wilburlim:

Does that mean that the rich can only afford to be under the aegis of Miss Loi? How about the poor? Will they succumb to low-quality, not-so-intelligent tutors?

Hey ! What seems to be the problem here Wilburlim ? It is just simple nature discussion and sharing of info here not directed at anyone in particular ...if not for the originator and contributors of this topic I wouldn't have know about the two tutors mentioned and their strength and style...

Your remarks are uncalled for .... Please keep this forum a friendly place for people to share info freely... just Live And Let Live OK ? :offtopic:

CayennePepper:

Interesting... I've been following P1 registration for 8 years. This is the first year that I observe alumni becoming firing targets.


Those who don't qualify for phase2A at the POPULAR schools complain that alumni take up too many vacancies. Mind you, this year there are only 4 schools on the entire island with zero phase 2A take-up. So are most disgruntled folks upset with every single parent who register as ex-student in the hundreds of schools? Or just those who register at the 'hot' schools in droves and decrease the vacancies for the hopefuls at later phases? I rather think a lot of the chatter is by those with vested interest... along the line of 'look at all these alumni who dare-dare register at MY chosen (popular) school! Take up so many spots! What's left for me???'

I don't hear much rumbling about alumni take-up at the less popular schools. Why? :? Cos there're enough seats left for the rest? Let's say the
popular school increase their intake, will you still protest at the existence of 2A? Nobody's complaining about CHS this year, right?
Some PVs complain they have to work so hard to get priority at registration, compared to alumni who just waltz in.
But, just to be fair, I must note that they also complain about grassroot leaders who can pick any school in the area they serve.
And clan members whom they perceive as having an easier time, just join, pay the fees for enough years, and voila!-qualify for 2B!
Don't forget church members. What? You're entitled to priority just because you go to church?? So easy! Whereas I have to SLOG, you know!

I'm sorry to say this, but in my current state (I'm a little drunk :oops:), a lot of the dissatisfied complaints sound like whining to me. It's like saying, I'm buay-song you have an advantage I don't enjoy... Take away the advantage because it's not fair FOR ME. You don't have to work to get in the school that is 500 metres away from my house. Stay at Ubin also can
get in!!! I am MORE entitled! Than you! Who did nothing for the school!

Hey, how about this, maybe the qualifying criteria for 2A should be: for those who have studied at the school of choice AND obtained a PSLE score of 270 and above! Good enough as contribution to said school? After all, if
not for those who did so well, would these schools become so desired by parents who want to give their offspring a so-called 'head start in life', whatever that means...

I want to get started on ranting about the tirade against PRs (after blaming alumni for not leaving enough vacancies, let's find another group to blame. Cos i really, really, deserve that spot more than you, you and you...) But i guess i've, very likely, offended many people here already.
Apologies in advance if i've seriously offended anyone. I was really just thinking hard about the unhappines felt by so many this year. Somehow my thoughts just drifted into frustration territory when i keep reading posts directed against every other soul who enjoys higher priority in the p1 registration game... :skeptical:

Er, I do understand where some of you are coming from when you voice out your thoughts about the current system and the changes you feel would benefit all (but how to please everyone huh). It's the whiners I can't abide. Drunk already, so chicken... Must write in tiny font... Ohhhhh, DH waiting for me in... :siam:

CayennePepper,
I think we should also ask ourselves why some \"kiasu\" parents' \"whining\", justified or otherwise, became louder and louder especially in the last 2 to 3 years ? Why their chances for the more popular schools are dwindling by the years ? Why the authorities, until as recent as last year, had to tweak the balloting system by giving an additional chance to S'pore Citizens which some feel is still not enough done ? ... Why ? .... is there a correlation to all things happening around us that is clearly taxing our infrastructures and facilities ? WHY ?

The cutting of classes to go single session could be the other reason that is causing supply of places in certain schools to be reduced while the demand is still strong and growing thus adding even more to their woes... so we can't really say the parents concerned by coming up with ideas and suggestions on how to increase the supply side of the equation are whining...

I would like to take this opporunity and quote KiasuParents.com \"About Us\" introduction, 2nd to 4th paragraph. At the end of day, I think common sense will prevail and those parents who did not get to see their wishes come true this year will surely pack up their old kit bag and move on with life ... let us not chastise them for voicing out their inner most desires but instead let their voices be heard through KiasuParents.com which is a reckon force by itself...

(Quote \"About Us\" KiasuParents.com) http://www.kiasuparents.com/kiasu/content/why-kiasuparentscom

\" We are quick to ridicule other parents as kiasu (怕输) when we see them blatantly trying to get the best for their kids. Indeed, at one extreme, we have horror stories about how aunties bullied small children into surrendering front seats for their own children on the first day of school. Yet, there are things that we do ourselves that other parents might deem as kiasu.

