'More than just a privilege': Two-track Phase 2C scheme for 12 schools draws mixed reactions from alumni

“If excessive alumni benefits are worsening inequality then we should intervene,” says one parent who is supportive of the changes.

Primary school students attending a class. (File photo: TODAY)

This audio is generated by an AI tool.

SINGAPORE: When Jasmine heard that more places would be set aside for Phase 2C applicants in the Primary 1 registration exercise from next year, she felt disappointed and worried.

The change could mean fewer places under Phase 2A, which gives priority to alumni.

As an alumna of Singapore Chinese Girls' School (SCGS), she will be eligible to register her four-year-old daughter in 2028 under Phase 2A. SCGS is one of 12 schools where places in Phase 2C – children with no connections to the school – will be allocated under a new two-track system.

Jasmine, who wanted to be known only by her first name, lives more than 2km from SCGS, but is considering moving closer to improve her daughter’s chances.

CNA Games Guess Word Crack the word, one row at a time Buzzword Create words using the given letters Mini Sudoku Tiny puzzle, mighty brain teaser Mini Crossword Small grid, big challenge Word Search Spot as many words as you can Show More Show Less “For many years, it’s something that parents from these schools felt was very competitive, even in the alumni round. Now we’re going to be squeezed even more.” “I understand that people who are not in this position may feel it’s just a privilege. But it’s more than just a privilege. It’s a shared experience that you also want your children to have. The same traditions, same school environment, same stories,” the 33-year-old communications professional said. “I want to share these conversations, bond over a similar childhood. And that's what I’d lose if I sent my child to another school,” she said. Jasmine, who also has a two-year-old daughter, worries about the longer-term implications if her elder girl does not get into the school. If so, her younger daughter would not qualify for Phase 1 at SCGS, which gives priority to children with an older sibling already at the same school. “I don’t know what it’s going to look like. I don’t think it’s fairer. You’re taking away the opportunity from some people,” she said. “You might potentially have a country of parents who will constantly try to work out how to get what they want. “The competition in the alumni phase will now be even worse.” The Ministry of Education (MOE) announced on Thursday (Sep 10) that most primary schools will set aside 60 places for Phase 2C from next year's Primary 1 registration exercise, up from 40 currently. Twelve schools in neighbourhoods where public housing makes up less than 40 per cent of homes within 2km will also split their Phase 2C places into two equal tracks – one for applicants living within 2km, another for those beyond it – with no home-school distance priority within either track. These schools are mostly in Bukit Timah, with a few in Marine Parade.

“For many years, it’s something that parents from these schools felt was very competitive, even in the alumni round. Now we’re going to be squeezed even more.”

“I understand that people who are not in this position may feel it’s just a privilege. But it’s more than just a privilege. It’s a shared experience that you also want your children to have. The same traditions, same school environment, same stories,” the 33-year-old communications professional said.

“I want to share these conversations, bond over a similar childhood. And that's what I’d lose if I sent my child to another school,” she said.

Jasmine, who also has a two-year-old daughter, worries about the longer-term implications if her elder girl does not get into the school. If so, her younger daughter would not qualify for Phase 1 at SCGS, which gives priority to children with an older sibling already at the same school.

“I don’t know what it’s going to look like. I don’t think it’s fairer. You’re taking away the opportunity from some people,” she said. “You might potentially have a country of parents who will constantly try to work out how to get what they want.

“The competition in the alumni phase will now be even worse.”

The Ministry of Education (MOE) announced on Thursday (Sep 10) that most primary schools will set aside 60 places for Phase 2C from next year's Primary 1 registration exercise, up from 40 currently.

Twelve schools in neighbourhoods where public housing makes up less than 40 per cent of homes within 2km will also split their Phase 2C places into two equal tracks – one for applicants living within 2km, another for those beyond it – with no home-school distance priority within either track.

These schools are mostly in Bukit Timah, with a few in Marine Parade.

