MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[verykiasu2010]

pirate:

No. It's about the interest of my child. And I will throw stones, buy house nearby, and more, if I have to. :nunchuk:

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: truly a pirate ! :rotflmao:

[verykiasu2010]

rains:

What? 'Awakening'? I already know it before my first post here la! I just don't want to point out the hypocrisy and get stoned all by myself la!

doesn't it make you same with the hypocrisy ? :rotflmao: :rotflmao: ok ok joking joking only

the truth is grim, and the truth hurts, and the truth is always denied

[3Boys]

verykiasu2010:

not too late for your \"awakening\" !

I won't hesitate to repeat it here again : It is all about personal interest.

okay let the stones fly .......

In the majority, probably, but not all. And even so, one then must look at what's logical and FAIR. Just because one position is of personal interest vs another position of personal interest, does not mean that neither is a better solution. One of them can still be the more fair one, and that's the one that should be taken.

Note, my kids are already in P-school, one that I will be happy for them to continue for their own progeny, but I fairly certain anyway that in 20 years when they are ready, the scene would have changed significantly. So I have absolutely no vested interest in this other than a deep sense of injustice about the present implementation.

[alng]

Laura02:

pirate:

(1) Some alma maters do not exist anymore.

It's sad that some primary school do not exist anymore. I hope that MOE can look into linking them to existing primary schools. Schools like Swiss Cottage really have a heritage worth preserving. It's not my alma mater, but my brother went to that school, and he love it. It gave people who were borderline handicapped a place to study alongside the normal students. It gave children, SC, PRs and FTs a place to interact and play together. I would like to see the alma mater of schools like Swiss Cottage another primary school where they can pass on their heritage and traditions to.

Is it true that when a primary school merges with another primary school, it is considered \"disappeared\"? If school A merged with school B and named the merged school as school C, then all the ex-students of schools A and B can apply under the alumni phase in school C.

My primary school was merged with 2-3 other primary schools in a matured estate and I can still apply under phase 2A in the merged school.

So is this an issue of alumni do not bother to find out more about their \"disappeared\" alma mater or a case of a primary school disappeared and deprived its alumni of phase 2A application?

[verykiasu2010]

alng:

Laura02:

[quote=\"pirate\"](1) Some alma maters do not exist anymore.

It's sad that some primary school do not exist anymore. I hope that MOE can look into linking them to existing primary schools. Schools like Swiss Cottage really have a heritage worth preserving. It's not my alma mater, but my brother went to that school, and he love it. It gave people who were borderline handicapped a place to study alongside the normal students. It gave children, SC, PRs and FTs a place to interact and play together. I would like to see the alma mater of schools like Swiss Cottage another primary school where they can pass on their heritage and traditions to.

Is it true that when a primary school merges with another primary school, it is considered \"disappeared\"? If school A merged with school B and named the merged school as school C, then all the ex-students of schools A and B can apply under the alumni phase in school C.

My primary school was merged with 2-3 other primary schools in a matured estate and I can still apply under phase 2A in the merged school.

So is this an issue of alumni do not bother to find out more about their \"disappeared\" alma mater or a case of a primary school disappeared and deprived its alumni of phase 2A application?[/quote]I think someone recently posted that the can be considered as alumni of the merged new school, as long as the root is traced

[pirate]

It’s a bit of a mystery why MOE would rather create new schools from scratch rather than resuscitate a "disappeared" school.

[alng]

An example of a merger of four primary schools: http://www.firsttoapayohpri.moe.edu.sg/cos/o.x?c=/wbn/pagetree&func=view&rid=1162420


But despite having an alumni pool from four primary schools, this school is not popular at all in Toa Payoh. I was from one of the four primary schools.

[phtthp]

pirate:

It's a bit of a mystery why MOE would rather create new schools from scratch rather than resuscitate a \"disappeared\" school.

because of stigma (old ghost past memories) attached.

is better to demolish First Toa Payoh, build a brand new school, give it a brand NEW school name - plant a new Principal there, plant new teachers, build new facilities, everything all brand new. Even the coat of fresh new paint smells good. Off to a good start! compared to let old school remain, renovate, but still got old past haunting association memories linked to it.

sometimes, people also tend to connect primary school association with her Secondary school name as well.

look at Frontier + another new school in the West.
although both schools not proven, but so many parents welcome them & rush to enrol, until overwhelming demand exceed vacancies available. Why rush for it ? because even the fresh coat of new paint smells good!

[phankao]

verykiasu2010:

therefore it is your view that only active alumni members should be accorded priority, and dormant alumni members are no different from anyone in phase 2C

I don't understand the quibble bc, seriously - how many children can we have???? 5, 6, 7, or 10 children? Alumni who are applying for their twins, or triplets, or quadruplets all in the same year to take up many places in earlier phases are certainly very rare too! So there is already a limit.

(must qualify first - neither me or dh had priority in alumni for our kids. We balloted for them... once for each gender).

[Imami]

3Boys:

verykiasu2010:

not too late for your \"awakening\" !

I won't hesitate to repeat it here again : It is all about personal interest.

okay let the stones fly .......

In the majority, probably, but not all. And even so, one then must look at what's logical and FAIR. Just because one position is of personal interest vs another position of personal interest, does not mean that neither is a better solution. One of them can still be the more fair one, and that's the one that should be taken.
Note, my kids are already in P-school, one that I will be happy for them to continue for their own progeny, but I fairly certain anyway that in 20 years when they are ready, the scene would have changed significantly. So I have absolutely no vested interest in this other than a deep sense of injustice about the present implementation.

agrree on the part in red.