Choo Zheng Xi / Editor-in-Chief
In an interview with TOC, Mrs Lim Lai Cheng, the principal of Raffles Junior College highlighted what she called the ‘wide ranging stakeholder consultations’ the Raffles schools have conducted over the last year.
Mrs Lim was specifically addressing an earlier TOC article highlighting views from students and alumni who felt the consultation process was not thorough enough. (See here).
‘We started in April, holding separate feedback groups and discussions spanning the three Raffles Schools, with teachers, students and alumni. We called in an external facilitator to gather the feedback to ensure objectivity and I made it a point not to address the groups directly.’
‘Closer to the date, around August, we asked for more opinions from student leaders, parents committees and the Old Rafflesians Association. Before we sent our first press release out, we made sure we made the announcement in school, and sent the parents a letter informing them of the change. Information to the press was embargoed until we had told all our stakeholders, so the press knew last’.
Consultations continued after the 13th October announcement of merger to the press, in the form of an email asking for feedback on the change.
‘I even stayed back in the evenings in school over the exam period to talk to students and parents about the merger, and hung around the canteen during breaks asking students what they felt about the merger. I didn’t receive any negative feedback, apart from operational concerns’.
So why are there 2,200 members of a Facebook group set up to oppose the merger?
‘Not everyone on the group opposes the merger. Many are there for information from the dialogues we’ve been holding, which we’ve allowed the group leaders to publish. Actually, even I am on the group, together with my corporate communications team’.
Mrs Lim said she proactively tried to organize a separate dialogue session on the 24th October for the concerned Facebook group organizers after seeing them around school, but only a handful turned up.
Back to the future
Going into depth about the benefits the merger would bring, Mrs Lim said:
‘The merger is primarily to allow us to form a joint legal entity that will help us pool our resources. Most immediately, merger will allow us to have a better sense of our student’s academic needs under the current six-year Integrated Programme. We can also reach out to the students earlier in terms of electives and co-curricular activities.’
But some have questioned whether the schools would be sacrificing their identity for administrative efficiency.
In the interview, Mrs Lim pointed out that the merger would achieve the school’s long term strategic vision.
‘More importantly, with a six year programme, alumni will be anchored to a bigger community. There are many possibilities when these strong institutions come together. There are many other exciting long term strategic initiatives that we have in mind, but I’m currently not ready to share these with the press yet.’
Furthermore, she noted, the merger would not be “de-historicizing” the schools. In fact, placed in its historical context, a unified Raffles Institution has always been on the cards.
‘Since the pre-University classes left RI in 1981, there’s always been a hope that the Institution will come back together. When Raffles Institution went independent and moved in 1990, they actually chose Bishan because it was a site that would be big enough to accommodate a future joint campus with Raffles Junior College. When RJC moved to Bishan three years ago, this set the stage for closer collaboration with RI, especially over the integrated programme’.
Identities to be retained
The individual identities of the schools will be retained as far as possible, Mrs Lim maintained. The official name of the merged institution will be “Raffles Institution”, while the usage of the ‘junior college’ suffix will be for operational purposes.
‘Currently the name change to Raffles Institution (Secondary) is an operational one to distinguish it from the Junior College. Eventually, the school as a whole will be collectively known as Raffles Institution, although we’re going to retain the ‘Junior College’ name for as long as we need, for sentimental purposes’. (Clarification from RJC – Nov 13: “The college would like to clarify that with effect from 1 Jan 2009, the merged institution will be known as ‘Raffles Institution’.”)
Keeping traditions such as the position of the headmaster was also negotiable, Mrs Lim said.
She added that there are ‘no plans to change the school song’ to reflect the new school’s co-ed makeup.
While decisions on ‘operational matters’ such as maintaining traditions can be sought through consultation with the student body, Mrs Lim was clear that strategic decisions such as merging of both schools was ‘not something that can be decided by cohort’.
‘People are naturally uncomfortable with change, but it doesn’t mean they won’t be rational about the benefits it will bring’.
As for those who might still be unhappy over the merger? Mrs Lim had this to say:
‘Adapting to this change won’t be easy, but talking it through will definitely help. My door is always open’.
Feedback on the merger can be forwarded to rjc@moe.edu.sg
———
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
I didn’t receive any negative feedback, apart from operational concerns’.
