To choose six good secondary schools after PSLE, first confirm your child’s official Posting Group, then compare each school’s cut-off point in the correct PG1, PG2 or PG3 category and intake year. A school’s cut-off is the PSLE Score of the last pupil admitted in a completed exercise, not an entry score guaranteed for the next year. In the PSLE AL system, a lower numerical total is stronger. A family should use past cut-offs to build a balanced list of six eligible schools that the child genuinely wants to attend, not a numerical ranking of school quality.
For PSLE 2026 pupils entering Secondary 1 in 2027, the available 2026 intake cut-offs describe the earlier PSLE 2025 cohort. The new cut-offs will only emerge after the 2027 Secondary 1 posting allocation. When pupils with the same PSLE Score compete for a final place, MOE uses citizenship, school-choice order and computerised balloting as tie-breakers. A stronger score is not overridden simply because someone ranked a school first. Parents should also read affiliation, SAP, IP, DSA and starred-score footnotes before making comparisons.
- COP means the last admitted score in a completed posting exercise; it is not a guaranteed future requirement.
- Use the correct intake year, school, programme, Posting Group and affiliation category.
- Smaller PSLE totals are stronger; the final number in a score range is the historical cutoff.
- Choose one eligible Posting Group for all six ordinary school choices.
- Understand merit first; tie-breakers then use citizenship, choice order and balloting for the relevant score ties.
- Submit six genuine preferences, including a spread of previous cut-offs where possible.
- Check exact school codes, programmes, travel and support before submitting.
- Never follow an old archived appeal deadline as though it were current.
Parent guide checked 14 November 2026. MOE remains the source of truth for current rules. All named school cut-offs below are historic 2026 Secondary 1 intake references.
A simple method for checking the numbers
| Step | What parents should check |
|---|---|
| 1 — Eligibility | Official PSLE score and Posting Group or group choice |
| 2 — Source | MOE SchoolFinder or the school’s official admission page |
| 3 — Year | 2026 S1 intake from PSLE 2025, not a promised 2027 result |
| 4 — Category | PG1/PG2/PG3, affiliation, SEC/IP or other programme |
| 5 — Meaning | Previous last-admitted score, not an admission guarantee |
| 6 — Fit | Teaching, CCA, commute, learning support, culture and affordability |
| 7 — Preferences | Six eligible acceptable options in genuine order |
Cut-off points are an outcome, not a minimum requirement
The Secondary 1 Cut-Off Point, commonly called COP, is the PSLE Score of the last pupil admitted into a school through the stated route in a completed posting exercise. It is not a threshold set in advance for the next cohort. Parents often read a cut-off as though the school had announced ‘all students scoring this number get in’. That interpretation is incorrect because new cut-offs emerge only after applicants rank their preferences and the available places are allocated.
A previous COP should be treated as a historical reference. When looking at the 2026 Secondary 1 intake, remember it arose from PSLE results in 2025. For pupils choosing schools after PSLE 2026, the 2027 intake outcome is unknown at the time choices are made. A good six-school list includes genuine preferences and a sensible historical spread without presenting any option as guaranteed.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Understand which end of a score range is the cut-off
A school may show an entry range such as PG2 21–24. The first number reflects the numerically strongest admitted pupil in that category; the last number reflects the last pupil admitted and is the cut-off point. PSLE Score numbers move in the opposite direction to percentage marks: smaller means a stronger overall examination result. Therefore, a total of 22 is numerically better than 24.
Parents should write the relevant last-admitted number beside each school, including its Posting Group and year. A child with total 22 could use a previous PG2 24 as a historically less stringent reference, but it is still not a guaranteed place in the next cohort. Do not describe the first number in the range as a minimum entry requirement.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
The same school can have three different PG figures
Under Full Subject-Based Banding, PG1, PG2 and PG3 are admission arrangements. A secondary school may publish a separate completed posting range for each group. For the 2026 intake, Clementi Town Secondary published PG3 13, PG2 23 and PG1 28. These are three separate historical comparisons for the same institution. A PG3 applicant cannot use the PG1 28 to make an admission prediction.
The child must first confirm their official eligibility and choose a group if the PSLE score permits a choice. The selected group applies to the ordinary six-school submission. Copy only the corresponding PG data into the final planning sheet. A family mixing columns is not discovering a new application strategy; it is comparing unlike cases.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Score-band choices must be resolved first
The standard framework usually gives PG3 for totals 4–20, allows PG2 or PG3 at 21–22, gives PG2 at 23–24, allows PG1 or PG2 at 25, and gives PG1 for 26–30 when English and Mathematics each meet the required AL7-or-better condition. These are the ordinary score bands; consult the official results and primary school if any special circumstances apply.
