MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[ascend88]

nlimm:

huskies:

[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]what makes the non-active / sleeping alumni special or different from Phase 2C ? they should be treated the same


suggest MOE to come up with policy guidelines on active alumni for them to qualify for alumni priority under Pr 1 registration, eg how many hours of active participation in the last 5 years prior to pri one registration

it will make alumni meaningful, continuing, and perhaps spur some sleeping members to be more active if they pride in being an alumni of a branded school

frankly, if the alumni has never got in touch with the school since graduation, there should be zero priority for such, as they are no different from anyone under Phase 2C

Agree!

I dont agree on this.Dont forget that alumni/old boy old girl are the group who make the school popular! Without them,without their result and contribution,how these popular schools be classified as popular?

Since the complaint/unhappiness arised due to 'Kids staying within 1 km cant even get into schools', dont all of you feel that MOE shd consider the below:

phrase 1A for \" SC kids stay within 1km\"

phrase 1B for \" SC kids stay within 1km with siblings who are existing students\"
[This phrase 1B is to eliminate those existing students who got in thru rental address/church /clan.grassroots/other means)

phrase 1C for \"SC alumni within 1km\"

phrase 2A1 for \" SC kids with siblings who are existing students>1km PLUS alumni/oldboy oldgirl>1km\"

phrase 2B1: clan/church/grassroot totally remove.SC PV remains.

phrase 2B2: Public >1km

phrase 2C:PR for above phases all here[since they have chose not to be SC but just PR just to have a bite of our pie]

phrase 3: foreigners[/quote]be it alumni....or PV...or even clan/church/clan/grassroots...all have done they part....

there should be a different between Singaporean.... PR...and foreigners...

also ...i believe the NS duty done by the Daddy should be taken into consideration too....

PR and foreigners done NS?

[janet88]

Keep phase 1-2C for Singaporeans only.

[ascend88]

janet_lee88:

Keep phase 1-2C for Singaporeans only.

Majullah Singapura !

[3Boys]

janet_lee88:

Keep phase 1-2C for Singaporeans only.

And in doing so, how much does it help Singaporeans competing with other Singaporeans for coveted 'premier' P-school places?

My guess is that we would just have turned nasty without making even a small dent in the problem.

[3Boys]

nlimm:

I dont agree on this.Dont forget that alumni/old boy old girl are the group who make the school popular! Without them,without their result and contribution,how these popular schools be classified as popular?

If you have read through this whole thread, you will see how illogical this contention is.

Do the alumni of Secondary schools get priority for their kids? How about ex-staff of schools who may have served for 20+ years, their contributions are less than some 6-year old who may have blurred his way through 6 years of primary school education? Completely illogical.

[nlimm]

ascend88:

nlimm:

[quote=\"huskies\"]makes the non-active / sleeping alumni special or different from Phase 2C ? they should be treated the same


suggest MOE to come up with policy guidelines on active alumni for them to qualify for alumni priority under Pr 1 registration, eg how many hours of active participation in the last 5 years prior to pri one registration

it will make alumni meaningful, continuing, and perhaps spur some sleeping members to be more active if they pride in being an alumni of a branded school

frankly, if the alumni has never got in touch with the school since graduation, there should be zero priority for such, as they are no different from anyone under Phase 2C

I dont agree on this.Dont forget that alumni/old boy old girl are the group who make the school popular! Without them,without their result and contribution,how these popular schools be classified as popular?

Since the complaint/unhappiness arised due to 'Kids staying within 1 km cant even get into schools', dont all of you feel that MOE shd consider the below:

phrase 1A for \" SC kids stay within 1km\"

phrase 1B for \" SC kids stay within 1km with siblings who are existing students\"
[This phrase 1B is to eliminate those existing students who got in thru rental address/church /clan.grassroots/other means)

phrase 1C for \"SC alumni within 1km\"

phrase 2A1 for \" SC kids with siblings who are existing students>1km PLUS alumni/oldboy oldgirl>1km\"

phrase 2B1: clan/church/grassroot totally remove.SC PV remains.

phrase 2B2: Public >1km

phrase 2C:PR for above phases all here[since they have chose not to be SC but just PR just to have a bite of our pie]

phrase 3: foreigners

be it alumni....or PV...or even clan/church/clan/grassroots...all have done they part....

there should be a different between Singaporean.... PR...and foreigners...

also ...i believe the NS duty done by the Daddy should be taken into consideration too....

