RAFFLES CHRISTIAN SCHOOL × DREAMBOX
Cover01 / 15
Scroll or use ↓ ↑ to navigate
Brand & Logo Validation Research
Raffles Christian School · 20th Anniversary Rebrand

A mark worth
believing in

Entrusted, Not Enrolled
508
Voices heard
199
Parents
309
Students
2
Campuses
Prepared by Dreambox
Brand Strategy & Consumer Insight
01 · Executive Summary

A strong foundation,
ready to build on.

The direction is sound and well received. Parents embrace the platform, students are supportive with room to feel it more deeply, and one logo is endorsed across both audiences. The clearest opportunity is not about design; it is about bringing students along.

THE VALUES

Broadly embraced

Parents endorse all three values, and students are supportive. The opportunity is to give one value a clearer lead and to voice them in language that resonates with students.

THE LOGO

One mark unites everyone

The Cross-and-Globe is the one option both parents and students prefer, and it carries the faith and stewardship core. A clear, confident choice, with a considered call on how much faith to foreground.

THE OPPORTUNITY

Bring students along

Students' attachment to the current logo and their wish for visibly human-led design is an invitation to involve them in the story, and to turn early approval into genuine pride.

The recommendation in one line. Move forward with confidence: adopt the Cross-and-Globe, enrich the value language for students, and make the launch a shared story that brings students into the change.

SourceParent survey n=199 · Student survey n=309 · Fielded across Pondok Indah & Kebon Jeruk
02 · Respondent Profile

Who we heard from.

508 respondents across two audiences and two campuses. Three characteristics of the sample shape how the results should be read.

Parents · n=199
Campus
Pondok Indah
70%
Kebon Jeruk
30%
Tenure with school
1 to 3 yrs
37%
7 yrs or more
28%
Under 1 yr
18%
4 to 6 yrs
17%
Students · n=309
Campus
Pondok Indah
66%
Kebon Jeruk
34%
Grade level
Secondary
77%
Junior College
22%
Tenure with school
7 yrs or more
40%
1 to 3 yrs
31%

Read the sample with three lenses.

  • Parents skew to Pondok Indah (70%), so Kebon Jeruk parent reads are directional.
  • Students are almost all teenagers (Secondary and Junior College, 99%), the most identity-aware, change-sensitive cohort in the school.
  • Long-tenured families are well represented, the group most attached to the current identity.

Scope: fielded at Pondok Indah and Kebon Jeruk only. Kelapa Gading is not represented in these results.

SourceQ1.1 to Q1.3 · Parents n=199, Students n=309 · Parent grade is multi-select
03 · Survey Results

Two questions the survey was built to answer.

Do the brand values match what families want? And which logo best carries the strategy? The findings, quantified and interpreted, follow.

A · Brand Values B · Logo Evaluation
03A · Brand Values

Broadly embraced,
with room to deepen.

How well does each commitment match what families want from the school? Bars show the split from low fit (slightly or not at all) through moderate to strong fit (very or extremely well).

Parents · n=199
Faithful Stewardshipmean 3.55 / 5
15
30
55% strong
Student First Mindsetmean 3.43 / 5
21
28
51% strong
Purposeful Guidancemean 3.52 / 5
17
30
53% strong
Students · n=309
Faithful Stewardshipmean 3.15 / 5
25
40
35% strong
Student First Mindsetmean 3.17 / 5
27
36
37% strong
Purposeful Guidancemean 3.22 / 5
24
39
38% strong
Low fitModerateStrong fit

What it means

  • Parents are firmly on board: about half rate each value strong, and around 85% rate it at least moderate.
  • All three values land consistently well, which gives a solid, unified base. The opportunity is to let one value take a clearer lead so the platform has a signature.
  • Students are supportive but more measured, with "moderately" their most common answer. That points to a clear opening to make the values land more personally for them.
SourceQ2.1 · 5-point fit scale · Parents n=199, Students n=309 · Strong = very or extremely well
03A · Brand Values · Interpretation

Strong with parents,
an opening with students.

An opportunity to speak the students' language

  • The values use the vocabulary of trust captured from founders and long-standing parents: stewardship, responsibility to families and faith.
  • That register resonates strongly with adults. Rephrasing it in more student-facing terms is a clear chance to make it land with students too.

The signal: Faithful Stewardship, the most institutional value, is strongest for parents (3.55) and has the most headroom with students (3.15).