Parents at scores 21, 22 or 25 should prepare separate provisional group-specific shortlists and then select one group before finalising school preferences. It is especially important to understand the starting academic demand of G1, G2 and G3 subjects. A seemingly favourable school cutoff cannot justify choosing a route that does not fit the child’s learning needs.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Read the 2026 intake year correctly
A school page may display ‘2025 PSLE Score range’ beside a 2026 Secondary 1 intake, because the pupils sat PSLE in 2025 and began Secondary 1 in 2026. Another page may label the same period as ‘2026 Secondary 1 COP’. The two descriptions refer to the same completed posting year and are not contradictory. What matters is being precise about the cohort and the intake.
For families choosing after PSLE 2026, the actual 2027 Secondary 1 cut-offs are not yet known during the choice period. Avoid renaming a 2026-intake school figure as the ‘2027 cutoff’. Record both the PSLE year and the intake year in the spreadsheet. This prevents parents from unknowingly comparing numbers from different cohorts.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
When a school provides no comparable range
Some schools have unusual admission arrangements or specialist pathways, including school-specific direct admissions. A particular programme may not have an ordinary PG score range directly comparable with mainstream schools. The absence of one number does not mean admission is guaranteed or impossible. It may mean the route is different and must be researched through its own instructions.
Check MOE SchoolFinder and the school’s official programme page. Identify whether the application is through ordinary S1 posting, Direct School Admission, an Integrated Programme or a specialised arrangement. Avoid inserting a guess or an unrelated school’s cutoff simply to fill a spreadsheet cell. A blank marked ‘verify route’ is more responsible than fabricated precision.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Affiliated and non-affiliated ranges cannot be mixed
An affiliated school may report different historical ranges for pupils who satisfy affiliation conditions and those who do not. A family that is not eligible for the affiliated category cannot use the affiliated last-admitted score as the ordinary reference. Affiliation should be confirmed from the actual primary-school relationship and current MOE ranking rules, not an assumption based on religion, family history or attendance at another school with a similar name.
Because affiliated and non-affiliated results arise from different categories, both the first and last scores may differ greatly. The family’s worksheet should show the appropriate category explicitly. If the child is affiliated, check all conditions before submission. The useful question is not ‘Which number looks easier?’ but ‘Which figure describes this child’s actual route?’.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Special Assistance Plan and Higher Chinese require care
For relevant Special Assistance Plan schools, Higher Chinese results may affect posting priority under MOE’s separate rule. Where applicants have the same PSLE Score and are competing for a limited place, the applicable Higher Chinese grading priority may be considered before ordinary tie-breakers. This does not make Higher Chinese a fifth subject added directly to the standard four-subject PSLE total.
Parents should consult the current MOE SAP admission instructions and school information instead of applying a generic PG comparison blindly. A school with particular linguistic and cultural programmes also needs to suit the child’s interests and academic habits. A family should understand both the special entry conditions and the real school environment before putting it on the final list.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Direct School Admission is a different exercise
Direct School Admission considers particular talents and aptitudes through a separate process. Successful applicants have specific obligations and ordinarily cannot simply treat that placement like a flexible six-school preference. A school’s DSA places should not be combined with its ordinary PG COP as if every applicant competed on the same terms.
If the child has an existing DSA result, read the current acceptance and commitment instructions. If there is no confirmed placement, check which ordinary routes remain applicable. Do not promise a child that a talent-based route will bypass every academic or programme condition. Admission categories must be recorded accurately before calculating anything.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Integrated Programme and SEC-track data are not interchangeable
Some institutions offer an Integrated Programme, which follows a different educational route from the standard secondary programme that leads towards the Singapore-Cambridge Secondary Education Certificate. Their admission information and curriculum may be different. Parents should not place an IP cut-off in a PG3 comparison table without checking the programme and route.
An academically strong pupil may find more than one kind of school attractive. That is a matter of curriculum, subject choice, learning culture and later progression rather than a single prestige ranking. The family should clearly label IP and other programmes, compare their actual expectations, and confirm whether the child’s score and category are relevant.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
The correct first posting priority is the PSLE result
MOE’s S1 posting process is based on academic merit, using the applicant’s eligible PSLE Score and school choices. Students with better totals are considered for vacancies before weaker-scoring applicants within the applicable arrangements. A child cannot jump ahead of a stronger-scoring pupil merely by placing an option first, and parents should not describe order of preference as a substitute for academic eligibility.
