MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[janet88]

Firstly I’m not rich. Not all alumnus are.


Secondly, I will not vacate my flat to make money.
2 years ago balloting started for a popular school within my estate. My son is finishing his P6 this year. I can shift since both my kids are already in primary school. But I am not willing to, bcos I love my flat. Not everyone shifts after getting their kids into schools of choice…just those who rent will.

[Lyddon]

limlim:

You've said it, they are the PRODUCT of the school. They benefited from it.


And bcoz they're the product and they benefited from it, their offspring should be accorded priority to further benefit from it and possibly deprive another \"staying nearby\" of the chance?

They contributed.. yes.

But they contribute as a way of paying back what they have TOOK from the school.. the invaluable education that they have received.

They took.. they contributed, and they took it again for their offspring.. and they take it again for their grand off spring.. and they take and take and take and take................................................

their offspring may contribute.. they may not.. but even if they do not.. they are given the liberty to take some more....

Unless.. we scrap or limit the alumni priority..

Of coz, even \"if\" we scrap it, alumni still may get in even w/o priority, or they may be staying nearby.. so.. alumni offspring still got chance to be in the school and carry on the \"baton\" in their family line.. if they are sentimental about it

Interesting how I can skew the words, also ..... :xedfingers:

Schools are the PRODUCT of the alumni. Schools benefited from alumni.

And bcoz schools are the product and they benefited from it, alumni's offspring should be accorded priority to further let schools benefit from alumni and possibly deprive another \"staying nearby\" of the chance?

Schools contributed.. yes.

But they contribute as a way of paying back what they have TOOK from the Alumni ... by providing the standard education/syllabus that they have received from MOE to the students.

Schools took.. Alumni contributed, and Schools took it again from their Alumni's offspring.. and they take it again from their grand off spring.. and they take and take and take and take................................................

their schools may have contributed.. they may not have contributed more than the Alumni has given.. but even if they did not.. the alumni still gave ....

:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

[dorisp]

Lyddon:

limlim:

You've said it, they are the PRODUCT of the school. They benefited from it.


And bcoz they're the product and they benefited from it, their offspring should be accorded priority to further benefit from it and possibly deprive another \"staying nearby\" of the chance?

They contributed.. yes.

But they contribute as a way of paying back what they have TOOK from the school.. the invaluable education that they have received.

They took.. they contributed, and they took it again for their offspring.. and they take it again for their grand off spring.. and they take and take and take and take................................................

their offspring may contribute.. they may not.. but even if they do not.. they are given the liberty to take some more....

Unless.. we scrap or limit the alumni priority..

Of coz, even \"if\" we scrap it, alumni still may get in even w/o priority, or they may be staying nearby.. so.. alumni offspring still got chance to be in the school and carry on the \"baton\" in their family line.. if they are sentimental about it

Interesting how I can skew the words, also ..... :xedfingers:

Schools are the PRODUCT of the alumni. Schools benefited from alumni.

And bcoz schools are the product and they benefited from it, alumni's offspring should be accorded priority to further let schools benefit from alumni and possibly deprive another \"staying nearby\" of the chance?

Schools contributed.. yes.

But they contribute as a way of paying back what they have TOOK from the Alumni ... by providing the standard education/syllabus that they have received from MOE to the students.

Schools took.. Alumni contributed, and Schools took it again from their Alumni's offspring.. and they take it again from their grand off spring.. and they take and take and take and take................................................

their schools may have contributed.. they may not have contributed more than the Alumni has given.. but even if they did not.. the alumni still gave ....

:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

:faint:

[Lyddon]

janet_lee88:

Firstly I'm not rich. Not all alumnus are.


Secondly, I will not vacate my flat to make money.
2 years ago balloting started for a popular school within my estate. My son is finishing his P6 this year. I can shift since both my kids are already in primary school. But I am not willing to, bcos I love my flat. Not everyone shifts after getting their kids into schools of choice...just those who rent will.

Totally understand. I also love my house a lot.... unless someone is
willing to pay me enuf to buy a freehold penthouse or bungalow in D9.

Aiyoh... if there are more people like you who love their flat and less people who want to sell ----> low supply + high demand = higher prices.

eh... Me not blaming you for high prices arh. :itwasntme:
Peace. :xedfingers:

[verykiasu2010]

Lyddon:

janet_lee88:

Firstly I'm not rich. Not all alumnus are.


Secondly, I will not vacate my flat to make money.
2 years ago balloting started for a popular school within my estate. My son is finishing his P6 this year. I can shift since both my kids are already in primary school. But I am not willing to, bcos I love my flat. Not everyone shifts after getting their kids into schools of choice...just those who rent will.

