MOE not tweaking P1 registration

[limlim]

rains:

limlim:

[quote=\"rains\"]

I hope I don't sound rude but you sound like you don't have an alma mater, because you don't seem to understand the sentiment of an alumni.

I don't get what you mean. You're suspecting that I never attended primary school?

It is clear that almost everyone have alma mater, but not everyone, or I would dare say, many, do not care. Look at the take up rate for P2A for those schools with vacancies for 2CS. A few KSP member does not represent the full picture.

Wah, you are over-sensitive lah. What I had meant was, your alma mater could have closed down or you are not proud of your alma mater. Just like how you can't comprehend what the big deal an alma mater is, I can't comprehend why you don't understand about the feeling of an alumni towards his alma mater. To me, it's only natural that we lean towards our alma mater at which we had spent our 6 years of our childhood. I can't understand how or why one can dismiss it as nothing. To have your kid attending your alma mater is akin to sharing a bond between you and your kid.

It's novel to me that there are people who don't feel for their alma mater, just like how it's probably new to you that there are people who takes pride in their alma mater. That's all. But to dismiss people's sentiment towards their alma mater and want to tweak phase 2A for those near school - that I think is not fair to the alumni. I don't buy the argument of 'since they love their alma mater so much, they should be actively involved in the school'. It's like saying 'since you love your country so much, you should take up arms to defend it.' I don't even have to live in my country to SHOW that I love it![/quote]You are free to love your alma mater.

But it doesn't mean that bcoz you love your alma mater, you should be given priority over other considerations of other part of the population.

So, those who attended NUS or NTU and love it should have they kids have priority in entering University BEYOND other considerations like grades? apparently NOT.

So, the \"love\" for the alma mater is not a viable consideration for priority admission. Other factors like best interest of the kids who stayed next to be school should have greater priority if there is no suitable means to judge the kid's suitability.

And those who love their alma mater so much that they spend a lot of effort in it, should be entitled to priority based on meritocracy alone. NOT bcoz of the \"love\" or sentiments.

[limlim]

nms1:

The impact on property prices is a very big consideration - in countries where a purely distance based system is in place you can have a situation where house prices on one side of the road which falls under a good school can be way higher than the other side of the road which falls under a not so good school.

So what is bad about higher property prices around a branded school? bcoz the poor might be deprived of the chance to enter that school?

IMO, alumni priority mostly benefit the rich, and possibly a greater evil than inflated property prices.

Have came across a few posting that the KSP member actually give up P2A priority to a branded school because it is just not practical or feasible to send their kids to a far away school. Only the rich ones can afford to do so, the minimum requirement probably means a car.

Hence, alumni priority are just as guilty as inflated property prices when it comes to favoring the rich. And even worse so when the poor kid staying in HDB next to the school is balloted out because of vacancies taken up by alumni staying 10km away.. who can well afford a car in a single income family to send/fetch the kids everyday, or afford hefty bus fees.

[SAHM_TAN]

But registration at P1 is different from gaining entrance into Uni leh.


Plus there’s no meritocracy for registration at P1 one.

[rains]

limlim:

But it doesn't mean that bcoz you love your alma mater, you should be given priority over other considerations of other part of the population.

Guess what? I'm inclined to believe that someone sitting at the top in MOE shares my belief rather than yours

Admission to universities or other institiutes in this discussion is irrelevant unless we have exams at kindies.

And I'm one of those who believe that giving priority to near-school families would definitely drive home prices up. As it is, property prices of houses and flats near popular schools are already more expensive simply because they are near these schools, so it's really a bad idea to suggest giving more vacancies to those near schools.

[wearefamily]

These are the ugly truths. Parents who did not or do not want to send their children to their alma mater (other than alma closed down or gender) because:


1. Alma mater was not brand name
2. Alma mater did not produce any top PSLE students

One very good example is Rulang. Before 2011, their phase 2A take up rates hovered around 40%. Come 2012, the numbers of applicants for this phase more than doubled, and total number of applications surged way up, just because the 2011 top PSLE student came from there.