The system then needs a fair way to distinguish applicants with the same PSLE Score when they compete for the last available place. This is where citizenship, school-choice ranking and balloting can matter. Explaining the difference prevents misleading strategies that urge families to choose schools in an order they do not really prefer.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Tie-breaker one: citizenship when scores are equal
Under the published ordinary S1 tie-break sequence, citizenship is considered first when pupils with the same PSLE Score are vying for the last available place in a school. Singapore Citizens receive priority over Permanent Residents, followed by international students in the applicable sequence. This is a tie-break rule, not a claim that nationality replaces the core merit framework for every vacancy.
A family should know the child’s actual status and never invent a probability from that alone. Citizenship can resolve some score ties, but not every school choice ends in a tie. If several applicants remain equal after the relevant priority, subsequent tie-breakers are applied. Keep discussion factual rather than encouraging children to compare personal worth with classmates.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Tie-breaker two: school choice order in score ties
If pupils have the same PSLE Score and citizenship status and compete for the last place, the applicant who ranked that school higher has priority under the published tie-breaker. Thus ranking an actual favourite first can matter. It does not mean a weaker-scoring pupil beats a stronger one by placing the school higher. Nor does it mean every applicant benefits from gaming the order against their own preferences.
The family should rank six schools from most to least genuinely preferred after ensuring each is eligible and acceptable. It is useful to ask ‘If this school is unavailable, would you willingly attend the next one?’ at every step. A sound list uses the ranking system as intended, not as a speculative tactic based on guessed demand.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Tie-breaker three: computerised balloting
When otherwise eligible pupils remain tied even after the applicable citizenship and school-choice-order comparisons, computerised balloting can decide the final place. Balloting is a limited tie resolution step, not a general lottery used to assign every student regardless of score. The family cannot control the draw by copying a social-media tactic.
Parents should explain this calmly to the child: an unsuccessful balloting outcome does not mean the school judged the child unfavourably as a person. The result reflects a specific allocation process when applicants remain equally placed for limited vacancies. The best response is to make sure the family values its alternative school choices before submission.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
A starred cut-off may record remaining vacancies
Springfield Secondary’s official 2026 intake page published PG1 25–30* with an explanatory note. The last pupil actually posted had a better score than 30, but the school still had vacancies and could have admitted an eligible score-30 pupil. The star changes the meaning of the reported last-admitted boundary. It does not prove that a Score 30 student entered through that exercise.
Parents who copy 30 and remove the star present a misleading fact. They should preserve the footnote, date and source. It is also wrong to assume that remaining vacancies in one completed intake mean the school will have them again in 2027. A school may have a different applicant mix and vacancy count.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
What ‘more selective’ really means
A school with a lower numerical historical cutoff was more selective in that admission category for that particular cohort. It does not necessarily provide better subject teaching, pastoral care or CCA experiences for a particular pupil. Selectivity depends on family preferences and vacancies, which can reflect many factors beyond instructional quality.
Use the cut-off to understand historical demand, then examine the school’s current programmes, support, travel, culture and values. A child who prefers applied science, music or sport may find an excellent fit at a school whose old cutoff was less selective. A lower number does not create a moral obligation to enrol.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Why no school’s 2027 cut-off can be guaranteed now
The 2027 Secondary 1 intake will be allocated after the 2026 PSLE cohort submits choices. Until the exercise is completed, the final last-admitted scores do not exist as settled facts. Parents may notice patterns across a few years and use them for context, but patterns cannot remove uncertainty. A difference of one AL point should not be translated into an invented percentage chance.
Be wary of calculators or posts claiming to know which schools are certain. They may use earlier figures, the wrong category or unverified vacancies. Check the underlying source and update date, then treat the result as planning evidence. Honest uncertainty is more useful than precision without evidence.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Use all six choices and keep a realistic spread
MOE advises families to submit six school choices and, where possible, include two or three schools with cut-offs numerically higher than the child’s score. This increases the range of acceptable schools while leaving room for preferred and more selective possibilities. At the upper numerical boundary of a Posting Group, historically less selective options may be limited; the advice should not be implemented by inventing a guaranteed school.
Rank by genuine preference after first checking eligibility, journey and education fit. A sixth choice must still be somewhere the child would willingly attend. A school with a less stringent previous cut-off but an unacceptable commute or inappropriate support is not a good fallback. An informed shortlist gives the family a plan for several outcomes.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
One school’s number should not dominate the child’s whole decision
Parents often fixate on a prestigious first choice, then spend little time checking the other five. Yet a pupil may ultimately be posted to a different school, and must attend it with confidence. The family should research every option enough to explain its strengths and practical challenges. That includes both ordinary teaching and the co-curricular opportunities the child values.