So why are there 2,200 members of a Facebook group set up to oppose the merger? – Choo Zhen Xi
This seems like a microcosm of Singapore. There are people who opposes, yet many of them don’t want to be visible or be part of the foreground.
“Mrs Lim said she proactively tried to organize a separate dialogue session on the 24th October for the concerned Facebook group organizers after seeing them around school, but only a handful turned up.”
well what do u expect when you hold the dialogue session on a day where all the houses have events going on, and many people having interviews on the same day!
the thing is we can still retain the name Raffles Junior College! her point is that when people want to look for RI in RI it wouldn’t make sense, but there are cases out there as well like Hawaii in Hawaii! i dont understand why after merging the admins, the schools are treated as merged but actually the two schools still stay so divided culturally and unique…it would make sense for RJC to retain it’s identity as RJC and RI as RI, even if the whole merged system is collectively known as RI
Mrs Lim was clear that strategic decisions such as merging of both schools was ‘not something that can be decided by cohort’.
This reminds me of PAP’s claim that the privilege of deciding what public interest is belongs to PAP only. Then what’s the point of having alternative political parties in the first place?
I do agree with comment (2) about the dialogue session on 24th October 2008. The dialogue session clashed with House Day, when all the houses had parties and events ongoing, and many J1s had interviews when the session was held. Therefore, the turnout for the dialogue session on that day was not very satisfactory.
About the name change, I feel that in some sense, it negates the fact that RJC did exist. Though RI and RJC used to be one collective entity known as RI, putting RI and RJC back together and calling the merged entity RI again without mention of RJC appear to be not acknowledging the period of time of RI’s history where the Pre-U classes were separated from RI. That period of time may be recorded in RI’s Archives in future years, but many people may not get to know about the initial separation before the reunion of the two schools. Unless that portion of history is remembered in a concrete form, a crucial part of an institution’s history would be lost as time passes.
On the bright side, the principal has done a good job for the interview. I look forward to the dialogue session with her on 15th October 2008.
When a merger is decided by the policy makers for their own reasoons – it is amost a done deal mostly.
There are few exceptions – like the one proposed for Changi Swimming Club with Changi Sailing Club, where one cash rich club is supposed to bail out the other. It failed when the true unreasonable reason for merger began to surface for all to know.
RJC’s principal has to get the job done and she is gracious to share her thoughts and even gave an interview to TOC albelt to clarify certain points. I do trust the system and feel that all will be well except for sentimental reasons.
The other matter brewing is also a related JC episode, I was told that a birthday girl was publicly bullied (torture and vendetta may be closer) by a group of cowardly girls wearing the the same school uniforms in ACJC to cheering by boys seen in the background. Seen the blog yet?( it is advertised in TOC’s Elsewhere in the Net”)
Let us look forward to ACJC principal’s interview soon – hopefully by TOC, to give netizens the chance to read about her views over the incident.
“We started in April, holding separate feedback groups and discussions spanning the three Raffles Schools, with teachers, students and alumni.”
I don’t recall even KNOWING ABOUT THE MERGER IN APRIL. Bullshit.
I have not yet received any RJC reply to my e-mails on the issue. In such instance, I can only conclude that that we can forget about them listening to any feedback.
‘We started in April, holding separate feedback groups and discussions spanning the three Raffles Schools, with teachers, students and alumni. We called in an external facilitator to gather the feedback to ensure objectivity and I made it a point not to address the groups directly.’
‘Closer to the date, around August, we asked for more opinions from student leaders, parents committees and the Old Rafflesians Association. Before we sent our first press release out, we made sure we made the announcement in school, and sent the parents a letter informing them of the change. Information to the press was embargoed until we had told all our stakeholders, so the press knew last’.
It is true that there were indeed feedback groups in April. However, the final decision of merging was not disclosed to the students until it was reported in the press. Most students (ie. not student leaders) were only informed when it was reported in the press. Note that the principal did not include the student population when she named the stakeholders that they informed in August.
Actually, Raffles Girls’ Secondary School (RGSS) used to have a Pre-U section until the early days of RJC. So it wouldn’t be accurate to claim that RJC is wholly from the old Pre-U of RI. Anyway, I’m glad RGSS isn’t a part of the merger exercise. As an ex-RGSS, it would be a shame to subsume our “daughters of a better age” identity into the bigger Raffles family.
On the other hand, this is really a storm in the teacup. I’d rather focus on the economic and survival woes currently faced by fellow Singapore citizens.