MOE not tweaking P1 registration

[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.

[rains]

There's always a counter-argument for every argument. We can argue till the cows go home but ultimately it really doesn't matter because the dust has settled

[limlim]

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?

Indeed, popularity of school is the main objective. no disagreement on that.

But doing away with whatever reasons a parent want to register in a particular school, distance priority is most beneficial and fairest to the overall community. That, is what most pple who support distance priority is taking about.. not the \"love\" of the neighborhood for the next door school.

Everyone loves convenience.. That, is a fact.

Some love their alma mater, some don't. But everyone loves convenience.

[limlim]

We’re just voicing out our opinions… doesn’t matter whether the pple from MOE listen or not.


Doesn’t affect me with regards to P1 registration anyway… Just feel that it is not right…

[SAHM_TAN]

limlim:

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?

Indeed, popularity of school is the main objective. no disagreement on that.

But doing away with whatever reasons a parent want to register in a particular school, distance priority is most beneficial and fairest to the overall community. That, is what most pple who support distance priority is taking about.. not the \"love\" of the neighborhood for the next door school.

Everyone loves convenience.. That, is a fact.

Some love their alma mater, some don't. But everyone loves convenience.

Errrr those who travel with their kids or let their kids travel from one end to the other end don't love convenience leh. So not everyone loves convenience.

[alng]

SAHM_TAN:

Errrr those who travel with their kids or let their kids travel from one end to the other end don't love convenience leh. So not everyone loves convenience.

I think most people, if not all, loves convenience. But parents who are prepared to send their kids to a good school despite the distance never see that distance as inconvenience.

My former Malaysian colleagues used to laugh at us Singaporeans, saying that despite our efficient (some may disagree) public transportation system, we actually think that is a distance of more than 10 km is considered far.

[laughingcat]

Inconvenience is very subjective. So i don’t think we should generalise "everyone loves conveniences".


Fetching the kids to school while in the same route and direction to workplace is convenience as well. Starting work early is also a good thing. It is all about time management.

[phtthp]

rains:

There's always a counter-argument for every argument.

We can argue till the cows go home but ultimately it really doesn't matter because the dust has settled

The dust had finally been settled, by a team of senior Top level govt Politician(s).
Verdict is:

MOE NOT tweaking P1 registration.
On hand now, MOE focus /concentration is on other far more critical matter to look into.

[MR06]

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.

Most alumnus from popular schools aren't poor in the first place. MOE should have the necessary data to support this. If alumnus children are indiscriminately admitted into a school it breeds an elitist culture, an entitlement culture. It effectively shuts the door to that self-made man's child who may have hailed from a humble background, from a primary school that no longer exists and lives near a \"branded\" school. Does it not run counter to a nation which prides itself on meritocracy?