Other parents shared similar concerns about securing places for their children at their alma mater.

Eugene, who wanted to be known only by his first name, is already wondering whether his two-year-old son will get into his alma mater, Anglo-Chinese School (Primary), when it is his turn to enter Primary 1 in five years.

“For years, I’ve heard of my friends moving houses to give their kids a better chance of this. It was never something that I thought I’d do, but now I’m thinking if I should do it,” he said.

For Eugene, wanting his son to attend the same school is about more than its "branding". It is about the culture and formative experiences he associates with his own time there.

“But we need to differentiate between wanting your child to go through a similar childhood or upbringing, versus wanting them to go to a brand-name school,” he said.

He believes many alumni parents yearn for the culture and community they had at their own schools, and want the same for their children.

At the same time, Eugene acknowledged the need to look beyond individual preferences and consider the kind of society Singapore wants its schools to foster.

He cautioned against allowing schools to become "enclaves" where particular backgrounds or communities perpetuate themselves.

“It is important to build a culture in all schools. And it’s down to the administrators to also create a culture in these schools,” he said.

GOVERNMENT LOOKING AT “BIG PICTURE”

With these changes, the priority traditionally given to alumni appears to be gradually narrowing, experts told CNA.

Associate Professor of Sociology at the National University of Singapore (NUS) Vincent Chua described the changes as a reallocation of seats “away from legacy phases (Phase 2A and 2B) toward open access”.

Phase 2B is for children whose parent has volunteered at the school, or who has ties to a religious or clan group affiliated with it.

“Although there is no outright abolition of the legacy, the moves do represent a decisive narrowing of alumni leverage," he said. "The state is making it clear that public educational infrastructure must prioritise open access and social mixing over private network continuity.”

Assistant professor of sociology Jacqueline Ho at Singapore Management University (SMU) shared similar views, saying the changes signal the direction the Primary 1 registration system could eventually take.

“There is a growing recognition that granting alumni priority access to schools is a legacy of the past, and is misaligned with the principles of fairness and meritocracy that we aspire to,” she said.

“It is no longer controversial to suggest that we should do away with this privilege. My prediction is that we are headed in this direction eventually, given the strong signal MOE has sent – at least discursively – about the importance of diverse schools.”

Asst Prof Ho said the increase in Phase 2C places was “a way of reducing access for children of alumni, even if it does not remove it entirely”. “The primary goal of the registration process should be to facilitate access to schools in a relatively fair manner, and to help ensure a healthy mix of students in each school,” she said.

“Why should preserving school culture be a task for the P1 registration process to accomplish? Likewise, do we need to reward volunteers with priority access to a school – can we even call it volunteering at that point?”

Experts also said widening access to popular schools could help broaden the socio-economic mix of their student populations.

“Under the old 1km distance rule, these schools were effectively monopolised by adjacent luxury private estate owners,” Assoc Prof Chua said.

The new 50-50 two-track framework, he said, would weaken the “popular-school-wealthy-area nexus”.

“Precisely because school popularity and neighbourhood wealth tend to go together (in Singapore), expanding the catchment from 1 to 2km and beyond will guarantee spatial, and by extension, socioeconomic diversity in classrooms that were previously wealth-gated.

“Some families will feel their advantages being attenuated, but the state looks at the big picture and says this is good for Singapore.”

Asst Prof Ho agreed the new system is fairer in principle, as it opens places to families living farther away and not just those in wealthier neighbourhoods. But she cautioned that the complexity of the system could affect whether families take up the opportunity.

“So it is more fair and more complex … And the complexity will shape the take-up rate and whether people take up the offer to attend these schools," she said.

“The registration framework process has already been criticised in the past for being complex and it’s now more complex. So I hope everyone who is in the know can better communicate these changes.”

This complexity, she said, raises the question of whether the registration framework should be rethought altogether.

