A poll was conducted online from 14/08/2009 to 08/01/2010 (~5 months) for the following question with three response options:

Are you for or against VJC implementing its own Secondary school programme?

1. FOR.  VJC should decide the best way to compete in a changing education environment.
2. AGAINST. VJC should not become a competitor to VS.
3. IT DOES NOT MATTER as long as the Victoria name remains strong.

Poll results (Text)

No. of responses for option 1: 58 (11.4%)

No. of responses for option 2: 381 (74.6%)

No. of responses for option 3: 72 (14.1%)

Total number of responses received: 511 (Percentages may not total 100 due to rounding)

Poll results (Graphical)

 Loading ...

Date : 2nd October 2009
Attention : Victoria Executive Committee / Victoria Advisory Committee

Dear Sir

RE: OUR EARLIER LETTER TO YOU REGARDING VJC’s ROPOSAL/SUBMISSION TO MOE TO SET UP ITS OWN INTEGRATED PROGRAMME (IP)

I had on 8th September 2009 written to you on the above.

On behalf of the OVA and the Victorian Alumni, I had also requested that you revert to us on the queries set out in my earlier letter.

If you will take the time and effort to go into certain cyber platforms like Facebook and various blogs hosted by fellow Victorians, you will undoubtedly note that they are concerned with receiving the answers to our queries. In any event, the queries which were raised in our earlier letter to you provide an opportunity for the VAC/VEC to clarify matters once and for all. With this intention, I am once again writing to you to let us have your response so that the Victorian family can be fully appraised of matters that transpired.

I trust that all members of the VAC/VEC will respond in writing and in anticipation of your courtesy of a written reply (within this week), I thank you personally and on behalf of the Victorian Alumni.

Please note that this letter will also be published and posted on the OVA website.

Sincerely Yours,
Vernon Teo,
President
Old Victorians’ Association

VJC and Victoria School must not compete for students

I REFER to Mr David Goh’s letter on Tuesday, ‘Beware of breeding elitism’.

I had the privilege of graduating from Victoria School (VS) in 1993 after four wonderful years.

I believe many VS alumni like me are concerned that should Victoria Junior College (VJC) get the Ministry of Education’s go-ahead to start a six-year Integrated Programme (IP), this will result in competition for students between VS and VJC’s IP.

VS could lose out as an IP is deemed more prestigious than a regular four-year secondary school education.

While this scenario may seem far-fetched, history can shed some light. I believe attempts to start a Gifted Education Programme in VS did not work out because of poor enrolment due to competition from IPs launched by other schools in 2004.

Fast-forward to this year. If VJC does launch an IP with the Victoria brand name, what calibre of students will VS attract and how will this affect VS’ development? Only when we learn from past mistakes can we avoid mistakes in the future.

My Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) score was 252, but VS provided the same quality education for my classmates and me, regardless of our results.

During our lower secondary years, each class had an even mix of PSLE scorers and there were no attempts to ‘hothouse’ or have ‘elite’ classes for students with better grades. Each and every VS boy was given equal opportunity and treatment. This allowed us to explore our potential to the fullest.

VS has neither the legacy of the Raffles schools nor the financial resources of the Anglo-Chinese family. It is a common man’s school but its alumni are the common men who are part of Singapore’s social and professional fabric.

VS boys like me cringe when we hear talk of elitism or upper echelons of society. This country was built on meritocracy, and school is one of the first places where children learn and understand this concept.

Do we really need a nation built along the lines of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, where children and society in general are divided into clearly defined castes?

Hong Chou Hui

Sunday Times, 13 September 2009

They opposed co-ed proposal in 2005, now they object to VJC’s plan to admit Sec 1s
By Mavis Toh

How far will you go to preserve the ‘family spirit’ of your alma mater?

One group, old boys of Victoria School (VS), went to the extent of writing to ministers, setting up online petitions and Facebook groups, and calling a press conference.

Four years ago, they objected to a proposal to turn the school co-ed.

Recently, they were upset again after affiliated school Victoria Junior College (VJC) wanted to enrol Secondary 1 students.

At the crux of the present brouhaha is this: VJC wants to attract top primary school pupils by accepting them – both boys and girls – at Sec 1 and taking them through a six-year programme to the A levels.

VJC submitted its proposal to the Ministry of Education (MOE) last month. It currently enrols students from Sec 3 for a four-year integrated programme (IP).

