MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[Laura02]

Oh, musn’t forget the most important person - my dc loves that I take time off work to go to her school.

[LOLMum]

if one has no time to join psg, be a class rep. get to know the form teacher, parents of the classmates.


it is less time consuming and lighter duties.

[alng]

Having been involved in both alumni and PSG, my experience is that alumni activities are organised in the evenings or on weekends while PSG activities are often held during school hours on weekdays. In the school where I am involved in, we have no problems getting PVs but the whole alumni are run by a small committee who are all working adults. We need more alumni to be involved. I am totally for the alumni phase to be modified to include active alumni only, even though I have benefitted from phase 2A many years ago as an inactive alumni then. But there will be an issue on what is deemed active. A prominent alumni who only attends one school event as a GOH annually may be deemed as active. Compare this to another alumni who spend time organising an alumni event on every Saturday (I know of one boys’ school at Bishan having weekly alumni activities).

[keroppi]

Laura02:

Oh, musn't forget the most important person - my dc loves that I take time off work to go to her school.

Yup. Must seize the day, that kind of love is fleeting ... by the time they are teens ... they go like this when they see you in school :yikes: and then quickly :siam: ... but I am sure that's not the reaction of every teen.

[gtx108]

alng:

Having been involved in both alumni and PSG, my experience is that alumni activities are organised in the evenings or on weekends while PSG activities are often held during school hours on weekdays. In the school where I am involved in, we have no problems getting PVs but the whole alumni are run by a small committee who are all working adults. We need more alumni to be involved. I am totally for the alumni phase to be modified to include active alumni only, even though I have benefitted from phase 2A many years ago as an inactive alumni then. But there will be an issue on what is deemed active. A prominent alumni who only attends one school event as a GOH annually may be deemed as active. Compare this to another alumni who spend time organising an alumni event on every Saturday (I know of one boys' school at Bishan having weekly alumni activities).

Why dont we use the same criterion in 2B to measure the contribution the parents make? We can simply count the hours like PV in 2B. If you have done 40 hours of duty for the school the year before the p1 registration, then you can be counted as \"active\" alumni. I don't think it's fair to give more priority to alumni who only contribute a few hours over those who have done 40 hours of PV (some even 60 or 80 hours). How's that sound?

[verykiasu2010]

pirate:

What I am against is putting up half-baked results inflated by GEP students just to show the school in as good a light as possible. Either don't put them up at all, or put up separate lists/tables. This is not for the benefit of present parents, but parents who are deciding which schools to register their children in.

verykiasu2010:

some parents even calling for pure-bred SC up to xx number of generations. your type ??

Now I really have to give you an 'F' in reading comprehension. This is not what they or I am saying here. But why so touchy?

since you already know it is inflated, why still bother? it is lousy except for the GEP transfer ...... why don't go to those non-GEP schools because they are good in producing GEP kids to be transferred out?

of course I don't understand what you are trying to say. and, F or not F, does not matter to me

[verykiasu2010]

pirate:

I would appreciate, at least, debating like an adult.

sorry I thot you are a kid

[verykiasu2010]

I think some people in their eagerness to prove a point or quote an example, mistaken between activities between PSG or parent volunteer versus alumni

[alng]

gtx108:

Why dont we use the same criterion in 2B to measure the contribution the parents make? We can simply count the hours like PV in 2B. If you have done 40 hours of duty for the school the year before the p1 registration, then you can be counted as \"active\" alumni. I don't think it's fair to give more priority to alumni who only contribute a few hours over those who have done 40 hours of PV (some even 60 or 80 hours). How's that sound?

It is not just quantity (hours) that counts, quality is, at times, more important. Consider this - a prominent alumni who is holding a high position in the ministry can fight something (eg location of the new premise) for the school vs another alumni who spend 2 hours weekly to run a taiji exercise session for the alumni. Can you say the contribution made by the prominent alumni is not valuable even though that person has probably spent a few hours on the task?

[keroppi]

gtx108:

alng:

Having been involved in both alumni and PSG, my experience is that alumni activities are organised in the evenings or on weekends while PSG activities are often held during school hours on weekdays. In the school where I am involved in, we have no problems getting PVs but the whole alumni are run by a small committee who are all working adults. We need more alumni to be involved. I am totally for the alumni phase to be modified to include active alumni only, even though I have benefitted from phase 2A many years ago as an inactive alumni then. But there will be an issue on what is deemed active. A prominent alumni who only attends one school event as a GOH annually may be deemed as active. Compare this to another alumni who spend time organising an alumni event on every Saturday (I know of one boys' school at Bishan having weekly alumni activities).

Why dont we use the same criterion in 2B to measure the contribution the parents make? We can simply count the hours like PV in 2B. If you have done 40 hours of duty for the school the year before the p1 registration, then you can be counted as \"active\" alumni. I don't think it's fair to give more priority to alumni who only contribute a few hours over those who have done 40 hours of PV (some even 60 or 80 hours). How's that sound?

To me, that wouldn't fully resolve the problem. I am sure if this \"new requirement\" is tabled, a lot of alumni will rush down to contribute their hours (for the sake for their scions) - an unwanted side effect may be that the schools might start turning away PV hopefuls. If alumni has to work hard for places, then it makes no sense for 2B to exist. PV (already replaced by alumni & PSG), GRLs & religious affiliates will probably have to go too. Right after Phase 2A, everyone else goes under 2C :skeptical:

Like alng, I didn't know the significance of being an alumni (been a sleeping one for many decades) until my child started school. Now, if I can't contribute my time, I contribute financially.