“I have always advocated for overhauling the system entirely and replacing the system with the government allocating students to schools based on proximity and demographic diversity.”

MIXING STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS

Not all alumni parents are opposed to the changes, with some saying they are willing to give up an advantage if it means creating a more inclusive system.

Mr Lester Lee, an alumnus of Nanyang Primary School with a five-year-old daughter, said alumni priority matters to him as it offers "an added dimension of shared experience", but he would sacrifice that advantage if it did not serve the common good.

“If excessive alumni benefits are worsening inequality then we should intervene,” the 35-year-old healthcare professional said.

Reducing competition, he said, also requires strengthening schools more broadly.

“If every school was a good school, or at least unique and empowered, there would be less of a need to try to game the system,” he said.

Anglo-Chinese School (Junior) alumnus Gabriel, who wanted to be known only by his first name, similarly placed little importance on securing an alumni advantage for his children.

“Sharing the same school name as my child would be nice, but surely the parent-child relationship has depth to it beyond what schools we went to,” said the 33-year-old, who works in administration.

He described the changes as “perfectly reasonable”, though he questioned what it means for a registration system to be fair.

“Fairer for who?” he said. “There must be a logic and process to evaluate school placements. Why can't we have one that's genuinely fair-minded, then live with the consequences?”

Others were more circumspect about whether the changes could be characterised as fair.

Jean (not her real name), an alumna of Raffles Girls’ Primary School who has a daughter, said she was surprised by the changes as “alumni priority appears to be an established practice in national schools”.

But she said fairness in the registration exercise could not be viewed in absolute terms.

“My view is that the concept of ‘fair’ is a subjective and reductive label. There is no broad-brush version of fairness, in that for the rules to be ‘fair’ to one group, another group loses out,” said Jean, who is a lawyer.

From a policy-design perspective, no simple registration system may satisfy all parents, said Associate Professor Jason Tan, who works in policy, curriculum and leadership at the National Institute of Education.

“There is probably no way of ensuring that the registration framework will appease the concerns of all parents,” he said.

A completely randomised lottery system could appear fairer and ensure a wider spread of demographic backgrounds, but it would come with its own trade-offs, he said.

“Many parents would be upset at not being able to choose a preferred school,” he said, adding that the young age of Primary 1 pupils would also raise concerns over travelling time and whether children can attend the same school as their older siblings.

More broadly, Assoc Prof Tan said policymakers are "grappling with the practical difficulties involved in making moral, not just technical, decisions that affect parents and students", including how much priority to give to different policy goals.

Even alumni who are not yet parents are willing to accept the changes.

St Margaret's School (Primary) alumna Rachel, who wanted to be known only by her first name, said she would want her future child to learn alongside peers from different backgrounds and cultures, as this could help develop empathy and understanding.

“When you have all your children coming from the same socio-economic background, we live in a bubble, and they don't get to experience other perspectives,” she said.

“The country is not just children living in Bukit Timah or people living in Bukit Timah. If you're living in this bubble, you'll miss out on the perspectives of the rest of the population.”

She added that other aspects of primary school education were also "worth debating about". To her, bigger priorities include equal access to educational resources, teaching quality, the syllabus and addressing student stress.

“The idea that every school is a good school is still an aspiration that we should aim for. This is not the lived reality now,” she said.

Get our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inbox

Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories

Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app

一位支持改革的家长表示：“如果校友福利过高加剧了不平等，那么我们就应该进行干预。”

小学生正在上课。（资料图片：TODAY）

这段音频是由人工智能工具生成的。

新加坡：当 Jasmine 听说从明年开始，小学一年级入学登记中将为第二阶段 C 申请者预留更多名额时，她感到失望和担忧。

这一变化可能意味着第二阶段A的名额会减少，该阶段优先考虑校友。

作为新加坡女子中学（SCGS）的校友，她有资格在2028年根据第二阶段A计划为她四岁的女儿注册入学。SCGS是第二阶段C计划中12所学校之一，这些学校将根据新的双轨制系统为与学校没有关联的儿童分配入学名额。