Was it fair for parents who live just across the street where this previously ordinary school suddenly became inaccessible to them just because its popularity went up overnight?

Many parents here chant the ‘distance is fairest’ mantra, give many ‘unfair scenarios’, grumble and nit pick. But please ask yourselves if it is hypocritical. To these parents, if you came from a brand name school, or suddenly your alma mater produced a top PSLE student, would you not be motivated to place your child there?

The direction of making all schools good is the right one. Changing parents’ mindsets will take time (unless their alma mater suddenly produces a top student, lol).

[Nebbermind]

For those who still insist on debating the alumni priority, can go back to http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32400&start=1950&hilit=priority and read the almost-200 pages and see what has not be said yet. I se no point in repeat the same thing over and over again.

[Musings]

limlim:

nms1:

The impact on property prices is a very big consideration - in countries where a purely distance based system is in place you can have a situation where house prices on one side of the road which falls under a good school can be way higher than the other side of the road which falls under a not so good school.

So what is bad about higher property prices around a branded school? bcoz the poor might be deprived of the chance to enter that school?

IMO, alumni priority mostly benefit the rich, and possibly a greater evil than inflated property prices.

Hence, alumni priority are just as guilty as inflated property prices when it comes to favoring the rich.

Alumni priority is neutral - it does not favour the rich. Anyone who has an alma mater which still exist will get priority for their kids to enter the school.

Inflated property prices on the other hand will definitely favour the rich.

[MR06]

wearefamily:

These are the ugly truths. Parents who did not or do not want to send their children to their alma mater (other than alma closed down or gender) because:


1. Alma mater was not brand name
2. Alma mater did not produce any top PSLE students

One very good example is Rulang. Before 2011, their phase 2A take up rates hovered around 40%. Come 2012, the numbers of applicants for this phase more than doubled, and total number of applications surged way up, just because the 2011 top PSLE student came from there.

Was it fair for parents who live just across the street where this previously ordinary school suddenly became inaccessible to them just because its popularity went up overnight?

Many parents here chant the 'distance is fairest' mantra, give many 'unfair scenarios', grumble and nit pick. But please ask yourselves if it is hypocritical. To these parents, if you came from a brand name school, or suddenly your alma mater produced a top PSLE student, would you not be motivated to place your child there?

The direction of making all schools good is the right one. Changing parents' mindsets will take time (unless their alma mater suddenly produces a top student, lol).

Hope you are not talking about me.
Fyi, if I have a child due for registration be it boy or girl will qualify into one of the top boys or girls school under the earlier phases. For selfish interest, I would not have written such a lengthy post to protect my self interest. When we debate on national policies, we look at what is good and fair to most and not a select group of people. Hope this clarifies my position on the matter. If everybody thinks about what is good for themselves only, where would the country be heading?

[MR06]

Musings:

limlim:

[quote=\"nms1\"]
The impact on property prices is a very big consideration - in countries where a purely distance based system is in place you can have a situation where house prices on one side of the road which falls under a good school can be way higher than the other side of the road which falls under a not so good school.

So what is bad about higher property prices around a branded school? bcoz the poor might be deprived of the chance to enter that school?

IMO, alumni priority mostly benefit the rich, and possibly a greater evil than inflated property prices.

Hence, alumni priority are just as guilty as inflated property prices when it comes to favoring the rich.

Alumni priority is neutral - it does not favour the rich. Anyone who has an alma mater which still exist will get priority for their kids to enter the school.

Inflated property prices on the other hand will definitely favour the rich.[/quote]In a way, you are assuming people rushing in to buy property near good schools. On the other hand, you disregard the people who had been living in an area for years with school going children before the property market hots up .

[limlim]

SAHM_TAN:

But registration at P1 is different from gaining entrance into Uni leh.


Plus there's no meritocracy for registration at P1 one.

P2B is a demonstration of meritocracy.

Distance priority is with consideration for best interest of the student.

P2A, if applies to distinguished Alumni who made significant contribution, is demonstration of meritocracy.

Indiscriminate blanket priority for alumni.. w.r.t. meritocracy, is highly questionable..