The old boys oppose the initiative for several reasons. If VJC gets its way, they fear it will vie with VS for the same post-primary cohort and hence ‘split up the family’.

Also, the Old Victorians’ Association (OVA) told The Sunday Times it is all for a VS-VJC merger as long as the school’s heritage is preserved and VS remains a single-sex school.

OVA president Vernon Teo, 41, said the group is especially ‘disappointed, saddened and puzzled’ as to why it was not properly informed and consulted before VJC’s submission.

VS started as an English class in Kampong Glam Malay School in 1876. Over the years, it moved to Victoria Street, Tyrwhitt Road and the present Siglap Link.

It attracted students from all walks of life and produced three presidents: Mr Yusof Ishak, Mr C.V. Devan Nair and Mr S R Nathan.

Today, the 133-year-old school is the only all-boys government school left and is a top boys’ school.

VJC, an idea first mooted by Victorians, was set up in 1984 after the late MP Dr Ong Chit Chung, an alumnus, submitted a proposal to the MOE. It has always ranked as one of the top JCs.

In 2005, after a proposal was floated for VS to become co-ed, then OVA president Teo Ser Luck organised a forum for the involved committees, alumni, teachers and principals.

Mr Teo, 41, now Senior Parliamentary Secretary (Community Development, Youth and Sports, and Transport), attributes his leadership qualities to his time at the school, and said Victorians are a ‘bonded and vocal bunch’ who readily contribute time and money generously to the school.

‘The school spirit has always been very strong. We would cheer our schoolmates in everything, from those involved in the band to drama to sports,’ recalled Mr Teo, who graduated in 1984.

Mr Vernon Teo, the managing director of an events management and production company, who took over as OVA chief in 2007, said he continues the fight to keep the school’s heritage.

Besides holding two more dialogues, he wrote to Education Minister Ng Eng Hen last month to explain why the association is against the expansion of the JC’s IP.

He has also called a press conference and, last week, penned an open letter to the Victoria Executive and Advisory Committee (VEC/VAC). The Sunday Times understands that this 18-member body, which includes old boys, can offer its views on the policy decisions of VS and VJC.

Mr Vernon Teo said previous meetings had led to an agreement that OVA be consulted on major decisions by VS and/or VJC, especially regarding the implementation of any IP.

He added that the OVA had not been consulted on VJC’s recent proposal, even if the move was apparently backed and supported by the VEC/VAC. He wants to know if there was a voting process and, if so, what the outcome was.

‘My question is, before the proposal was made, had they consulted enough parents, students, stakeholders and old boys,’ he said.

He graduated 25 years ago and spoke fondly of the times he sneaked into the school’s Jalan Besar campus after dark with fellow boys for ‘ghost walks’.

‘It was there we built our character and grew from mischievous boys into young men,’ he said.

Another Victorian, Mr Teo Yang Song, 55, agreed that VJC’s proposal would split the family. But if the proposal passes, he wants VJC to stop using VS’ badge and song.

The senior executive building officer has been voluntarily coaching the VS soccer team for the past 12 years. He met his wife there, when they were in the school’s co-educational pre-university classes, and his eldest son, 28, is an old boy too.

Meanwhile, a Facebook group set up to protest against expanding the IP now has about 2,200 members. Also, all 60 comments posted on a website OVA launched to gather views on VJC’s proposal were against the idea.

But one old boy, engineer William Tan, 57, does not care. He said: ‘The education landscape has changed, the principals should do what’s best for the students. Retaining heritage is not everything.’

When contacted, VJC principal Chan Poh Meng said that since 2005, VJC and VS have actively engaged OVA members, former students as well as the VEC/VAC to discuss extending VJC’s IP to Sec 1 students, including a possible merger with VS. Several meetings were held, he added, before the proposal was submitted to the MOE.

Meanwhile, the OVA has three suggestions: a merger with centralised management; a collaboration with an all-girls school to provide students for the IP; or setting up an all-girls school within the Victorian family.

Said Mr Vernon Teo: ‘We just want to look after the interests of the family.’

mavistoh@sph.com.sg

What are your views on the moves by the old boys? Send them to suntimes@sph.com.sg

Sep 15, 2009

EXPANDING IP PROGRAMMES

Beware of breeding elitism

I REFER to last Tuesday’s report (‘VJC’s IP plan: Upset alumni write to minister’) and understand why the Old Victorians’ Association is averse to letting Victoria Junior College implement the integrated programme (IP).