茉莉（Jasmine）希望只透露自己的名字，她住在距离 SCGS 2 公里多的地方，但她正在考虑搬到离学校更近的地方，以提高女儿的入学机会。

CNA游戏猜词游戏：逐行破解单词；流行词游戏：用给定的字母组成单词；迷你数独：小巧的谜题，强大的脑力挑战；迷你填字游戏：小方格，大挑战；单词搜索：尽可能多地找出单词。显示更多 显示更少 “多年来，这些学校的家长们都觉得竞争非常激烈，即使是校友轮也是如此。现在，我们的竞争将会更加激烈。”这位33岁的传播专业人士说：“我理解那些没有这种机会的人可能会觉得这是一种特权。但这不仅仅是一种特权。这是一种你也希望自己的孩子拥有的共同经历。同样的传统，同样的校园环境，同样的故事。”她还说：“我想和孩子们分享这些对话，让他们因为相似的童年而建立联系。如果我把孩子送到另一所学校，我就会失去这一切。” 贾斯敏还有一个两岁的女儿，她担心如果大女儿没能考上这所学校，会对孩子的未来产生长远的影响。如果真是这样，她的小女儿就无法进入SCGS的第一阶段，因为该阶段优先录取已有兄姐就读于同一所学校的孩子。“我不知道会是什么样子。我觉得这并不公平。这剥夺了一些人的机会，”她说。“你可能会看到，全国的家长都在绞尽脑汁地想办法让孩子得到他们想要的东西。校友入学阶段的竞争现在会更加激烈。”教育部周四（9月10日）宣布，大多数小学将在明年的小学一年级入学登记中预留60个名额给第二阶段C班，高于目前的40个。此外，还有12所位于公共房屋占比低于2公里范围内40%的社区的小学，会将第二阶段C班的名额分成两个等额的通道——一个通道面向居住在2公里范围内的申请人，另一个通道面向居住在2公里范围之外的申请人——两个通道的录取均不考虑家庭住址与学校之间的距离。这些学校大多位于武吉知马，少数位于马林百列。

“多年来，这些学校的家长们都觉得竞争非常激烈，即使是校友赛也是如此。现在，我们的竞争压力将会更大。”

“我理解那些没有这种经历的人可能会觉得这只是一种特权。但这不仅仅是一种特权。这是一种共同的经历，你也希望你的孩子能拥有同样的经历。同样的传统，同样的学校环境，同样的故事，”这位33岁的传播专业人士说道。

“我想和孩子分享这些对话，让他们因为相似的童年经历而建立联系。如果我把孩子送到另一所学校，我就会失去这些，”她说。

贾斯敏还有一个两岁的女儿，她担心如果大女儿没能考上这所学校，长远来看会产生什么影响。如果真是这样，她的小女儿就无法进入SCGS的第一阶段，因为第一阶段优先录取已经在同一所学校就读的兄姐的孩子。

“我不知道最终会是什么样子。我不认为这样更公平。你剥夺了一些人的机会，”她说。“你可能会看到，这个国家的父母会不断地想方设法得到他们想要的东西。”

“校友阶段的竞争现在会更加激烈。”

教育部周四（9月10日）宣布，明年小学一年级入学登记的第二阶段C期，大多数小学将预留60个名额，高于目前的40个。

在公屋占比低于 40% 的 2 公里范围内，12 所学校的 2C 期学位将分为两个相等的通道——一个通道面向居住在 2 公里范围内的申请人，另一个通道面向居住在 2 公里范围之外的申请人——两个通道内均不考虑家庭与学校之间的距离。

