MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[vratenza]

vicki:

so i dont see why 'too much' benefit should be given to anyone group based on personal reasons...

I want to send my child to the nearest school so that he can sleep more and wake up later.

I want to send my child to the nearest school so that don't have to pay the increasing school bus fee.

I want my child to enter this school so that my parents can look after him while I am at work.

I want to my child to enter this school because his tuition center or enrichment class will be nearby and walk over immediately after school.

Any of these are not PERSONAL reasons?

[3Boys]

vratenza:

vicki:

so i dont see why 'too much' benefit should be given to anyone group based on personal reasons...

I want to send my child to the nearest school so that he can sleep more and wake up later.

I want to send my child to the nearest school so that don't have to pay the increasing school bus fee.

I want my child to enter this school so that my parents can look after him while I am at work.

I want to my child to enter this school because his tuition center or enrichment class will be nearby and walk over immediately after school.

Any of these are not PERSONAL reasons?

But none of those grant hereditary perpetaul PRIORITY, geddit? There are good reasons to prioritize on distance, and in some cases those poor folk who happen to live near a school are displaced because alumni have come in to grab the slots, and they are forced to do long commutes.

[3Boys]

3Boys:

verykiasu2010:

hereditary or otherwise, popular school will always be popular, even if NYPS increase the intake to 1000, there will still be complaints of unfairness of not able to get in

Therein is the problem, it will be never ending, and therefore, the issue is not so much how many places there are in popular schools, as you now say (but in contradiction to your earlier position that the REDUCTION in places was the main factor), but rather, the priority admission system. That is the problem, the unfair situation in the competition for limited spaces, that one set of CHILDREN have a hereditary advantage over another.

Further, the reading that Phase 1 takes most of the places compared to alumni also hides the facts that likely a fair number of those who are in phase 1 are already in because their elder sibling benefited from the alumni entry. E.g, if school X has 80 slots taken in Phase 1 (siblings etc.) and 20 in alumni phase, guess how many of those in the initial Phase 1 got into the school due to 'child of alumni' priority? You do the math, its P2-P6, my guess is easily a third to half.

[vicki]

vratenza:

vicki:

so i dont see why 'too much' benefit should be given to anyone group based on personal reasons...

I want to send my child to the nearest school so that he can sleep more and wake up later.

I want to send my child to the nearest school so that don't have to pay the increasing school bus fee.

I want my child to enter this school so that my parents can look after him while I am at work.

I want to my child to enter this school because his tuition center or enrichment class will be nearby and walk over immediately after school.

Any of these are not PERSONAL reasons?

Yes, these are all personal reasons.

So i'm clamouring for more balance against personal reasons of a selected group of pple (the alumni) - who at the moment have a total free hand.

'Share the pie with thy neighbour abit more'.

[verykiasu2010]

3Boys:

verykiasu2010:

hereditary or otherwise, popular school will always be popular, even if NYPS increase the intake to 1000, there will still be complaints of unfairness of not able to get in

Therein is the problem, it will be never ending, and therefore, the issue is not so much how many places there are in popular schools, as you now say (but in contradiction to your earlier position that the REDUCTION in places was the main factor), but rather, the priority admission system. That is the problem, the unfair situation in the competition for limited spaces, that one set of CHILDREN have a hereditary advantage over another.

I don't contradict

Reduction of places is the main problem for those schools that run out of places after the alumni phase. If not for the push for single session and to reduce class size to 30, the schools could have been able to take in more. In the case of NYPS, even it was reduced from 420 to 390, they don't run out of places after alumni phase, in some years balloting only needed for those outside of 2km. If you read my earlier posts, I suggested that those sleeping alumni should be in phase 2C with the open category

Even if the intake is raised to 1,000, presumably able to satisfy all imaginary alumni, and even all PV, there still won't be enough places, popularity is also another issue -- some die hard parents die die want to send their kids to those popular schools. Some schools had lots of alumni, but not as popular as others

[vratenza]

3Boys:

vratenza:

the ABSOLUTE PRIORITY at this point in time are the P1. there is no Absolute priority for P2 at this stage...you can argue till the cows come home on the CAP vs no CAP issue, that's not my fight.

And the list I proposed are just reasons why some parents prefer to choose their alumni for their children. Please read the post carefully and refrain from altering my intentions.

Please do not start stirring the hornet's nest on taxpayer money argument. Some one will come along and ask you which tax bracket are you paying this year.....do you really want to go there?

So some parent's preference is sufficient to become a priority then?

Bill Gates did a great job for Microsoft, he loves the place, they love him = His son has a straight shot to the CEO position then?

Just because one had a rollicking time at one's old school, and one PREFERS that his child attends that school, DOES NOT mean that priority should then be granted.

It is a public school system, paid for in taxes by ALL Singaporeans, why should one set of children have priority over another, on the basis of, yes, I say again, SENTIMENT.

once again do not re-interpret my intentions. I am just explaining some reasons that parents have to prefer to send their children back to their alumnus.....I did not say they are accorded the priority based on these reasons.... :slapshead:

If one singaporean PREFERS to have his child study in a popular school, he bought a property <1km paying a premium for this proximity to increase his chance of entering the school. Now we are dealing with 1) Personal PREFERENCE and 2) Financial clout. And if you add PV to the mix, 3) luxury of time

as mentioned in my reply to another poster, whether you pay tax or not is inconsequential compared to the fact that you are SC. Do not bring paying tax into the discussion to fan the flame.
Foreigners, workpass holders, PRs all pay tax....the underpriviledged SC do not pay tax...so what say you?

[limlim]

vratenza:

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:

Popular schools got HDB whose occupants are average SC.

I do not find it reasonable to assume that a significant these households will all vacant their flats and be replaced by rich SC for generations to come.. althou this is just my personal view.

[verykiasu2010]

not every one wants the nearest school


more like every one wants the most popular school

and will move to become the nearest to the school

孟母三迁

[verykiasu2010]

vratenza:

as mentioned in my reply to another poster, whether you pay tax or not is inconsequential compared to the fact that you are SC. Do not bring paying tax into the discussion to fan the flame.
Foreigners, workpass holders, PRs all pay tax....the underpriviledged SC do not pay tax...so what say you?

that is true

[3Boys]

vratenza:

----> I will not have guaranteed space for my son in any of the 3 choices anymore. Alumni priority is not my birth right, but I earned it by gaining entry into CHS on my own capability and I should have the distinct priority in letting my son return to my alma mater. If I decide for whatever reason that I do not want my son to go back to CHS, the space can then be released to anyone else interested.

That is severely flawed logic, and unfortunately, you are not the only one to be deluded by it. Absolutely not.

You are the CEO of the company, you have outperformed your predecessors by a long mile, turned the company around.

Your son deserving of a seat on the board by dint of your efforts?

Not unless you own the company (or in this case, the school). The school does not belong to you, it belongs to Singaporeans. You contributed a lot? Thank you, so did the teachers, the principal, the school cleaner. I don't think the old school teacher who contributed 20 years of his life to building the school's math department has a priority admission for his son, does he? Why should it be different for alumni?