Please note that our OVA office voice and fax number has been changed to (65) 3112-9990 with immediate effect. Thank you.

Dear OVA life members,

Please be reminded of OVA AGM this coming Friday (26/Mar/2010) 6pm at Victoria School. Do refer to Notice of AGM for agenda, posted on OVA website on 26/Feb/2010.

Regards,
Joo Peng
Honorary General Secretary

26th February 2010

Dear OVA Member,

NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

1 Please take notice that the Annual General Meeting of the Members of the Association will be held at:

Victoria School (how to get there)
2 Siglap Link, Singapore 448880
26th March 2010 (Friday)
6:00pm

Light refreshments will be served before the meeting.

2 Agenda:
a. To confirm the Minutes of the preceding Annual General Meeting.
b. To receive the Annual Report of the Management Council.
c. To consider and, if approved, pass the Audited Account and Balance Sheet of the Association for the year ended 31st December 2009.
d. To elect two Honorary Auditors.
e. To transact any other business arising from the matters set out in the Agenda.
f. To elect new Management Council for term 2010 to 2012.
g. To consider any matter of which at least seven days’ notice in writing has been given to the Honorary General Secretary in accordance with Rule 11(a) of the Rules of the Association.

Yours faithfully,

Vernon Teo
President
Old Victorians’ Association

Tell us which OVA activities you look forward to in 2010.

Vote in the poll now!  Or email us at info@ova.org.sg if you have any suggestions.

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

VJC PLANS TO ADMIT SEC 1 STUDENTS

VICTORIA Junior College (VJC) has proposed a change to its current integrated programme which will see it admitting Secondary 1 students, a decision that has sparked ire among Victorian alumni.

VJC, which currently runs a four-year integrated programme admitting students at the Sec 3 level, submitted a proposal to the Ministry of Education about two weeks ago indicating that it hopes to extend its programme to six years, and admit Sec 1 students to the school.

If approved, this proposal will put VJC in direct competition with Victoria School (VS), with which it is affiliated, say some of its alumni.

The move would be similar to what the National Junior College has implemented, as it too has started to admit Sec 1 students directly this year.

Other institutions that have implemented integrated, or through-train, programmes include the Raffles schools and Hwa Chong Institution.

Temasek Junior College is the only other junior college that offers a four-year programme similar to VJC’s.

Some alumni are concerned that if implemented, the programme will pose a threat to Victorian heritage and unity.

‘We are disappointed that they have gone ahead with the proposal,’ said Mr Quak Hiang Wai, spokesman for the Old Victorians’ Association, the alumni association for both VS and VJC.

‘This will split the Victorian family apart and lead to unnecessary competition, as there will essentially be two secondary schools.’

He noted that the committee of the alumni association is not opposed to the integrated programme, but is taking issue with VJC’s decision to ‘go its own way’.

‘In fact, we are all for a merger between VS and VJC…for an integrated programme, as long as the school’s heritage is preserved and VS remains a single-sex school,’ said Mr Quak.

VJC intends to enrol both male and female students in its six-year programme, if it is approved.

When asked about VJC’s decision to extend its four-year programme, vice-principal Audrey Chen said the school believes there are significant educational advantages in having an uninterrupted six-year programme.

She added: ‘Regardless of the outcome of the proposal, VJC will continue to maintain close ties with VS and work in partnership to keep the Victorian spirit strong.’

Both Ms Chen and VS principal Low Eng Teong declined to comment on the alumni’s concerns.

chiaym@sph.com.sg

Source: The Straits Times