这些学校大多位于武吉知马，少数位于马林百列。

其他家长也表达了类似的担忧，他们担心自己的孩子无法在母校获得入学名额。

尤金（他希望只透露自己的名字）已经在想，五年后轮到他两岁的儿子上小学一年级时，他的儿子是否能考上他的母校——英华小学。

“多年来，我一直听说我的朋友们为了让孩子有更好的机会而搬家。我以前从未想过自己会这样做，但现在我在考虑我是否也应该这样做，”他说。

对尤金来说，希望儿子能上同一所学校不仅仅是出于“品牌”考虑，更关乎他自己在那所学校的成长经历和文化氛围。

“但我们需要区分希望孩子拥有相似的童年或成长经历，和希望他们上名校之间的区别，”他说。

他认为，许多校友家长都渴望重拾自己母校的文化和社区氛围，也希望自己的孩子能够拥有同样的文化和社区氛围。

与此同时，尤金也意识到，我们需要超越个人喜好，考虑新加坡希望其学校培养出怎样的社会。

他告诫不要让学校变成“飞地”，让特定的背景或群体得以延续。

他说：“在所有学校建立一种文化都很重要。而营造这种文化也是学校管理者的责任。”

政府着眼于“大局”

专家告诉中央社，随着这些变化，传统上给予校友的优先权似乎正在逐渐缩小。

新加坡国立大学（NUS）社会学副教授 Vincent Chua 将这些变化描述为“将席位从传统阶段（2A 阶段和 2B 阶段）重新分配到开放获取阶段”。

第二阶段 B 适用于父母在该校担任志愿者，或与该校有联系的宗教或氏族团体的儿童。

他说：“虽然没有彻底废除校友传承制度，但这些举措确实显著削弱了校友的影响力。政府明确表示，公共教育基础设施必须优先考虑开放获取和社会融合，而不是私人关系网的延续性。”

新加坡管理大学 (SMU) 社会学助理教授 Jacqueline Ho 也表达了类似的观点，她表示，这些变化预示着小学一年级注册制度最终可能的发展方向。

“人们越来越认识到，给予校友优先入学权是过去的遗风，与我们所追求的公平和精英主义原则不符，”她说。

“现在提出取消这项特权已不再有争议。鉴于教育部已经发出强烈的信号——至少在言论上——强调学校多元化的重要性，我预测我们最终会朝着这个方向发展。”

何助理教授表示，第二阶段C期招生名额的增加“即使不能完全取消校友子女的入学机会，也是一种减少其入学机会的方式”。她指出，“招生流程的首要目标应该是以相对公平的方式促进学生入学，并帮助确保每所学校学生构成均衡。”

“为什么维护学校文化应该成为小学一年级注册流程中的一项任务？同样，我们是否需要奖励志愿者优先进入学校的权利——到了那种地步，我们还能称之为志愿服务吗？”

专家还表示，扩大热门学校的招生范围有助于扩大这些学校学生群体的社会经济构成。

“根据旧的1公里距离规定，这些学校实际上被邻近的豪华私人住宅区业主垄断了，”蔡副教授说。

他表示，新的 50-50 双轨制框架将削弱“热门学校与富裕地区之间的联系”。

“正因为学校受欢迎程度和社区财富往往密切相关（在新加坡），将招生范围从 1 公里扩大到 2 公里甚至更远，就能保证以前被财富所垄断的课堂在空间上，进而在社会经济上实现多样性。

“有些家庭会感到他们的优势被削弱了，但政府从大局着眼，认为这对新加坡有好处。”

何助理教授也认为，新制度原则上更加公平，因为它向居住较远的家庭开放了名额，而不仅仅是那些住在富裕社区的家庭。但她提醒说，制度的复杂性可能会影响家庭是否愿意抓住这个机会。

“所以这更公平也更复杂……而这种复杂性将影响录取率，以及人们是否会接受这些学校的录取通知，”她说。

“注册流程过去就因过于复杂而受到批评，现在变得更加复杂了。所以我希望所有了解情况的人都能更好地传达这些变化。”