One value to refine before launch

  • Student First Mindset (We Know) has the most room to grow with parents, who engage with it most critically (21% rate it low).
  • The likely reason is its "beyond grades" framing. Parents value academic proof, so pairing the two would strengthen it.

The name is still being finalized, so this is the ideal moment to pair known as an individual with academic outcomes, so the two reinforce each other.

SourceQ2.1 · Bottom-box rejection (slightly / not at all well) · Cross-referenced with RCS Brand Strategy priorities
03B · Logo Evaluation

Three marks, three meanings.

These are not better and worse versions of one idea. Each logo communicates something distinct, and families read them consistently. That clarity is an asset.

Cross-and-Globe lockup
Cross-and-Globe
Owns · Stewardship · Character

A cross over a globe. Reads as faith, Christ at the centre, and an international outlook.

Sprout-and-Star lockup
Sprout-and-Star
Owns · Care · Nurture

A bloom with a star. Reads as growth, warmth, and each child nurtured with love.

Striped Shield lockup
Striped Shield
Owns · Excellence (parents)

A heraldic shield. Reads as strength, heritage, and academic standards to adults.

Method noteLogo labels A/B/C were randomised per question in the survey. All responses were decoded to the true mark before analysis.
03B · Logo Evaluation

Each logo owns
a different promise.

When asked which mark best reflects each brand value, families give each logo a clear and distinct role. Encouragingly, the pattern is consistent across both audiences.

Cross-and-Globe Sprout-and-Star Striped Shield
Brand valueParents pickStudents pick
StewardshipCross-and-Globe39%Cross-and-Globe43%
Care for each childSprout-and-Star49%Sprout-and-Star46%
ExcellenceStriped Shield45%Cross-and-Globe44%
Character & purposeCross-and-Globe39%Cross-and-Globe42%

The through-line

  • Cross-and-Globe carries the faith-and-values core of "entrusted, not enrolled."
  • Sprout-and-Star owns care by the widest margin in the whole study.
  • Striped Shield owns excellence, but only for parents. Students give excellence to the Cross too, the first sign of where their preference is heading.
SourceQ3.1 to Q3.4 · Plurality of forced choice · Parents n=199, Students n=309
03B · Logo Evaluation · Overall Preference

Only one mark is
liked by everyone.

Which do you personally prefer?
Parents · n=199
37%
33%
30%
Students · n=309
43%
36%
21%

Bars scaled to a 50% axis for readability.

Reading the split

  • The Cross-and-Globe is embraced by both audiences: students' clear favourite, and parents' close second.
  • The Shield appeals most to parents. Its narrow parent lead is a statistical tie with the Cross, and it sat in the first answer slot, which tends to lift a result.
  • The Cross preference is robust. Students chose it decisively even when shown last, giving a confident, well-supported front-runner.

Campus echoes the strategy. Kebon Jeruk leans to the warm Sprout (students 45%), Pondok Indah to the faith-forward Cross (students 47%). This mirrors the two campus characters the strategy already describes, and supports a shared core with campus-flexible expression.

SourceQ3.5 overall preference · Q3.5 by campus · Parents n=199, Students n=309
03B · Logo Evaluation · In Their Words

What they told us.

"The background reflects a piece of globe, confirming the students are part of the world."

Parent · on the Cross-and-Globe

"Its modern design evokes both a heart and a blossoming plant."

Parent · on the Sprout-and-Star

"Please do not use AI, and get an actual designer."

Student · recurring concern

"Can you please keep the logo the same? The majority of students also prefer the old logo."

Student · resistance to change

"The fonts can be better, this one still feels old school."

Parent · on typography

"I don't want the religious aspect to be highlighted too much."

Parent · on faith prominence

Two themes point to quick wins

  • Refreshing the wordmark would address the main point parents raised, and it can be done independently of the emblem choice.
  • Students' loyalty to the current logo runs deep, and their call for a visibly human design is an opportunity to involve them and share the story behind the mark.
SourceQ3.6 open response · 86 parent comments, 229 student comments · Quotes lightly trimmed, not edited
03C · Comment Sentiment

The mood behind
the comments.

Engagement was strong, with students especially eager to share their views, a healthy sign of how invested they are in the school's identity.

86 / 199parents commented (43%) 229 / 309students commented (74%) 315 / 508overall (62%)

Each comment was coded for its overall feeling toward the rebrand: Positive approves a new mark, Neutral is descriptive or indifferent, Negative prefers the current logo or raises a concern.