Is being kiasu really bad?
The fact is, most parents are naturally kiasu to varying degrees, and we do it because we care. So our focus should not be on whether parents are kiasu or not. What is much more important is our parenting style. Are we uninvolved, indulgent, authoritarian or authoritative parents? Parenting style has a permanent impact on how our children are shaped as they become adults themselves.

Here at KiasuParents.com, our mission is to debunk the notion that being kiasu is bad to begin with. Instead of being furtive about it, we will be proactive when it comes to trying to look for that external help that can give our children the extra edge as they grow up. We want to celebrate the kiasu parents who successfully adopt authoritative practices that achieve their goal of giving their best to their dearests. The literal meaing of kiasu is \"to be afraid of losing out\", which also translates to: \"to want to win\". There is nothing wrong with wanting the best for our children; the question is how it is achieved. Kiasu becomes derogatory only when we attempt to win at all costs, igoring common sense and basic human decency. \"　(UnQuote)

Scary:

teddy75:

[quote=\"sc88\"]
****** quoting Champion before this ************
I am wondering - can we do away with this PV system? No offence to any parents but it would be fair and square for everyone if all fall under the same category....Well, I know some may beg to differ from my point here but seriously this PV thing is really creating the big hoo-haa - already 2 cases here in JW area [last year West Grove and this year Rulang] :sad
*********************

I suggest the schools seperate PV under distances (Priority given to accept more parents staying within 1km ) The remainings will then to be given for parents staying within 1-2km (depending on individual schools acceptance of how many PV on that year.)Since every year mostly all School PVs is within 1km go for balloting.

At least parents staying within 1km can choose to do PV or go under Phase 2C. This will gives parents within 1km have more chances .
For Singaporean , they thus have total 4 balloting chances whilst those not under Singaporean have total 2 chances .

MY SUGGESTION FAIR ENOUGH?

It's really up to the school. Some schools, I think (suspect), may actually take in more PVs staying 1-2 km to give them a chance to go at it especially if their chance at Phase 2C, 1-2 km, is not too high to reduce some imbalances... of course not forgetting the need to stress that it is not guaranteed. No body can.

On another note, even if you, a Singaporean, are given 400 balloting chances and you stay 1-2km from a school of choice, the PR who stays within 1km and with only 1 ballot chance in his hand will still beat you to the queue... how's that food for thought ???

Call me selfish or what .....I can't help it but to agree and side with those who have remarked earlier that Singaporeans should be given priority over PRs whose registration should be placed in later phases after 1, 2A, 2B and 2C... unless someone have a fairer suggestion :imdrowning: :?:

Actually PVs or not PVs doesn't matter at this pt if priorities are all given to Singaporeans. Tackle a problem at a time. To me, priority to be given to Singaporeans is most impt. Just like elections, PRs don't get to vote. PRs get lesser medical subsidies. Why in this case, PRs are on equal footing as Singaporeans and some even better than us? (Having said that, our population is around 5m now, election population is 2.Xm. Half population are those Sgporeans less than 21, PRs, etc. So one can roughly know how many PRs we have!!)[/quote]Scary, Agree with you with both a \"YES\" & \"NOT\". YES, If priorities are given to Singaporean first then we will not have today's situation. However, for super hot and popular schools with a long history and good track record the 2B PV scheme will still draw the line.... can we remove the 2B PV scheme as Champion had suggested ? You tell me... I think \"NOT\" because the 2B PVs also help legitimizes the clan members' and grassroot leaders' entitlement for those who have contributed in one way or another to a higher order then those who have not and besides PVs are needed and do help enrich the schools' programmes too... So, who are these people in the clan and grassroot group ?... want to make some guesses ? Hmmmm... :scratchhead: You tell me...it's anybody's guesses... your guess will be as good as mine :pokeeye: So let's not rock the boat too much.... But, Yes 100% AGREE must give priority to SINGAPOREANS FIRST !!! :gloomy: :sad:

sc88:

Champion:

I am wondering - can we do away with this PV system? No offence to any parents but it would be fair and square for everyone if all fall under the same category....Well, I know some may beg to differ from my point here but seriously this PV thing is really creating the big hoo-haa - already 2 cases here in JW area [last year West Grove and this year Rulang] :sad:

I suggest the schools seperate PV under distances (Priority given to accept more parents staying within 1km ) The remainings will then to be given for parents staying within 1-2km (depending on individual schools acceptance of how many PV on that year.)Since every year mostly all School PVs is within 1km go for balloting.

