MOE Relooking P1 registration - Too much priority to alumni

[ana_mum]

dorisp:

Yes I too agree that it may be personal interest for some that have young children going P1 in a few years time but I believe a lot of us here are done with this P1 thing and are here because we genuinely believe there are rooms for the P1 registration system to improve and this unlimited priorities to P2A is one big one to correct!

:imcool:

i can't agree more.. i've my fair share of experience with the P1 registration and have gone through Phase 2B (balloted out) and Phase 2C (accepted based on distance priority).. was satisfied with the result though ds didn't get into the school under Phase 2B but was lucky to have another school in Phase 2C that meet most of our criteria.. i've learnt alot from the P1 registration and really think that many things can be improved to make it easier & fairer for other parents who will be going through it.. it wouldn't hurt us at all even if the authorities were to keep the current system unchanged.. as for my children, who will be the alumni of their school (fairly gd school with long history and secondary affiliation), i'll strongly encourage them to actively participate in the events organized by their alma mater, keep in-touch and not just sit back and reap the benefits after graduating from it many years later.

[keroppi]

Imami:

A fellow parent at the cc that my child attends was telling me – they could choose to enrol their first born in tao nan (because the hubby attended the school for one year) or maha bodhi (because the hubby graduated from there). How fair is that? Some of us don’t even have that privilege between the husband and wife but they can even afford to choose…. :faint:

If I am not wrong, attend one year in a particular school does not qualify you for alumni status. Min is 3 years. They had better check with the authorities.

[Imami]

keroppi:

Imami:

A fellow parent at the cc that my child attends was telling me – they could choose to enrol their first born in tao nan (because the hubby attended the school for one year) or maha bodhi (because the hubby graduated from there). How fair is that? Some of us don’t even have that privilege between the husband and wife but they can even afford to choose…. :faint:

If I am not wrong, attend one year in a particular school does not qualify you for alumni status. Min is 3 years. They had better check with the authorities.

Heck, I don’t care a dime (about them).

But thanks for highlighting – this will be useful information for those who are going via the alumni route.

[dorisp]

keroppi:

If I am not wrong, attend one year in a particular school does not qualify you for alumni status. Min is 3 years. They had better check with the authorities.

Is it? But I read somewhere that you'll qualify as alumni even if you have just attended the school for one year.

Anyone could verify? TIA.

[keroppi]

Laura02:

Er .. Pls correct me if I'm wrong. Is it easier to change schools at P4 if the child has passed the first round of GEP screening?

At P4, there will be many kids transferring from non-GEP to GEP schools, leaving behind many places behind. Even for GEP schools itself (kids vacating mainstream into GEP classes). So that is ideally a good time to transfer school (end of P3). Like playing musical chairs.

[dorisp]

ana_mum:

dorisp:

Yes I too agree that it may be personal interest for some that have young children going P1 in a few years time but I believe a lot of us here are done with this P1 thing and are here because we genuinely believe there are rooms for the P1 registration system to improve and this unlimited priorities to P2A is one big one to correct!

:imcool:

i can't agree more.. i've my fair share of experience with the P1 registration and have gone through Phase 2B (balloted out) and Phase 2C (accepted based on distance priority).. was satisfied with the result though ds didn't get into the school under Phase 2B but was lucky to have another school in Phase 2C that meet most of our criteria.. i've learnt alot from the P1 registration and really think that many things can be improved to make it easier & fairer for other parents who will be going through it.. it wouldn't hurt us at all even if the authorities were to keep the current system unchanged.. as for my children, who will be the alumni of their school (fairly gd school with long history and secondary affiliation), i'll strongly encourage them to actively participate in the events organized by their alma mater, keep in-touch and not just sit back and reap the benefits after graduating from it many years later.

That's right. There are always two sides of a coin when it comes to personal interest and since it is a zero sum game, one place gain is one place lost so frankly if we could all just concentrate and discuss and debate the merits and demerits of the system, there really is no need to determine the motivation or the background of the proposer.

If your points are valid, it should not matter if it is personal interest. It could be national interest since this is a national policy.

If your arguments are not valid, it might not get very far even if you stand nothing to gain from this exercise.

[Laura02]

I asked because I think that these HA kids transfer fr non GEP schools to GEP schools for their twinning program, hence further increasing the number of good PSLE scores for these GEP schools.

[Imami]

dorisp:

ana_mum:

[quote=\"dorisp\"]
Yes I too agree that it may be personal interest for some that have young children going P1 in a few years time but I believe a lot of us here are done with this P1 thing and are here because we genuinely believe there are rooms for the P1 registration system to improve and this unlimited priorities to P2A is one big one to correct!

:imcool:

i can't agree more.. i've my fair share of experience with the P1 registration and have gone through Phase 2B (balloted out) and Phase 2C (accepted based on distance priority).. was satisfied with the result though ds didn't get into the school under Phase 2B but was lucky to have another school in Phase 2C that meet most of our criteria.. i've learnt alot from the P1 registration and really think that many things can be improved to make it easier & fairer for other parents who will be going through it.. it wouldn't hurt us at all even if the authorities were to keep the current system unchanged.. as for my children, who will be the alumni of their school (fairly gd school with long history and secondary affiliation), i'll strongly encourage them to actively participate in the events organized by their alma mater, keep in-touch and not just sit back and reap the benefits after graduating from it many years later.

