Legal challenge to alumni priority policy

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:01:23 GMT

ScaredyMum — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:01:23 GMT

Dreamgear:
3Boys:
[quote=\"Dreamgear\"]So which school did your kids attended? Via alumni route or just like normal people?

My primary school no longer exists. I got my kids into school via PV, another system I dislike immensely and feel should be dismantled. But it is a lesser issue than 2a.

Fair enough. There is a 3rd system which i am also against : grassroot leaders and groups associations.

However i dont think things are going to drastically overnight. A lot of the current MPs also have a stake in this.

Maybe a revamp system where each cat are restricted to a certain percentage. Example alumni cannot be more than 20%, no more pv and clan or associations adventage. Grassroots portion will be difficult to take awar....[/quote]Personally I find this worse than the alumni and PV policies. Why should e grassroots & associations be given priority where they do not even have any \"relationship\" with the school, so to speak. If I am not wrong, alumni oso has 2 phases (those who r in the alumni club and those who r not), this is totally irrelevant. PV isn't that healthy either, some pple r so stressed abt PV when their kids r only 3-4 yo.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 06:51:24 GMT

limlim — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 06:51:24 GMT

Now, why not put forth the justification for the alumni priority?

"So that my kids can feel proud wearing the same uniform as me"?

Why not we look at justifications for distance priority?

Plenty of it over at the other thread, no need for me to re-write here.

WHY should alumni priority be before distance priority?

Fine, say, we don’t remove alumni priority. But, put it at P2C and subject to distance priority too. Then, I have no issues.

Within 1km, alumni first, then others <1km, and so on.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 06:45:04 GMT

limlim — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 06:45:04 GMT

Iluvmygals:
limlim:

Similarly, alumni priority is NOT justified
Only from your point of view, i am afraid...maybe not even the point of view of the general public...

We shall see about that..

Refer to the other thread about opinions on P1 registration.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 06:24:30 GMT

Iluvmygals — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 06:24:30 GMT

limlim:

Similarly, alumni priority is NOT justified

Only from your point of view, i am afraid...maybe not even the point of view of the general public...

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 04:03:57 GMT

limlim — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 04:03:57 GMT

AC_Power:
limlim:
[quote=\"AC_Power\"]
However, the question now is, is there an absolute fair system?
We seek a system that best fulfill the needs of the general community. Not necessary the \"fairest\" system.

Is it fair that children pay child fare and adult pay full fair when they occupy the same 1 seat on the bus?

Is it fair that only married couples can buy HDB flat? Is it fair that those with kids get extra govt-granted paid leave (CCL) while singles don't have?

There is no such thing as \"absolute fair\". Only \"reasonable and acceptable\" system to best suit the country's needs.

Please, throw the word \"fair\" out of the debate.

Look at what we NEED, and what is in the best interest for the community.

How can a system that is not fair to start with be able to address the need and the best interest of the community? Please advise.

Child paying lesser is because they are not earning. Charging them the same rate actually tax on the parents. So it is fair.

Singles can also apply HDB flats, but only after certain age. Why priority given to married couple? Because they need to start their family. So it is fair.

Working parents with kids need to cater for time when their child is unwell or need to bring them for medical checkup etc. Those without kids do not have such commitment. So giving them CCL is fair.

Maybe I should ask in another way. Is there a fairer or better system?[/quote]Children paying less, means their fares will have to be subsided by other paying adults, don't you realize that? Is it fair to singles? If children pay full fare, the adult fare might have been lesser!

You want to start a family is your business. Why should you have priority to a flat compare to singles who also need a roof? why 34yo single cannot apply flat while 22yo couple can?

Parents pay tax, singles don't pay tax? why should one party enjoy more perks than the other?

c'mon, FACE it.. it is never \"fair\". But we all accept it and recognize that it is in the best interest of the community.

We recognize that kid pay child fare is acceptable because they are not earning, NOT bcoz it is \"fair\"

We recognize that those with family structure need a flat MORE, so it is reasonable that they have priority. NOT because it is \"fair\".

We recognize that our country need more babies, hence all the perks. Not bcoz it is \"fair\".

We justify a need, not bcoz it is fair. It is NEVER \"fair\".