她表示，这种复杂性引发了一个问题：是否应该彻底重新思考注册框架。

“我一直主张彻底改革现行制度，由政府根据学生居住地距离和人口多样性来分配学校。”

混合不同背景的学生

并非所有校友家长都反对这些变革，一些家长表示，如果这意味着创建一个更具包容性的体系，他们愿意放弃一些优势。

南洋小学校友李先生（Lester Lee）有一个五岁的女儿，他表示校友优先权对他来说很重要，因为它提供了“额外的共同体验”，但如果这不符合公共利益，他会放弃这种优势。

“如果过多的校友福利加剧了不平等，那么我们就应该进行干预，”这位35岁的医疗保健专业人士说道。

他表示，减少竞争还需要从更广泛的层面加强学校建设。

他说：“如果每所学校都是一所好学校，或者至少是一所独具特色且拥有自主权的学校，那么人们就没有必要试图钻制度的空子了。”

英华中学（初级）校友加布里埃尔（Gabriel）希望人们只知道他的名字，同样，他对为自己的孩子争取校友优势也不太重视。

“如果能和孩子上同一所学校当然很好，但亲子关系肯定不止于我们上过哪所学校，”这位33岁的行政人员说道。

他称这些变化“完全合理”，但他质疑注册制度公平的含义。

“对谁更公平？”他问道。“学校安置评估必须要有逻辑和流程。为什么我们不能制定一个真正公平的方案，然后承担相应的后果呢？”

其他人则对这些变化是否公平持更为谨慎的态度。

Jean（化名）是莱佛士女子小学的校友，她有一个女儿。她说，她对这些变化感到惊讶，因为“校友优先似乎是国民学校的既定做法”。

但她表示，登记过程的公平性不能用绝对的眼光来看待。

“我认为‘公平’的概念是一个主观且过于简化的标签。公平没有统一的标准，因为规则对一个群体‘公平’的同时，另一个群体就会蒙受损失，”身为律师的让说道。

国立教育学院政策、课程和领导力副教授 Jason Tan 表示，从政策设计的角度来看，没有一个简单的注册系统能够满足所有家长的需求。

他说：“恐怕没有办法确保登记制度能够消除所有家长的担忧。”

他表示，完全随机的彩票系统可能看起来更公平，并确保更广泛的人口背景覆盖，但它也有其自身的弊端。

“很多家长会因为无法选择自己喜欢的学校而感到沮丧，”他说，并补充说，一年级学生的年龄较小，也会引发人们对通勤时间和孩子是否可以和哥哥姐姐上同一所学校的担忧。

更广泛地说，谭副教授表示，政策制定者正在“努力应对在制定影响家长和学生的道德决策（而不仅仅是技术决策）时所涉及的实际困难”，包括如何优先考虑不同的政策目标。

即使是那些尚未为人父母的校友也愿意接受这些变化。

圣玛格丽特小学校友瑞秋（她希望只透露自己的名字）表示，她希望未来的孩子能与来自不同背景和文化的同龄人一起学习，因为这有助于培养同理心和理解力。

“当你的所有孩子都来自相同的社会经济背景时，我们就生活在一个泡沫中，他们没有机会体验其他观点，”她说。

“这个国家不仅仅是住在武吉知马的孩子或住在武吉知马的人。如果你生活在这个泡沫里，你就会错过其他人群的观点。”

她补充说，小学教育的其他方面也“值得探讨”。在她看来，更重要的优先事项包括教育资源的平等获取、教学质量、课程设置以及解决学生的压力问题。

“让每所学校都成为好学校仍然是我们应该努力追求的理想目标。但这并非目前的现实，”她说。

订阅我们的邮件，即可获取精选热点新闻和引人深思的文章。

订阅通知，第一时间获取突发新闻和精彩报道。

加入我们的频道，即可在您常用的聊天应用上获取当日热门文章。