When the Education Ministry implemented the gifted education programme in 1984, only 1 per cent of Primary 3 pupils were enrolled in it.

Interestingly, this 1 per cent cohort of gifted programme pupils had priority or access to IPs offered by some 11 schools even though they did not fare as well in their Primary School Leaving Examination.

The IP was started five years ago to provide a seamless and richer secondary and junior college education whereby students bypassed the O-level examinations.

It was aimed at letting students develop their intellectual curiosity and giving them a more broad-based education without being stifled by the exam culture.

But the pioneering IP schools have managed to attract all the top students, leaving some traditionally good JCs with no choice but to offer IPs as well to get their share of good students. Currently, the top 5 per cent of Primary 6 pupils can opt for integrated programmes.

During the 1970s and 1980s, most Singaporeans who performed relatively well in neighbourhood schools could enrol in the top five JCs without much difficulty.

Not so now. A good Secondary 4 student from a neighbourhood school, one with even a ‘perfect’ score of six points (that is, six A1s) in six subjects in the O levels, may find it harder to get into Raffles Institution and Hwa Chong Institution, National JC, Temasek JC and perhaps Victoria JC because most places would have been reserved for the IP students of the schools these colleges have hooked up with.

The Education Ministry must be sensitive and extremely careful in implementing more IPs for JCs or any other school as it may breed a culture of elitism.

In the past, we have had ministers, permanent secretaries, senior civil servants and MPs from various secondary schools.

What should not happen is a reversal of such a healthy trend, that is, future top guns in government coming from a handful of elite institutions.

Meritocracy works well but breeding elitism is unhealthy, and my sense is that many government-aided or autonomous schools have lost good students to the schools providing IPs.

David Goh

VJC’s IP plan: Upset alumni write to minister

By Amelia Tan

A ROW is brewing between the Victorian alumni association and Victoria Junior College (VJC) over a decision to expand the college’s integrated programme.

VJC submitted a proposal to the Ministry of Education (MOE) last month, seeking to admit students at the Secondary 1 level instead of Secondary 3, which it has been doing for the last four years.

The Old Victorians’ Association (OVA) – the alumni group of Victoria School (VS) and VJC – is against the move, which it feels pits VJC against VS.

OVA president Vernon Teo said in an interview yesterday that he has written to Education Minister Ng Eng Hen to explain why the association is against the expansion of the integrated programme.

An MOE spokesman confirmed it has received the letter but did not say when the results of the evaluation process will be known.

Mr Teo said the association had been talking with VJC on the possibility of expanding the integrated programme for the past three years. But VJC decided to submit the proposal to MOE despite objections from the OVA. ‘We said no but they went ahead. We are very disappointed,’ Mr Teo added.

When contacted, VJC principal Chan Poh Meng said: ‘We believe that there are significant educational advantages in having an uninterrupted six-year programme for the students to engage in a wider range of learning experiences for holistic development.’

Mr Teo said in the letter that the move will cause a split in the Victorian family, as VS and VJC will be forced to fight for the same target audience: Secondary 1 students.

He also said that expanding the integrated programme to Secondary 1 students will attract top Primary 6 pupils and breed a culture of elitism which Victorian schools do not stand for.

Mr Teo said the association’s view is shared by the majority of Victorian alumni, students and their parents. A Facebook group set up to protest against the expansion of the integrated programme has drawn about 2,200 members. All 60 comments posted on a website that OVA launched, to gather views on VJC’s proposal, were also against it.

Mr Teo said that while the OVA is against VJC’s proposal to admit Secondary 1 students, it is open to working with the school on alternative ideas that can achieve the same objectives as a six-year programme, and which also ensures VS stays an all-boys school. He added that the VS track record of excellence has proven that an all-boys formula during a student’s teenage years works.

One idea the association has is to have a management team run both VJC and VS and continue with the four-year integrated programme. This means the boys will study with female students only when they progress to Secondary 3.

The second idea is to adopt a girls feeder school so VJC can attract top female students. The girls will study for the first two years at their girls school before joining VJC in Secondary 3.

The last idea is to admit Secondary 1 girls to VJC but have them study at a separate campus from the boys for the first two years.

This article was first published in The Straits Times.

