MOE not tweaking P1 registration

[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..

[rains]

MR06:

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 .

If you do read the papers, they do report on families who buy properties to up their chance to gain entry to popular schools. We don't disregard people who have lived there for years, but I'm just wondering if proximity to popular schools were not on their mind when they first bought the house/flat. Anyway the post was meant to say that giving distance-priority more vacancies would drive up property prices and thus further widen the rich-poor gap. I also believe that if distance-priority is given more vacancies, the popular schools will soon be occupied with only rich kids. Giving alumni more vacancies, on the other hand, will not see this happening, at least not as fast as distance-priority.

[rains]

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..

Ya right. Meritocracy for the rich, elite or famous. I'm a working mother. I want to be a parent volunteer to up my chance at a popular school. Surprise surprise - the Psg only consists of taitais who don't need to work, can volunteer during office hours and can raise private fund for the school. I'm not a doc or lawyer or actress who can provide exclusive services to the school. Shucks! I don't even get the chance to volunteer. What meritocracy are you talking about?

[limlim]

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).

Oh.. the love for alma mater from the alumni of this school suddenly more than doubled overnight.

Indeed questionable whether the \"love\" is hypocritical..

[rains]

Let’s admit that it’s only innate for human beings to be hypocritical. But given that all are hypocritical, wouldn’t the argument to do away with the sleeping alumni for distance purpose more hypocritical when in actual fact, ‘popular schools’ is actually the main objective lining every argument for distance-priority?

[limlim]

rains:

limlim:

[quote=\"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..

Ya right. Meritocracy for the rich, elite or famous. I'm a working mother. I want to be a parent volunteer to up my chance at a popular school. Surprise surprise - the Psg only consists of taitais who don't need to work, can volunteer during office hours and can raise private fund for the school. I'm not a doc or lawyer or actress who can provide exclusive services to the school. Shucks! I don't even get the chance to volunteer. What meritocracy are you talking about?[/quote]They contributed time and effort. As an alumni, you could have contributed also.. and those who doesn't, don't deserve priority.

of coz, it is debatable whether P2B should exist or not, and whether it is fair or not. that is outside the scope of this discussion.