At least parents staying within 1km can choose to do PV or go under Phase 2C. This will gives parents within 1km have more chances .
For Singaporean , they thus have total 4 balloting chances whilst those not under Singaporean have total 2 chances .

MY SUGGESTION FAIR ENOUGH?

It's really up to the school. Some schools, I think (suspect), may actually take in more PVs staying 1-2 km to give them a chance to go at it especially if their chance at Phase 2C, 1-2 km, is not too high to reduce some imbalances... of course not forgetting the need to stress that it is not guaranteed. No body can.

On another note, even if you, a Singaporean, are given 400 balloting chances and you stay 1-2km from a school of choice, the PR who stays within 1km and with only 1 ballot chance in his hand will still beat you to the queue... how's that food for thought ???

Call me selfish or what .....I can't help it but to agree and side with those who have remarked earlier that Singaporeans should be given priority over PRs whose registration should be placed in later phases after 1, 2A, 2B and 2C... unless someone have a fairer suggestion :imdrowning: :?:

Funx3:

Jennifer:

The 2 top PH pupils are from CH6.

Got to B .... Cannot Imagine If a FA6 Students Beat CH6, Right?
:celebrate: :celebrate:

Hi Funx3, What's this suppose to mean ? I think our littles ones can do without insinuating remarks such as yours ... spare a kind thought and words for all kiddos who tried and did their best ok ?!!! :x

Juanthedragon:

verykiasu2010:

Juan, can you elborate this? Does it means that pte housing price will goes down soon? We have been sourcing for one at BT but the price keep going up.. Hope to get one at Shelford....hope your magic words come true... wishful thinking

The property market will collaspe when an old guard passed on. I believe you can decipher for yourself.

juanthenaysayer :offtopic:

markfch:

foreverj:

[quote=\"markfch\"]
Let me looked at my crystal ball. Blurry blurry at first. Ok, saw it already. It says that 40 yrs down the road, NYPS & RGS will still be tops. Wait wait, I see something else . I also see that SAPS will rise up and challenge both schs. So parents of kids in these schs made the correct choice.

wats SAPS?

St Anthony's pri sch. Btw, my colleague told me that last time St Andrews is same std as RI. I asked him rugby is it? He knocked my head :heresmyfish: and say don't try to by funny. It's academic.[/quote] St Anthony Primary & RI ??? :? St Anthony Primary is one of the feeder schools to SJI... yr colleague meant to say \"last time\" SJI was same standard as RI long time ago izzit ? ... but that's was, like your colleague said, ... a loooong time ago....\"last time\" was like 30-40 over years ago... :heresmyfish:

chamonix:

teddy75:

I wonder what does MOE based on to reduce PHPS vacancies by 8.3% from last year's 360 to 330 this year ? Or is the decision made by the school itself ? Monkey year (2004) birthrate slight tapering off at 37,174 from Goat year (2003) of 37,485 ? My personal opinion that 0.83% is not large enough to justify it ..... or maybe a survey of their existing population ?? Is there such a thing ? Can anyone share ?

Most primary schools are moving towards single sessions slowly. PH is a partial single session school currently, so more cuts in classes may be expected over the next few years. The same scenario happened to BPPS too. There were 2 fewer classes for P1 registration last year. Not sure if there's any more cuts in classes this year though.

Thank you for your enlightenment...

BPPS was 240 last yr and increased to 270 this year instead.... maybe there is demand there and they have reacted to upgrade their facilities to allow this... let's hope PHPS will do the same too....

janet_lee88:

Chamonix,

It's not true that Bukit Timah has many Indonesians ? A friend told me so leh. :?

I would like to see what's the take up rate for Phase 2A2 for Pei Hwa now. With half vacancies gone, it's going to be a tough fight for those in 2B and 2C.

I wonder what does MOE based on to reduce PHPS vacancies by 8.3% from last year's 360 to 330 this year ? Or is the decision made by the school itself ? Monkey year (2004) birthrate slight tapering off at 37,174 from Goat year (2003) of 37,485 ? My personal opinion that 0.83% is not large enough to justify it ..... or maybe a survey of their existing population ?? Is there such a thing ? Can anyone share ?

.... I really really hope that this is all a bad dream and an \"Honest Mistake\" that 175 is actually for NYPS and 111 is actually for PHPS (yearly avg 150 minus 30 dropped ?) since they are both one line entry away from each other in the MOE table.....

If not, the foregone conclusion for PHPS 2C balloting would be a ThunderBolt HOT contest for those <1km ....out of the Blue ! .... :!:

praying for all concerned and including myself.... (2012 registration, <1km)