Source: Asiaone

Victoria school alumni: Boys only please, but executive committee pushes for co-education and merger with VJC

By Nurul Asyikin Mohd Nasir, newsroom intern

THEY have been labelled as ‘stubborn and in denial’.

Stubborn because they have refused to compromise on their stand, and in denial because they believe there is no need for too drastic a change to bring about progress.

At a press conference called by the Old Victorians Association (OVA), president Vernon Teo ‘stubbornly’ reiterated his stand, which the OVA has held since 2005.

That there is no need for Victoria School (VS) to go co-educational to go up the academic ladder, as it is already achieving this.

But the school’s executive committee has been pushing for it to go co-ed and merge with Victoria Junior College (VJC).

Go public

When the committee backed VJC’s latest proposal to extend its Victoria Integrated Programme to start at Secondary 1 rather than Sec 3, the OVA decided that it was time to make its position public.

Mr Teo and two OVA council members – property developer Lim Chap Huat and former Business Times news editor Quak Hiang Whai – said the OVA was ‘saddened, disappointed, and puzzled’ by the proposal.

If the proposal, under review by the Ministry of Education (MOE), goes through, VJC will be in direct competition with VS both for boys as well as in inter-school competitions.

Mr Teo, 46, managing director of CPD Productions, likened the proposal to ‘seeing a close sibling leave without knowing why’.

‘What is their objective? This is something not thoroughly communicated to us stakeholders,’ said Mr Teo, referring to VS-VJC alumni, parents, and current students alike.

To Mr Teo and the more than 1,000 alumni who have made their voices heard on Internet petitions, VJC’s proposal is ‘not sustainable’ and ‘could hurt both sides’.

The OVA, he added, was not against change and progress.

‘The educational landscape is changing. But surely there must be workable solutions that would not break up the family,’ he said.

‘We are adamant about keeping VS’ legacy as the best environment for education is in a single-sex school.’

The OVA says it arrived at its position in a measured manner.

It conducted several ‘public consultation exercises’ where it sought feedback from stakeholders about the issue.

‘There is unanimous resistance from the old boys, parents and even the public to the current situation (where VJC will go on its own and compete with VS),’ said Mr Teo.

So the OVA has come up with three counterproposals.

The first is a VS-VJ merger, but with a centralised management, in the style of Raffles Institution and Hwa Chong Institution, while maintaining traditions.

The second is for the Victoria family to collaborate with an existing all-girls’ school to ‘provide students’ for the six-year integrated programme. VS would groom the boys and the sister school the girls, before the two streams join in Year Five of the programme.

Or, the OVA suggests, as did The New Paper in July, the establishment of an all-girls’ school within the Victoria family.

The female students would then study at a separate campus.

The 1,100-strong OVA claims it does not intend ‘to interfere with the running of the school or schools’.

Said Mr Teo: ‘We are merely concerned about preserving our heritage and whether the new entity would be fit to carry our ‘brand’ name.’

Mr Teo said the green light for the submission of the proposal was given after a vote by the Victoria Executive and Advisory Committee. However, The New Paper understands that only seven members turned up to vote.

The other 11 members were apparently canvassed for their vote on the phone.

When contacted, VJC principal Chan Poh Meng would say only that ‘the MOE is in the process of assessing the workability and suitability of the extension of the (integrated programme).’

Executive and advisory committee acting chairman Ng Yat Chung also declined to comment.

Mr Teo said: ‘Come back to the family and talk. There’ll be no hard feelings.’

MOE confirmed it had received a letter from the OVA regarding VJC’s proposal to extend its integrated programme. It said it is in the process of evaluating the proposal.

OVA’S COUNTER PROPOSALS
1. A VS-VJ merger with centralised management.
2. Collaboration with existing all-girls’ school to ‘provide students’ for the Victoria Integrated Programme
3. Establishment of its own all-girls’ school within the Victorian family

Source: The New Paper

Date : 8th September 2009
Attention : Victoria Executive Committee / Victoria Advisory Committee

Dear Sir

RE: VJC’s PROPOSAL/SUBMISSION TO MOE TO SET UP ITS OWN INTEGRATED PROGRAMME (IP)

On behalf of the OVA and the Victorian Alumni, I am writing to you in respect of the above captioned matter.

As you are aware, VJC has decided to proceed with its own IP despite almost unanimous objections from the alumni and a counter offer by the OVA to merge the two schools into an IP institution, one that will maintain the 133-year-old heritage of VS.