A real fitment review gives each school a short narrative: location, subject opportunities, a support practice, a student culture observation and an affordable routine. This makes the posted result understandable and helps the child feel they had choices instead of being rejected by a single school. The parent’s task is to build six valid possible futures, not one dream and five empty lines.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
What parents should know about the posting result
After the exercise, use the official result to identify the allocated school, reporting instructions and deadlines. If the family is disappointed, distinguish a school’s historic cutoff from the actual intake result. Any current transfer or appeal process follows its own requirements and vacancies. Matching a previous cutoff is not enough to secure a transfer.
Schools’ archived 2026-intake appeal pages may show December 2025 deadlines. Those are historical, not a submission schedule for a new 2027 entrant. Do not reuse them as though they were current. Until an official change is confirmed, prepare the child for the allocated school and follow its reporting instructions.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Keep the academic choice separate from the child’s dignity
A child’s PSLE result provides useful information for school posting and initial subject planning. It does not measure creativity, loyalty, curiosity or capacity to grow. A family that treats cutoffs as rankings of children can unintentionally make the transition more anxious. Children should understand that matching the right learning environment is a practical decision rather than a judgement of their value.
Parents can discuss admission uncertainty without shame. Explain that a result reflects places, preferences and rules, and that the student has meaningful opportunities in different schools. After posting, focus on learning, friendships and new responsibilities. The most important result over the next four or five years is sustained progress, not the original cut-off comparison.
Verification step: Write down the source link, the exact intake year and the child’s applicable category. Then ask whether the number changes any real school-fit consideration.
Five official school examples show why the correct column matters
The figures below are from the named schools’ official completed 2026 intake posting or appeal references. Each column refers to a different entry group. They are historical facts, not 2027 forecasts.
| School | PG3 2026 | PG2 2026 | PG1 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Temasek Secondary | 11 | 22 | 26 |
| Clementi Town Secondary | 13 | 23 | 28 |
| Hillgrove Secondary | 18 | 24 | 27 |
| Bukit View Secondary | 20 | 24 | 29 |
| Springfield Secondary | 22 or better | 25 | 30* |
For Springfield, the 30* comes with a footnote about remaining places and does not prove a score-30 pupil was admitted. Different schools format ranges differently; the correct source explanation must travel with the figure.
Worked examples: how parents should interpret posting data
A PG3 Score 13 family reads Clementi Town PG1 28
The parent believes the school is very safe because 13 is much better numerically than 28. But the 28 belonged to PG1, not PG3. Clementi Town’s 2026 PG3 reference was 13. The correction changes the comparison to an exact historical match, still not a guaranteed future result. The family should check the correct column and then investigate whether the school actually suits the child.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
A PG2 Score 23 family compares two schools
Clementi Town’s historical PG2 cutoff was 23 and Hillgrove’s was 24. The child matches one old boundary and is numerically stronger than the other. Neither school is guaranteed for 2027. The family checks current programmes, travel and teaching, then chooses honest ranking order among six acceptable options. The old numbers aid planning without deciding quality.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
A PG1 Score 29 family reads Springfield 30*
The parent initially interprets 30* as evidence that a Score 30 pupil was admitted. The official footnote says something narrower: the school had vacancies and could have admitted an eligible 30-score student, while its last admitted pupil had a better score. The family preserves the star in its records and does not assume the situation repeats in 2027.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
Two citizens with Score 18 choose the same last place
Both pupils have the same eligible PSLE Score and citizenship. One ranked the school second and the other ranked it fourth. Under the published tie-break sequence, the higher-ranked choice matters in this exact type of competition. This does not imply that order would defeat a third pupil with a stronger PSLE Score. Parents should use genuine preference order rather than guess which school everyone else will list.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
Two families see a non-affiliated and affiliated range
A school publishes a less stringent affiliated range. One child qualifies through the correct affiliated primary school and the other does not. It is not honest to compare both children using the affiliated score. The family without affiliation must use the applicable non-affiliated reference. Each should verify ranking conditions and the current rules before finalising the list.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
A child loves a school whose old cutoff is more selective