That's right. There are always two sides of a coin when it comes to personal interest and since it is a zero sum game, one place gain is one place lost so frankly if we could all just concentrate and discuss and debate the merits and demerits of the system, there really is no need to determine the motivation or the background of the proposer. [/quote]Indeed. If not for folks like you (willing to share/teach/speak up), I wont not have learnt so much within a short span of time…

[gvyong]

I am only in favor of Phase 1 priority admission only for kids with siblings already studying in the school, for reasons of logistics and it is a pro-family policy.


IMHO, ALL the remaining places in the primary school should be balloted out, but with additional ballot slips as follows:

Phase 2A(1) - parent was former student and joined alumni, or School Advisory/Mgmt Committee member
SCs: alumni +2 ballot slips, SAC +3 ballot slips
PRs: +1 ballot slip (alumni or SAC)

Phase 2A(2) - parent has studied in the primary school of choice, or
parent is a staff member of the primary school of choice
SCs: +1 ballot slip,
PR studied in school: nil, PR staff member only: +1 ballot slip

Phase 2B - PV, church/clan endorsement, active community leader
SC PV: +3 ballot slips, PR PV: +1 ballot slip
church/clan/community leader: +1 ballot slip

Phase 2C
SCs: +5 ballot slips
PRs: +1 ballot slip

Distance from school
<1km - SCs: +5 ballot slips, PRs: +1 ballot slip
1km-2km - SCs: +3 ballot slips. PRs: nil
>2km - SCs: +1 ballot slip. PRs: nil

PRs Limit to max 2 ballot slips from all categories

E.g.'s

A) an SC who is alumni, involved in church/clan but >2km can get:
+2 (alumni) +1 (church/clan) +5 (as SC) +1 (>2km) for a total of 9 ballot slips.

B) an SC, non-alumni and <1km gets:
+5 (as SC) +5 (<1km) = 10 ballot slips

C) a PR, alumni, church/clan and <1km gets:
2 ballot slips (PR Limit)

I am trying to propose a system that rewards effort & involvement with the school, makes a CLEAR distinction between SCs and PRs, narrows the gap between alumni and non-alumni, provides some reward for proximity to school, while injecting an element of chance for 'outsiders' (non-alumni, PRs with a dream, living a little further but willing to make effort etc.) to land a place in the school.

Under the current absolute priority system, there is no HOPE at all for pple in certain categories.

Disclaimer: I'm sure there are flaws in such a system which I haven't thot thru in this quick brainstormer, so any feedback is welcomed!

[3Boys]

gvyong:

I am only in favor of Phase 1 priority admission only for kids with siblings already studying in the school, for reasons of logistics and it is a pro-family policy.


IMHO, ALL the remaining places in the primary school should be balloted out, but with additional ballot slips as follows:

Phase 2A(1) - parent was former student and joined alumni, or School Advisory/Mgmt Committee member
SCs: alumni +2 ballot slips, SAC +3 ballot slips
PRs: +1 ballot slip (alumni or SAC)

Phase 2A(2) - parent has studied in the primary school of choice, or
parent is a staff member of the primary school of choice
SCs: +1 ballot slip,
PR studied in school: nil, PR staff member only: +1 ballot slip

Phase 2B - PV, church/clan endorsement, active community leader
SC PV: +3 ballot slips, PR PV: +1 ballot slip
church/clan/community leader: +1 ballot slip

Phase 2C
SCs: +5 ballot slips
PRs: +1 ballot slip

Distance from school
<1km - SCs: +5 ballot slips, PRs: +1 ballot slip
1km-2km - SCs: +3 ballot slips. PRs: nil
>2km - SCs: +1 ballot slip. PRs: nil

PRs Limit to max 2 ballot slips from all categories

E.g.'s

A) an SC who is alumni, involved in church/clan but >2km can get:
+2 (alumni) +1 (church/clan) +5 (as SC) +1 (>2km) for a total of 9 ballot slips.

B) an SC, non-alumni and <1km gets:
+5 (as SC) +5 (<1km) = 10 ballot slips

C) a PR, alumni, church/clan and <1km gets:
2 ballot slips (PR Limit)

I am trying to propose a system that rewards effort & involvement with the school, makes a CLEAR distinction between SCs and PRs, narrows the gap between alumni and non-alumni, provides some reward for proximity to school, while injecting an element of chance for 'outsiders' (non-alumni, PRs with a dream, living a little further but willing to make effort etc.) to land a place in the school.

Under the current absolute priority system, there is no HOPE at all for pple in certain categories.

Disclaimer: I'm sure there are flaws in such a system which I haven't thot thru in this quick brainstormer, so any feedback is welcomed!

Well, if that was a quick brainstorm, what awesome things can you do with a little more thought!

Too complex my fren, and to put 2A ahead of 2B does not solve a structural issue of schools with too many in 2A already. Just my view.