At earlier meetings in March/October 2008, the roadmap for these 2 institutions and the various options available were discussed with Yat Chung and various opinion leaders in the presence of both principals. During that meeting, all parties had expressed their opinions and more importantly came to the agreement that the OVA will be consulted if any major decisions are to be made in respect of VS and/or VJC especially regarding the implementation of any IP.

Without any consultation being made, VJC made the above proposal/submission to MOE. It is understood that the VAC/VEC had backed and supported such a move.

VJC’s endeavour has caused much grief and disagreement among Victorians. One only needs to go into any popular cyber platform to gain a flavour and the extent of the views expressed by fellow Victorians on this issue. There is also an online petition being circulated. Whilst it is heartening to see Victorians rallying on this issue, it is also equally painful for matters to come to this state. If the VAC/VEC had consulted the OVA and the alumni on this issue, I believe that matters may not have developed in this manner.

I have now received queries regarding the full particulars of the process which the VAC/VEC had adopted to come to this decision. Was there a vote taken on this issue and if so, please provide full details of the voting process, the parties who voted and the outcome.

I need the above information so that these can be shared with fellow Victorians who are desirous and keen to be fully appraised of matters that had transpired.

Given the urgency and gravity of this matter, I trust that the VAC/VEC will work with us at the OVA expediently. As such, I appreciate a written reply from you as soon possible.

Sincerely Yours,
Vernon Teo
President
Old Victorians’ Association

For English readers, click here for an automatic translation via Google Translate.

不满维初直通车或酿“分家”
维中校友会向教育部请愿

杨雪慧

维多利亚初级学院向教育部提出申请扩展直通车计划，从四年延至六年并独立招收男女中一新生。由于这可能导致维初与维多利亚中学“分家”，成为维中的竞争对手，引起一些校友不满，维多利亚校友会已把请愿书寄交给教育部长黄永宏，希望当局考虑校友会的立场。

维多利亚校友会也表示，并不反对维初和维中合并开办直通车，结合两校资源为学生提供更全面的教育，并且提出了让维初招收女生，同时让维中保留纯男校学习环境的建议，包括与其他女中达成合作关系，让她们中三才加入直通车计划，以及设立“女生校园”让男女学生在中一、中二时分开上课。

维多利亚校友会会长张伟良（41岁）昨天受访时强调，维中有133年悠久历史，向来提倡包括学生人格培养的全面教育，不只是专注于学业成绩，校方不应为扩大收生来源而改变维多利亚传统。

他说：“维初与维中可能有一些不同的目标，不过本来就是一家人，我们听到维初提呈（扩展直通车计划、设立中学部）的申请书，都感到非常意外及失望。”

维初于1984年成立，当初是由已故国会议员兼校友翁执中建议把维中的高中部改成初院，两校有着很深的历史渊源。

维初在2005年开办四年的直通车课程，目前从中三开始招生。其实，维初有意开办六年直通车计划已讨论多时，维初和维中三年多前就开始探讨学校未来的发展方向及合作模式，但双方在一些问题上意见分歧而迟迟未达成共识。

随着直通车计划越来越普遍，多所知名学府近年也纷纷赶搭上这趟列车，包括华侨中学、莱佛士书院、德明政府中学及立化中学等。国家初级学院也在今年初将原有的四年直通车扩展至六年，成为第一所开办完整中学部的初级学院。

在这个大趋势下，如何吸引小六会考成绩优异的学生，提升学校的竞争力，成为维初和维中共同面对的挑战。两校无法合并的一个主要矛盾在于，维初倾向男女混合教育，争取从中一开始招收成绩优异的女生；但维中却坚持应保留纯男校的传统而不愿接受男女同校。维中几年前也曾讨论是否转为男女混合学校，最终因校友强烈抗议而作罢。

张伟良认为，维初即使要扩大招生，还可以考虑其他做法，如与其他女中达成合作关系，让她们在中三时才进入维初修读直通车。

他也提议，两校如果合并，从中一就招收女生进直通车课程，男生与女生可在中一与中二阶段分开在两所校园上课，到中三才一起上课，以保留维中纯男校的传统。
另外，校友会也质疑学校的咨询委员会决定扩展直通车的过程不够透明，之前未广泛征询家长和校友意见。

