Lower-ranked JC?

I thought MOE has done away with ranking eons ago (ok, a few years ago) Hence, I was a little uncomfortable when I saw the headlines on yesterday's ST spelling "Lower ranked JCs......." It made my stomach churn when the usual suspects, who, just because take in students with the max L1R5 of 20, are labelled as the "lower ranked JCs". It made me even more upset that they dare to classify my alma mater,PJC as a "lower-ranked JC".

Lower-ranked. In what sense? Just because majority of our students do not put us as the first choice? Just because we do not produce truckloads of people with A's and S paper Distinctions? What are you exactly implying when you lable us as "lower-ranked?"

Our teachers are top grade. Not just in PJC. My other friends from the other "lower-ranked JCs" have commented that they had wonderful teachers as well. Ok, not all are good. But are you telling me that it doesn't occur in the "higher-ranked JCs" as well?

Find me a "higher-ranked JC" that allows me to take the combination I took, of Physics, Chemistry, Geography and Maths. Heck, now it is possible as it is compulsory for students in JC to take a cross faculty subject.

Find me a teacher, in those "higher-ranked JC", who is willing to give a student that he barely knew extra lessons, so that he can take the combi he wanted when the timetable doesn't allow him to do so, without missing out on lessons just because the time table clashes. Without what Mr Chia CK, I doubt I'm able to have Geography as my CS1 now, and having such a great time in NUS.

Find me a teacher, in those "higher-ranked JC", who is always online, always ready to give us advice online, always joins us for meals, to connect, to find out how we are, who holds no barriers between us and him, like Mr David Chia.

Find me JC, among those "higher-ranked JC", who constantly keeps a lookout for the mental and emotional well-being of the students nearing the exams, who constantly encourage the students despite the sucky grades they produce during common tests and exams.

Yes, we may not have the best facilities, may not have bucketloads of money to loads of stuff. But my education in PJC is not any lesser as compared to those "higher-ranked JC". In fact, I wouldn't be what I am today, without PJC. As a few of the teachers, who were part of the exodus that migrated from HCJC to PJC when PJC started, put it the best " I have taught more by being in PJC for 1 year than I was in HCJC for 4 years"

However, I think that the headlines of ST reflects what the society is like : We always compare, hence rank and label, so that we can "pick the best", like picking apples or poking fishes in the market. Even though the system has done away with the labelling, the society still wants to.

It goes back to the age-old question about streaming. Is the society who labelled the students to be "stupid" and "lousy" that damaged their self-esteem, or was it the system? Was the system simply a mechanism that separated the students into groups, that wouldn't have any effect on the students, until society pasted labels on them?

I would say society. Some might argue that teachers are the ones who label the students. True. But when teachers label these students, they do so because their actions is based on social norms, rather than the system's norms. They are part of society after all. Unless of course, there's a MOE circular asking teachers to do so.