Similarly, alumni priority is NOT justified, so it should be removed or severely limited. It should be a privilege, not an entitlement.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 03:10:30 GMT

Average Joe — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 03:10:30 GMT

Hi, just to share my two cents’ worth on this perennial issue and I am sympathetic to both camps. As a compromise, I think there should be a cap on the number of places made available just like for PVs etc, with priority given to those who have served the almuni longest.

Separately, the fact that someone feels deep inside that this policy is unfair does not mean that the person would not take advantage of it if he/she can.

Lastly, if MOE wants to be inclusive, they should also think about what they can do for the kids of the parents, whose primary school had been closed down by MOE.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 03:10:08 GMT

AC_Power — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 03:10:08 GMT

limlim:
AC_Power:

However, the question now is, is there an absolute fair system?
We seek a system that best fulfill the needs of the general community. Not necessary the \"fairest\" system.

Is it fair that children pay child fare and adult pay full fair when they occupy the same 1 seat on the bus?

Is it fair that only married couples can buy HDB flat? Is it fair that those with kids get extra govt-granted paid leave (CCL) while singles don't have?

There is no such thing as \"absolute fair\". Only \"reasonable and acceptable\" system to best suit the country's needs.

Please, throw the word \"fair\" out of the debate.

Look at what we NEED, and what is in the best interest for the community.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 03:01:10 GMT

limlim — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 03:01:10 GMT

AC_Power:

However, the question now is, is there an absolute fair system?

We seek a system that best fulfill the needs of the general community. Not necessary the \"fairest\" system.

Is it fair that children pay child fare and adult pay full fair when they occupy the same 1 seat on the bus?

Is it fair that only married couples can buy HDB flat? Is it fair that those with kids get extra govt-granted paid leave (CCL) while singles don't have?

There is no such thing as \"absolute fair\". Only \"reasonable and acceptable\" system to best suit the country's needs.

Please, throw the word \"fair\" out of the debate.

Look at what we NEED, and what is in the best interest for the community.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 02:38:29 GMT

AC_Power — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 02:38:29 GMT

First and foremost, I do not even think this needs a legal challenge. It is not a law but merely a enrollment structure set forth by MOE. Hence, if one day this is deemed obsolete or unfair, the structure can be changed accordingly.

However, the question now is, is there an absolute fair system?

Going to the extreme, we can of course abolish everything and just apply via distance. Even if we are to implement that, I will guarantee that we will be hearing complaints from some sector as well. For example those staying in between 2 schools and lose out to those who are nearer to one of them.

Looking it from the other angle. Those who actually got their kids into the old school which is further from where they are staying, actually are freeing up slots for others vying for a place in a school near their place.

My niece got into my brother’s old school and she is very proud to be able to wear the same uniform, sing the same school song her dad once wore and sang. She can feel the attachment to that school right from the start. She has the desire and do well and behave in school as well because she does not want let her dad down.

So I guess the alumi priority policy does have the effect of passing on a legacy, its like 薪火传递, and bound the generations stronger together.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 02:05:30 GMT

MotherHen — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 02:05:30 GMT

Iluvmygals:
Ask enough people and we will probably get enough people to be against every single phase of the P1 registration....then we can throw the whole system out of the window.....

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: yes, so true...

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Fri, 07 Jun 2013 01:42:30 GMT

concern2 — Fri, 07 Jun 2013 01:42:30 GMT

Iluvmygals:
Ask enough people and we will probably get enough people to be against every single phase of the P1 registration....then we can throw the whole system out of the window.....

:rotflmao:

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:17:26 GMT

Iluvmygals — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:17:26 GMT

Ask enough people and we will probably get enough people to be against every single phase of the P1 registration…then we can throw the whole system out of the window…

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:29:17 GMT

Imp75 — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:29:17 GMT

How abt cheena schools haha, most cheena schools very hard to get in also haha though lesser fund raising exercises required

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 04:26:49 GMT

limlim — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 04:26:49 GMT

Deleted.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 03:33:54 GMT

3Boys — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 03:33:54 GMT

GLORYmum:
Pirate, thanks for sharing your view and I agree with you.

If given a choice, we strive to go for the best and safest. If I live above rulang and knowing that my chances of being balloted out in phase 2c is highly possible, wouldn't I register my dc in my alma mater provided my alma mater exists .

A system can't cater to every single need and it is 'strange' ( i would refrain from using 'ridiculous' ) to want to revamp a system that provides for the majority.

Why call for revamp nationwide when the problem of extremely high take up rate occurs only in specific top schools where non-alumni aka outsiders have practically no chance to enrol?