The family keeps it as a genuine stretch preference because the child is excited about the school’s learning and CCA opportunities. They also select other eligible schools with a more realistic historical spread. Rather than promise the stretch choice, the parent discusses uncertainty and why the other schools are worthwhile. Ambition and sensible risk management can coexist in a six-choice plan.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
The sixth school is chosen without visiting or researching
A parent finds an apparently less selective cutoff and uses that school as the sixth option without checking the journey or programmes. The child later discovers the trip is long and the desired CCA is unavailable. A stronger approach would have examined every school enough to know whether the family could accept the outcome. The term ‘safety school’ should never excuse poor fit.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
A parent misreads an old school appeal page
A page showing the 2026 intake also displays a December 2025 transfer appeal deadline. The parent assumes the date applies to the upcoming 2027 intake and nearly misses the actual current posting process. The family separates historical data from current instructions, checks MOE and the primary school, and saves the correct submission confirmation.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
A child receives a school lower on the preference list
The parents feel disappointed and worry that the school is academically inferior because its historical cut-off was less selective. The family revisits the research that made this school acceptable: manageable transport, a suitable programme, supportive teaching and activities the child likes. They begin the transition positively while checking any legitimate current appeal process, without promising a reversal.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
A family mixes an IP number into a standard PG3 list
The school has different programme routes, and the parent copies a cut-off for one into the other. The apparent ranking looks impressive but does not correspond to the application under consideration. The family corrects the programme labels, verifies eligible school codes and discusses each route’s actual curriculum. Exact categories are more important than a long list of numbers.
Use this case to check your own list: Was the right category selected? Is the evidence from the correct year? Is the school genuinely acceptable after considering teaching, travel, programmes and wellbeing?
Frequently asked questions about cut-offs and ranking
Are 2026 intake cut-offs valid for 2027 school choices?
They are historical planning references. The 2027 cutoffs are determined only after the new exercise.
Why does a school have three cut-offs?
Separate PG1, PG2 and PG3 applicant categories produce separate historical outcomes.
Does a score better than the old cut-off guarantee a place?
No. Vacancies, the new cohort and tie-breaks may change the result.
Why is 13 a stronger PSLE result than 18?
The overall AL-based score is a sum of achievement levels; smaller totals represent stronger examination results.
Does putting a school first beat a better-scoring applicant?
No. Choice order applies as a tie-breaker to otherwise equally placed applicants after the academic and citizenship comparisons.
Can a school choose its 2027 cutoff in advance?
No. The final last-admitted score emerges from the actual posting outcome.
Are affiliated and non-affiliated cut-offs interchangeable?
No. Use the category for which the child genuinely qualifies.
What does a cut-off ending in an asterisk mean?
Read that school’s footnote. An asterisk may indicate a qualification such as remaining vacancies.
What if no historical cutoff is clearly less selective than my child’s score?
Broaden school research and consult the primary school; do not invent a guaranteed option.
Should the child rank a school first because it is most prestigious?
Rank it first only if it is genuinely preferred after fit, eligibility and practical factors are examined.
Can a DSA pupil use the six ordinary choices as normal?
A successful DSA placement has separate conditions and commitments; follow the current official instructions.
Can a transfer appeal override the posted result automatically?
No. Current criteria and vacancies apply. A prior cutoff or an application submission is not a guarantee.
A printable six-school worksheet for parents
- Choice 1: official school name and code; correct group; year of historic cutoff; why the child genuinely prefers it.
- Choice 2: correct category and source; journey; subject interest; CCA fit; one unresolved question.
- Choice 3: school programme and ordinary teaching practices; correct cutoff reference and ranking reason.
- Choice 4: learning support, student culture, expected travel and school costs.
- Choice 5: a school with comparatively less selective prior cutoff where feasible and a genuine reason to attend.
- Choice 6: an acceptable last preference, still researched carefully; never mark it as guaranteed.
A strong choice list recognises academic merit and the tie-break rules without reducing the child to a score. What matters after posting is whether the learner can participate, ask questions, develop strong subject foundations and build a sustainable secondary-school life.
Official sources and the wider PG series
- MOE — S1 Posting
- MOE — SchoolFinder
- MOE — Choosing a Secondary School with Your Child
- MOE — Understanding PSLE Score Ranges
- MOE — Posting tie-breaker explanation
- Clementi Town Secondary — 2026 cut-offs
- Bukit View Secondary — 2026 cut-offs
- Hillgrove Secondary — 2026 cut-offs
- Temasek Secondary — 2026 cut-offs
- Springfield Secondary — 30* footnote
- PG1 Fitment Guide
- PG2 Fitment Guide
- PG3 Fitment Guide
- Parent Six-Choice Fitment Roadmap