Aiyoh... if there are more people like you who love their flat and less people who want to sell ----> low supply + high demand = higher prices.

then some people will suggest / lobby both MOE and HDB to require those without pri school kids to vacate their flats within 1km of popular schools

[CactusInDesert]

Lyddon:

janet_lee88:

Firstly I'm not rich. Not all alumnus are.


Secondly, I will not vacate my flat to make money.
2 years ago balloting started for a popular school within my estate. My son is finishing his P6 this year. I can shift since both my kids are already in primary school. But I am not willing to, bcos I love my flat. Not everyone shifts after getting their kids into schools of choice...just those who rent will.

Aiyoh... if there are more people like you who love their flat and less people who want to sell ----> low supply + high demand = higher prices.

Agree. If someone offer $10 million (I know it is not possible but just to show there is always a right price for physical possession), I bet she will
sell. Her love for the house will suddenly disappear and shifted to another hse.

[metz]

Lyddon:

limlim:

You've said it, they are the PRODUCT of the school. They benefited from it.


And bcoz they're the product and they benefited from it, their offspring should be accorded priority to further benefit from it and possibly deprive another \"staying nearby\" of the chance?

They contributed.. yes.

But they contribute as a way of paying back what they have TOOK from the school.. the invaluable education that they have received.

They took.. they contributed, and they took it again for their offspring.. and they take it again for their grand off spring.. and they take and take and take and take...............................................

their offspring may contribute.. they may not.. but even if they do not.. they are given the liberty to take some more....

Unless.. we scrap or limit the alumni priority..

Of coz, even \"if\" we scrap it, alumni still may get in even w/o priority, or they may be staying nearby.. so.. alumni offspring still got chance to be in the school and carry on the \"baton\" in their family line.. if they are
sentimental about it

Interesting how I can skew the words, also ..... :xedfingers:

Schools are the PRODUCT of the alumni. Schools benefited from alumni.

And bcoz schools are the product and they benefited from it, alumni's offspring should be accorded priority to further let schools benefit from alumni and possibly deprive another \"staying nearby\" of the chance?

Schools contributed.. yes.

But they contribute as a way of paying back what they have TOOK from the Alumni ... by providing the standard education/syllabus that they have received from MOE to the students.

Schools took.. Alumni contributed, and Schools took it again from their Alumni's offspring.. and they take it again from their grand off spring.. and they take and take and take and take................................................

their schools may have contributed.. they may not have contributed more than the Alumni has given.. but even if they did not.. the alumni still gave ....

:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

I like this. It shows that schools are immaterial. So, just congregate the children of alumni in any schools and they will make these schools 'good'. Then, we will have more and more good schools.

Hmm, MOE should seriously consider this.

[Laura02]

This is turning into a witch-hunt. First go after the PRs, then the alumni, church and clan associations.What next? Income? Race? Religion? but that comes under church associations, doesn’t it?

[metz]

CactusInDesert:

Lyddon:

[quote=\"janet_lee88\"]Firstly I'm not rich. Not all alumnus are.


Secondly, I will not vacate my flat to make money.
2 years ago balloting started for a popular school within my estate. My son is finishing his P6 this year. I can shift since both my kids are already in primary school. But I am not willing to, bcos I love my flat. Not everyone shifts after getting their kids into schools of choice...just those who rent will.

Aiyoh... if there are more people like you who love their flat and less people who want to sell ----> low supply + high demand = higher prices.

Agree. If someone offer $10 million (I know it is not possible but just to show there is always a right price for physical possession), I bet she will
sell. Her love for the house will suddenly disappear and shifted to another hse.[/quote]Just throwing out some random ideas.

MOE can always have certain criteria on distance. Priority to 'good' schools can be given to those who have been living there for more than 7 years. Those who stayed/rented there for less than 5 years will enjoy no special treatment.

For alumni, same thing. Those who have contributed for a long time with no self interest truly deserve a seat for their children. For those who have done nothing much since they graduated or contributed only after having children will not get to enjoy any special treatment.

All the issues discussed here are equally important or unimportant, depending on which side of the fence you are on.

[vicki]

Laura02:

This is turning into a witch-hunt. First go after the PRs, then the alumni, church and clan associations.What next? Income? Race? Religion? but that comes under church associations, doesn't it?

This is not a witchhunt. I still do not understand the true reason behind unlimited entry for alumni kids vs church n clan.

Hey, be fair. If u want to give 'a free for all' for alumni, then do so for the church n clan too - since without these fellows, the school would never have ben formed.

So back to the, wats sooooooooooo special with alumni (2A)?