Because

1) The current policy is based on faulty premises

2) One needs a consistent set of rules across all schools in this regard

3) The policy tweak, which will have impact on the popular schools primarily, will have little to no impact on schools for which Phase 2A is not a problem. If indeed Phase 2A is a problem for some of those schools, then the policy fix is indeed relevant and necessary. Do you see the circularity of your argument on this point?

You say the system provides for the majority.

It does no such thing.

For schools that are not so popular, it matters not if one is an alumni, because even if you were, you could apply under Phase 3 and still get in. I.e., for the majority of schools, it provides no priority whatsoever, except a theoretical one.

Where the theoretical problem becomes a real problem, and who knows which schools in future will face this, then the policy tweak will become relevant.

Which is why if we fix this, we ought to fix it across the board. For the schools where you say there is no issue, then there is no impact.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:44:07 GMT

GLORYmum — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:44:07 GMT

Pirate, thanks for sharing your view and I agree with you.

If given a choice, we strive to go for the best and safest. If I live above rulang and knowing that my chances of being balloted out in phase 2c is highly possible, wouldn't I register my dc in my alma mater provided my alma mater exists .

A system can't cater to every single need and it is 'strange' ( i would refrain from using 'ridiculous' ) to want to revamp a system that provides for the majority.

Why call for revamp nationwide when the problem of extremely high take up rate occurs only in specific top schools where non-alumni aka outsiders have practically no chance to enrol?

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:25:22 GMT

pirate — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:25:22 GMT

GLORYmum:
Out of curiosity, if your primary school exists, would you enrol your boys via alumni priority?

I know this is directed at 3Boys, but if I have a boy (that one still work in progress, ok? ), I would. Why? Because the current system gives me hardly any viable alternative since the comparable one within 1 km of where I live is highly competitive at P2B and P2C (and the kid would still suffer a disadvantage getting into secondary school because of affiliation). So, yeah, even if I have to hire a chauffeur to ferry the kid all the way to Bishan, I still would. No prizes for guessing which boys' school I am an alumni of.

No. I don't believe the spiel that all schools are good schools. And certainly not all schools have affiliated secondary schools with IP programmes.

The system we have is broken. There is much room for improvement. Unfortunately, the majority of families do not have the means to get around the problems arising from it. And this is why I am offended by elitist people spouting 'atasness'. (I don't mean you. I am referring to a certain blogger.)

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:23:42 GMT

3Boys — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:23:42 GMT

chenwj:
U can look for this famous lawyer M Ravi :evil:

http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/13237663/img/13237663.jpg\">

How about this chap, I heard he's quite popular.....

http://www.tnp.sg/sites/default/files/ambody21.jpg\">

:evil:

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:19:21 GMT

3Boys — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 02:19:21 GMT

GLORYmum:
3Boys:
[quote=\"Dreamgear\"]So which school did your kids attended? Via alumni route or just like normal people?

My primary school no longer exists. I got my kids into school via PV, another system I dislike immensely and feel should be dismantled. But it is a lesser issue than 2a.

Out of curiosity, if your primary school exists, would you enrol your boys via alumni priority? [/quote]Sort of a moot point. It's never been an option so I have never thought about it.

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:49:09 GMT

GLORYmum — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:49:09 GMT

3Boys:
Dreamgear:
So which school did your kids attended? Via alumni route or just like normal people?

My primary school no longer exists. I got my kids into school via PV, another system I dislike immensely and feel should be dismantled. But it is a lesser issue than 2a.

Out of curiosity, if your primary school exists, would you enrol your boys via alumni priority?

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:18:04 GMT

GLORYmum — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:18:04 GMT

Oops sorry I am in the wrong thread, read it from the last page and realized that the thread is for legal challenge against alumni priority.

Maybe most of the legal professionals are beneficiaries of the alumni priority system?

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:12:54 GMT

GLORYmum — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:12:54 GMT

chenwj:
U can look for this famous lawyer M Ravi :evil:

http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/13237663/img/13237663.jpg\">

Er... Aiyo this is even funnier. :rotflmao:

Reply to Legal challenge to alumni priority policy on Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:12:11 GMT

GLORYmum — Wed, 05 Jun 2013 10:12:11 GMT

limlim:
pirate's nick kena pirated.. what more to say..

:rotflmao: