gal.
So back to this, since there is no clear distinction between CHS/ St Nics ( Full School) and a school like CHIJ TP - then why should the former be accorded extra benefits?
I mean surely if the difference is just for a P n a canteen - it cannot be too difficult to cut one of the Ps (just get 2 VPs lah - one running each section) and remove a canteen right in CHIJ TP right?
Ok - im probably asking to be slammed by the CHS and the likes BUT REALLY - i would like to understand the CLEAR difference between these schools and one like CHIJ TP.[/quote]you chose to ignore my most pertinent point, and if you cannot see beyond this, I have no more to add..really....
\"the same school management committee and during my days, I remembered myself helping out in the primary school's sport's day, excursions and such. There are mentoring programs for the older secondary school students to help the younger primary section students.
It is one big family.\" -
vratenza:
Im not really catching you, Vratenza.
You have chosen to sieve out sentimentality among other considerations to support your argument........let's put it back in perspective:3Boys:
Sentimentality does not trump fairness. There is no fairness in a hereditary system of Primary school priority admission, just because some parents have a sentimental attachment. We are a democracy, not a monarchy.
1) sentimentality.
2) assurance from 1st hand experience with regards to the actual school culture, programs and level of stress bestowed upon the students.
3) familiarity in terms of school staff, teaching style and environment giving the parents assurance that the child is in safe and familiar hands.
4) confidence in the school achieving the results because you had been through the same system.
5) avoid PV and balloting.
alumni = monarchy? might as well add in communism to for the added drama?
So you think its is fairness to give ABSOLUTE PRIORITY to the alumnis for the above reasons??
Too bad - lesser Singaporeans who never went to such schools - you cant join in the crowd because you werent from there although you pay tax (like every other SG) and indirectly fund these schools.
Ok -- i am soooooo going to be slammed in my face....
Better siam first. :siam: -
vicki:
Yes. Fairness is subjective but still - i dont see why secondary students of FULL SCHOOLS should be accorded such additional priviledges - i mean - we are talking abt OLD BOYS/ OLD GIRLS for primary school admission right? The secondary school student would have a 'primary school' to begin with (well, at least most) - so WHY should these secondary students of these schools be given 'additional priviledges'??
Fairness is subjective I guess. And one should really understand the situation from inside better before lambasting the rule as being \"unfair\"vratenza:
[quote=\"vicki\"]Hi veratenza,
Actually I hve another grouse which I hope the govt can look into.
Because u went to CHS in secondary (I presume) n CHS is a 'full school', therefore u will be considered hvg priority cos u are also a alumni. This will mean u hve priority into 2 schools.
I don't find this 'fair'.
Why should some schools be considered as 'full school' n some schools don't?
U may argue that culture same etc or even that if a kid changes primar school (he would also hve 2 'alumni' schools to choose from.
To this I say;
1) Alot of other schools hve same culture but not considered as Full schools - why the diacrepancies?
2) Number of kids changing schools (per school) each year is not overly significant unlike 'Full Schools' with one whole cohort of students graduating each year for 'O' levels.
Do away with 'Full School' alumni (2A) connections I say....
To me it's fair because CHS Primary and Secondary are housed in the same compound, share the facilities and even canteen, the same school management committee and during my days, I remembered myself helping out in the primary school's sport's day, excursions and such. There are mentoring programs for the older secondary school students to help the younger primary section students.
It is one big family. :snuggles:
I'm not sure if your \"alot of other schools\" have the same level of linkage? Or they are simply sharing the same name, uniform maybe school anthem but in reality minding their own business on the running of the school?
You talk abt same school compound - well - one example is CHIJ Toa Payoh. So whats the difference? Maybe just different principal (one for P n one for S) and 2 canteens. If full school just means one P n one canteen - then simply just get rid of one of the P and one of the canteen lor - QED? No?? So pls do tell me, what is the difference (the REAL difference) between CHS/ St Nics and the likes of CHIJ TP? Difference is 2 Ps and another canteen??
Culture wise - i dare say is the same - HOW much different can the IJ culture be? Ask any IJ gals and they will tell you - culture is same in both P n S - and how would i know? cos i was an IJ gal.
So back to this, since there is no clear distinction between CHS/ St Nics ( Full School) and a school like CHIJ TP - then why should the former be accorded extra benefits?
I mean surely if the difference is just for a P n a canteen - it cannot be too difficult to cut one of the Ps (just get 2 VPs lah - one running each section) and remove a canteen right in CHIJ TP right?
Ok - im probably asking to be slammed by the CHS and the likes BUT REALLY - i would like to understand the CLEAR difference between these schools and one like CHIJ TP.[/quote]I am beginning to see your point.
-
vratenza:
Ok - lets continue with this discussion.
you chose to ignore my most pertinent point, and if you cannot see beyond this, I have no more to add..really....
\"the same school management committee and during my days, I remembered myself helping out in the primary school's sport's day, excursions and such. There are mentoring programs for the older secondary school students to help the younger primary section students.
It is one big family.\"
Same school mgmt comm? Not difficult wat - just combine 2 groups to report under one P.
Help out primary school areas - not difficult wat? If there is only one Principal - he can ask his students to do it.
So the underlying problem is BECAUSE there are 2 Principals - each therefore does not have absolute authority over both areas. However, if one ask the other to help - it will surely be rendered (in those rare occassion). So is it a simplistic thing to say - remove one P and therefore it is a Full School?
My boy is in the primary section of a FULL SCHOOL now and No, i dont see the secondary students helping out much. Recess time? the P5 guides. Excursion? PVs/ PSG helps out.
So - back to my - EXACTLY what constitutes a FULL SCHOOL n what doesnt? Is it a 2 P vs 1 P issue?
So No - im not avoiding your line of thought - i just want to know what differentiates CHS/St Nics with CHIJ TP?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login