PR and foreigners done NS?[/quote]Ascend88:
Not too sure if PR does NS, I don't think so. Foreigners definitely nope.
But then if consider this be the same as what I stated of All phrases SC shd come 1st & PR all the way back coz all SC kids' daddy definitely did NS right? ( or wrong assumption?)

[nlimm]

3Boys:

nlimm:

I dont agree on this.Dont forget that alumni/old boy old girl are the group who make the school popular! Without them,without their result and contribution,how these popular schools be classified as popular?

If you have read through this whole thread, you will see how illogical this contention is.

Do the alumni of Secondary schools get priority for their kids? How about ex-staff of schools who may have served for 20+ years, their contributions are less than some 6-year old who may have blurred his way through 6 years of primary school education? Completely illogical.

3Boys:
Coz to get into gd sec sch is based in real ability of the kids. Of coz if to have this on pri 1 registration , we can have entry tests all all kids instead of balloting but well parents like us be really very extremely stressed then though personally I don't mind as I will know my kids be mixing with sch mates of equivalent abilities.
Actually what they shd look into is discontinued the part which ' parents fr affiliated sec sch r consider as in phase2A1 & 2A2 also. This part is what I really cannot comprehend. The parents not even fr tt pri sch,no contribution at all to the pri sch. Can anyone enlighten me on this ?

[3Boys]

nlimm:

3Boys:

[quote=\"nlimm\"]
I dont agree on this.Dont forget that alumni/old boy old girl are the group who make the school popular! Without them,without their result and contribution,how these popular schools be classified as popular?

If you have read through this whole thread, you will see how illogical this contention is.

Do the alumni of Secondary schools get priority for their kids? How about ex-staff of schools who may have served for 20+ years, their contributions are less than some 6-year old who may have blurred his way through 6 years of primary school education? Completely illogical.

3Boys:
Coz to get into gd sec sch is based in real ability of the kids. Of coz if to have this on pri 1 registration , we can have entry tests all all kids instead of balloting but well parents like us be really very extremely stressed then though personally I don't mind as I will know my kids be mixing with sch mates of equivalent abilities.
Actually what they shd look into is discontinued the part which ' parents fr affiliated sec sch r consider as in phase2A1 & 2A2 also. This part is what I really cannot comprehend. The parents not even fr tt pri sch,no contribution at all to the pri sch. Can anyone enlighten me on this ?[/quote]No, I do not advocate ANY kind of ability testing for P1 registration.

However, that does not mean that therefore, alumni priority becomes logical. It does NOT! Just because someone can produce a report card from that school does not mean he was a contributor to it, not does it imply that such a privilege should be hereditary.

[Chenonceau]

3Boys:

No, I do not advocate ANY kind of ability testing for P1 registration.

I know from a teacher friend that the school she teaches in... sets killer exams for P1 to sieve out the very brightest to set apart for special teaching. Staff however, are not allowed to talk about this to the parents of the school.

Is this what is meant by ability testing?

[3Boys]

Chenonceau:

3Boys:

No, I do not advocate ANY kind of ability testing for P1 registration.

I know from a teacher friend that the school she teaches in... sets killer exams for P1 to sieve out the very brightest to set apart for special teaching. Staff however, are not allowed to talk about this to the parents of the school.

Is this what is meant by ability testing?

Not my experience. I think some kind of 'soft' banding is acceptable, if it helps the slower kids with foundation knowledge they may not have, and stretches the more advanced ones lest they get bored. If you prefer a softer word, perhaps I use 'knowledge level', so as not to impugne the ability of the child?

Anyhow, its OT. I am replying to nlimm regarding pre-P1 testing for P-school entry, not testing at P1 per se.