\".... I know, because in 5 years of writing on this in this forum, every colour of parent that has dared to challenge this has been shouted down......\"


3Boys, get a life bro....

ChiefKiasu:

Tokidoki:

[quote=\"SBKS\"]my days of not requiring to be worried is over after last night.


2A1 also need to worry now. kow. :frustrated:

yah, i'm also starting to worry...

Relax already people. Unless you are eyeing those 5 or 6 schools that might require balloting at Phase 2A(2), this new measure won't affect you any more than the current system already does. The 40 places is a lower bound that protects places in those 5/6 schools for people downstream. For the other 184 schools, it is business as usual.[/quote]Boss, you are absolutely right.... I think the gahment has came out a solution that is only targeting those ultra popular school without making large changes to the existing system.

I think it is very silly and stupid to revamp everything just because those parents couldn't get their darlings into those few schools!

I was dead worried initially but now can continue to sleep peacefully til next yr registration....

Cheers!

charlotte_momo:

P2c will cfm hv 4o slots from next yr onwards.


Meaning that by 2a2, if still hv 60 slots, are they only giving 20 to p2b? Cos 40 has to go to p2c?

What if there are schools with lesser than 40 slots?

I think it's more of a reverse order allocation ie 40 will be set aside for P2C. From there, P2A and P2B will be adjusted accordingly... I think.....

Looking forward to more details.

Cheers!

Sigh…this thread has gone to the dogs…


God Bless and signing out…

floppy:

Nothing in life is fair. Get over it. It will make you less bitter, if nothing else.


Every proposal aiming at \"fairness\" is subjective and the value of fairness is determined by the person in question. Therefore:
1. A distance based approach is fair.
2. A first-come-first-serve approach is also fair.
3. A child-who-borns-first-will-be-accepted-first approach is also fair.
Perhaps, we should eliminate the current enrolment phases and subject everyone to a lucky draw. Element of luck? Maybe, but this approach is probably the fairest.
These are all examples of \"fair\" system used in our everyday life where \"fairness\" is required.

Is the current system fair? No, but so are all the proposals suggested here.
As long as parents have a particular school in mind and wants it more than any other, the only fair system is the one that allows their child to get in.

:goodpost:

Just got back from a short holiday and my goodness..... u folks are still at it!?!

Peace to all and happy holidays!!

[quote]
Let me take the case further from the child's perspective. The argument would go something like this:
The enthusiastic alumni who is so \"imbued with the school spirit\" told his child about the experience and his child was enthusiastic and eager to join the school and wanted the school as his first choice when his turn comes.
At the same time, another child, a neighbourhood friend of the alumni's child heard about the wonderful \"experience\" from the friend and was equally enthusiastic and wanted the school as his first choice too. But his parents are not alumni.
Why should the first child have a MORE THAN EQUAL claim to admission to the school which is after all a government public school?[/quote]The non-alumni child who heard abt the experience n wanted to get in.... U sure about that?! How on earth would a 6 yrs old child know and appreciate about the tradition, culture and the rich heritage of the school n wants so badly to get in... Give me a break!

More like the parents of the child WANTS the child to get gain a foothold into the prized school n satisfy their own vanity needs. What can't they inculcate their child that every school is a darn good school to get in?

As I have said before, it's not the system, it's not the alumni issue, it's the bloody mentality of the parents that needs a revamp!

pirated:

nothing much is going to change


the alumni priority causing fewer places to be left for 2B and 2C only affected a few perennial popular schools

for those perennial popular schools, even if you restrict phase 1 to within 1km only - they will still not be enough places for all the kiasu singaporeans who clamour to be in those schools even if they are SC living to JB, no matter how far

when RGPS newly moved to its new (present) premises with the enlarged intake, in the initial 2 years, even had vacancies for phase 3.......

and now ? it just prove a point that no matter how big is the intake or how restrictive you get, popular schools will never have enough places for die hard kiasu singaporeans

EXACTLY my learned friend!! Same sentiments!!

After 345+ pages of nagging and self-proposed solutions and comments, some verging on being ridiculous, what does it serve...... the vanity of kiasu parents who wants a piece of the pie they are deprived of, screaming of inequality and unfairness.

And don't get me started with those who had benefited from the existing policies, now championing for the underdog and claimed 'I have no vested interest'..... sounds hypocritical to me!


Peace to all...

Save yr joy for the traffic chaos in the morning and after school… Anyway welcome to the Marist family!


Cheers!

So what if they remove Phase 2A(1) after this uproar of giving alumni priority?


Those popular school will still continue to be over-subscribed… what’s next, start demanding that Phase 2A(2) must go too… not enough… Phase 2B not fair must also go… still cannot… let’s go for Phase 1 elimination.

When will it ever end?

Over zealous and kiasu parents will never be satisfied when their child cannot into their ‘preferred school’.

Cheers!

A few things might change in the months to come…


My girl actually qualifies under Phase 2A(1) for 2014 P1 registration. Statistically speaking, I should not be even worried or concerned for her when she is due for registration. But recently, there has been so much unhappiness and complaints about priorities given to this phase whereby knowing how our government has been so obliging in recent years… I am starting to worry that there’s going to be some changes to the phases to appease the general public.

From the media reports and feedback gathered, there’s seem to be alot of negativity towards alumni, church/clan association, GR volunteer and especially the PV scheme. If there were any changes to come, I am pretty sure it will be targeted at those areas. Just like how priorities were given to Singapore citizens (SC) now when there was an uproar during 2010 registration regarding the high number of PRs and non-SC getting places before SC.

Well, I suppose for every policy change, some win some lose. I just find that nowadays it’s so unsettling to make plans for anything in the Singapore context, case in point, look at the property cooling measures, the COE system etc

In the meantime, I am praying very hard and at the same time preparing myself for the worse case scenario of joining the thousands in the ever-popular national pastime… balloting.

Cheers!