维多利亚校友会目前有超过1000名注册校友，包括维初与维中的校友。另外，有校友在热门社交网站Facebook针对这个课题辟讨论区，目前已有2200多人参加。

维初校长：呈交计划书前

曾与主要相关人士开会

维初校长曾宝明受询时表示，维初与维中自2005年推行直通车计划起，就积极与维多利亚校友会、校友、维多利亚咨询与执行委员会商讨扩展直通车计划，其中也包括与维中合并的可能性。

他说，直通车计划延长至六年是为了强化直通车课程，让学生在不受干扰的情况下广泛学习，获得全面发展，对学生有益。

他也指出，校方向教育部提呈计划书前，曾与相关人士举行了几次会议，讨论这个课题。

至于校友会提出的一些意见，曾宝明则表示，由于教育部目前仍在评估维初的申请计划，他不便作出回应。

他说：“不论申请的结果如何，维初将继续和维中保持密切合作关系，延续维多利亚的顽强精神。”

教育部受询时则证实，已经收到维多利亚校友会的请愿书。教育部目前正针对维初的申请进行评估。

Source: Lianhe Zaobao

Old Boys and the turf they guard

by Lin Yan Qin

EDUCATION for all, regardless of exam results, and shared memories of a time when character development came first – it is this sense of pride in their school, they say, that drives them.

So, for the second time in three years, a group of Victoria School (VS) alumni hope to scuttle a proposal that would change things for their alma mater.

More than 1,500 Old Boys – to date – are objecting to Victoria Junior College’s (VJC) proposal to expand its current four-year Integrated Programme to a six-year one.

The proposal, which has been submitted to the Education Ministry, would allow VJC to draw students who do well at the Primary School Leaving Examinations.

And cannibalise VS, turning the two close schools into rivals for good students, ultimately resulting in the loss of an egalitarian ideal, say those against the idea.

“We’re a school that’s for everyone, from all backgrounds, not just those with the best results, and developing each one of us in a holistic way,” said alumnus Kevin Lam, 41, a senior vice-president at UOB.

“With the IP, if we admit students based strictly on academic merit, we would lose that.” This egalitarian ideal, he added, is part of “the greater debate about education in Singapore”.

Call it an ideal, call it heritage, too – the reason why VS alumni vigorously objected three years ago when the all-boys school and the JC considered admitting female students in a merger so as to offer an IP.

The plan was shelved; now this vocal group hopes to dash VJC’s latest bid out of concern their dreams would be dashed.

VS alumnus Mr Sanjay, 21, who started the FaceBook group objecting to VJC’s plans, said: “Even at the late stage in Secondary 4, I was invited to join the school track and field meet to represent VS. This enormous faith the teachers and coaches had in me inspired me to further my goals and dreams.”

Other prominent schools have had it easier when faced with such choices.

Mr Cheng Soon Keong, former president of the Old Rafflesians’ Association, who helped oversee the merger between Raffles Institution and Raffles Junior College said the two schools “had it easier” because both worked together closely even before the merger

“Victoria has a very unique set of problems … I think it’s natural the alumni have such strong feelings because of the shared camaraderie people go through together in their secondary schools,” he said.

A spokesperson for the Old Victorians’ Association (OVA) said it was not clear how much consultation VJC did with stakeholders before submitting the proposal. The association was “disappointed” by the move.

According to the Lianhe Zaobao, VJC vice-principal Fong Yeow Wah said both schools will continue to maintain ties, regardless of whether the proposal is accepted. The expansion, he said, was necessary to give its IP students an uninterrupted education experience to develop holistically.

Today understands the OVA sent a letter to Education Minister Ng Eng Hen last week to explain its stand.

Ironically, a merger of sorts doesn’t seem so bad any longer. “The preferred outcome is for a merger to take place and the IP programme offered to VS students, and other students including female students entering at the junior college level,” said the OVA spokesperson.

There is a gnawing feeling among another segment of alumni that VS may not otherwise be competitive enough.

Education consultant Fang Xiong Kun, 25, who attended both VS and VJC, told Today: “As it is, the good students are going to the IP schools, so we’re losing out on the quality of students we can attract.

“There are parents who are alumni but will not send their child to VS if standards fall behind other schools.”

Mr Lam, who is also an OVA member, hopes both schools can work out a compromise, rather than go their separate ways.

If the schools part ways, VJC will need to reconsider its present use of the Victoria school anthem, badge, and its brand name, said the OVA spokesperson.

“Because, is it still Victoria?” he asked.

Source: Today Online