Parentsn=86 comments
43%
45%
12%
Studentsn=229 comments
38%
36%
26%
Combinedn=315 comments
39%
39%
22%
PositiveNeutralNegative
  • Both audiences lean positive or neutral, and parents, the decision-makers, are the most favourable.
  • Students voice more reservations, which mostly reflect warm attachment to the current logo rather than dislike of the new marks.
  • Student positives are largely first impressions, so there is clear room to turn early approval into lasting pride.
SourceQ3.6 open response · 315 comments hand-coded for valence · Parents n=86, Students n=229
03C · Comment Sentiment · Themes

What is driving it.

What they like
Parents · substantive (of 37 positive)
Represents the school & its values43%
Symbolism lands (heart, cross, globe)38%
Simple, clean, modern design27%
Students · surface (of 86 positive)
"Looks cool / nice / good"41%
Simple, clean, modern19%
Where reservations lie
Students · concentrated (of 60 negative)
Keep the current logo70%
Colour palette & uniforms23%
New options generic or bland13%
"Looks AI-generated"10%
Parents · craft notes (of 10 negative)
  • Options too busy or generic, and typography feels dated (4 of 10 each).
  • A few want continuity with the original mark (2 of 10).

The headline. 70% of students' reservations come from loyalty to the current logo, not dislike of a specific new mark. That is an engagement opportunity, and a sign of how much students care, rather than a design problem.

SourceQ3.6 · Theme tags within each sentiment class · Buckets overlap, so shares do not sum to 100
04 · Key Insights

Three things that should
shape the decision.

1

The platform resonates with parents and has a clear path to connect with students.

  • The values themselves are sound. The difference is simply who the words were written for.
  • Parents rate all three around 3.5 of 5; students are supportive and a step behind. Voicing the platform in student-facing language is the highest-leverage opportunity before launch.
Evidence: Parent top-box 51 to 55%, student 35 to 38% · Stewardship parents 3.55, students 3.15
2

The logos are genuinely distinct, and only the Cross-and-Globe unites strategy fit with cross-audience preference.

  • Each mark owns a different value, so this is a choice about meaning, not quality.
  • The Cross-and-Globe carries the core and is the one mark both audiences want. The Shield resonates most with parents, and the Sprout is the warm favourite at Kebon Jeruk.
Evidence: Cross wins students' preference at 43% and is parents' close 2nd · Cross owns stewardship + character for both audiences
3

The biggest opportunity is bringing students along, turning their loyalty into pride in the new mark.

  • Many students feel real affection for the current logo, and some would like to see a visibly human design process.
  • Whichever mark is chosen, crediting the human design intent and sharing the symbolism will help students embrace it and build early advocacy.
Evidence: 54 of 229 student comments reference the current logo · several unprompted requests for a human designer
SourceSynthesis across Q2.1, Q3.1 to Q3.6 · Parents n=199, Students n=309
05 · Conclusion & Recommendations

The verdict, in three answers.

What is the overall conclusion?

A sound direction, ready to strengthen.

  • The strategy is well founded and well received by parents, with a clear, encouraging path to deepen its resonance with students.
  • Move ahead with confidence: enrich the language and bring students into the change. A platform to build on, not to reopen.
Do the values validate with both audiences?

Yes with parents, with a clear opening for students.

  • Validated with parents (about half rate each value strong, few reject) and supported by students, with room to land more personally (top-box in the mid 30s).
  • Students rate the values lower because the wording feels formal, not because they disagree with them. Rephrasing the values in student-friendly language, and adjusting the We Know value so "beyond grades" does not sound like downplaying academic results, would close the gap.
Which logo should Raffles adopt?

The Cross-and-Globe.

  • The only mark endorsed by both audiences, it carries the faith and stewardship heart of the strategy, and it is the new mark students actually like.
  • Adopted conditionally, with the two moves on the next page.
BasisFull survey synthesis · Quantitative preference + value fit + qualitative rationale
05 · Recommendations

Adopt the Cross-and-Globe,
with two deliberate moves.

01 · Type

Refresh the wordmark. Updating the typography addresses the main point parents raised. It is a quick win, independent of the emblem, that lifts the whole lockup.

02 · Launch

Make the launch a shared story. Credit the human design intent, tell the story of the symbolism, and involve students early. This turns their loyalty to the current logo into pride in the new one.

Read with careParent preference is a 3-way split · Logo results are pluralities, not majorities · "Keep the current logo" was not on the ballot