17 August 1998

Home > Media Centre > Press Releases

Printer-friendly page

EDUN N25-02-033 VOL 5

04698

17 August 1998

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR JUNIOR COLLEGES 1998

As in previous years, the Ministry of Education is providing information on the performance of junior colleges (JCs) to help students and their parents make informed choices when selecting suitable JCs for entry after the General Certificate of Education (GCE) ‘O’ Level Examination.
The data in Table 1 gives an overall picture of how each college performed in a number of selected academic performance indicators and the intake quality of its students. In Table 2, the colleges are ranked according to the different indicators, including value-added performance and fitness index. It shows that different colleges can excel in different areas. For example, Hwa Chong and Raffles JC were top in terms of A-level points and mean subject grade (MSG), while Temasek and St. Andrew’s JC were top on value-added performance. In terms of physical fitness, Yishun, National and Jurong JC were ranked higher than the rest.
The value-added performance of a JC is calculated by comparing its students’ A-level performance against the expected performance based their O-level results when they entered the JC. As in last year, the Ministry will award $20,000 to Temasek JC for being the top value-added college, and $10,000 to St. Andrew’s JC for being the next best value-added JC.
Also attached are data showing students’ physical fitness and percentage of overweight students in each JC (Table 3), and the L1R5 aggregate scores of students admitted to the different JCs in 1998 (Table 4).
From this year, data on the performance of each JC will be included in the Information Booklet which students will receive when applying for admission into JCs.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

Table 1: Ranking of Junior Colleges by Performance Indicator

(Based on 1997 GCE A-Level Results and Fitness Test)

		Ranking	Ranking of Students in 1997 A-Level Examinations						Ranking
S/No	Junior College	of JC1 Intake in 1996	Mean A-Level Points	Mean Subject Grade	% Grades A & B	% Passed 3 A-Levels or More	% Passed GP	Value-Added Indicator	on Fitness Index^*
1	Anderson	6	6	6	6	7	6	8	8
2	Anglo-Chinese	7	8	8	8	9	6	13	9
3	Catholic	11	13	13	13	13	9	14	13
4	Hwa Chong	2	1	1	1	2	4	4	6
5	Jurong	12	11	11	11	11	12	4	3
6	Nanyang	9	8	8	9	8	8	10	12
7	National	4	4	4	4	2	2	6	2
8	Raffles	1	1	1	2	4	1	7	7
9	Serangoon	13	12	12	12	12	13	10	11
10	St. Andrew's	8	7	7	7	4	9	2	14
11	Tampines	10	10	10	10	9	9	9	10
12	Temasek	5	5	4	4	4	4	1	4
13	Victoria	3	3	1	2	1	2	3	5
14	Yishun	14	14	14	14	14	14	12	1

* Based on all students, including those in JC1.

Table 2: Performance of Junior Colleges

(Based on 1997 GCE A-Level Results)

				1997 GCE A-Level Results
S/No	Junior College	No of Pupils	Mean L1R5	Mean A-Level Points	Mean Subject Grade	% Grade A & B	% Passed 3 A-Levels or More	% Passed GP
1	Anderson	743	11.0	62	2.2	65	97	92
2	Anglo-Chinese	745	12.6	57	2.6	53	91	92
3	Catholic	636	15.2	51	3.3	34	81	82
4	Hwa Chong	792	8.0	69	1.6	86	99	96
5	Jurong	698	15.5	54	2.8	44	89	76
6	Nanyang	703	13.4	57	2.6	52	92	83
7	National	771	9.1	67	1.7	81	99	98
8	Raffles	813	7.7	69	1.6	85	98	99
9	Serangoon	653	15.6	53	3.1	38	82	72
10	St. Andrew's	705	13.0	60	2.3	60	98	82
11	Tampines	779	13.9	56	2.7	49	91	82
12	Temasek	752	10.0	66	1.7	81	98	96
13	Victoria	770	8.9	68	1.6	85	100	98
14	Yishun	404	17.4	48	3.4	32	70	64

Table 3: Fitness Data For Junior Colleges in 1997

S/No	Junior College	Fitness Index^#	Percentage Overweight^*	% Passed NAPFA^@ Test
1	Anderson	87.9	4.7	83.4
2	Anglo-Chinese	86.4	6.4	82.5
3	Catholic	81.3	6.2	71.1
4	Hwa Chong	88.0	4.6	83.3
5	Jurong	90.8	6.7	91.0
6	Nanyang	85.6	6.4	80.9
7	National	93.0	2.6	88.8
8	Raffles	87.9	5.1	82.0
9	Serangoon	85.8	6.9	82.8
10	St. Andrew's	78.4	8.4	70.2
11	Tampines	86.2	6.9	82.3
12	Temasek	89.3	4.3	85.9
13	Victoria	89.2	4.7	85.3
14	Yishun	93.1	4.4	90.9

* Refers to percentage of pupils who are overweight by 20% or more according to standards provided by the Ministry of Health.

@ National Physical Fitness Award.

# The Fitness Index (FI) is defined as the average of:

(i) the percentage of pupils within the acceptable weight range and;

(ii) the percentage of pupils who pass the NAPFA test.

The acceptable weight range is from 80% to below 120% of standard weight.

Table 4: Aggregate Scores of Students Admitted in 1998

S/No	Junior College	Arts	Commerce	Science
1	Anderson	6 - 12	7 - 11	6 - 9
2	Anglo-Chinese	6 - 12	8 - 12	6 - 11
3	Catholic	8 - 16	8 - 16	8 - 14
4	Hwa Chong	6 - 7	6	6
5	Jurong	12 - 17	9 - 16	6 - 13
6	Nanyang	7 - 16	9 - 13	7 - 12
7	National	6 - 9	6 - 8	6 - 7
8	Raffles	6 - 9	6 - 8	6
9	Serangoon	12 - 19	7 - 20	8 - 17
10	St. Andrew's	9 - 13	6 - 14	6 - 12
11	Tampines	8 - 14	6 - 13	8 - 12
12	Temasek	6 - 10	6 - 9	6 - 8
13	Victoria	6 - 10	6 - 9	6 - 7
14	Yishun	11 - 20	11 - 20	7 - 20

Notes:

1 The above L1R5 aggregate scores are based on students who do not have bonus points.

2. Students are given 2 bonus points if they have a pass in Higher Mother Tongue language, and another 2 points if their secondary schools are affiliated to the JCs that they are applying for, or they have been provisionally admitted to the JC.

APPENDIX A

Explanation Notes for Tables on Performance of Junior Colleges

1 The following four tables provide information on the performance of junior colleges in the 1997 GCE ‘A’ Level Examination, data on physical fitness of their students, and aggregate scores of those admitted in 1998.

Table 1:	Ranking of Junior Colleges in Performance Indicators
Table 2:	Performance of Junior Colleges in the 1997 GCE A-Level Examination
Table 3:	Fitness Data for Junior Colleges in 1997
Table 4:	Aggregate Scores of Students Admitted to the Junior Colleges in 1998

2 Table 1 shows the rankings of each JC in terms of intake quality, absolute and value-added performance, and physical fitness. The rankings are based on data shown in Table 2. The value-added ranking is based on difference between actual and expected mean A-level points of students. Table 3 gives the different indicators of the fitness level in the junior colleges. Table 4 gives the range of aggregate scores of students admitted to the different JCs in 1998.

3 Data on academic performance is based on students who took the A-level examination for the first time and the fitness data is based on all students, including those in JC1.

Description of Terms Used in the Tables

4 Ranking on Intake Quality (L1R5): This column ranks the JCs in terms of mean L1R5 aggregate score of their 1996 JC1 intake i.e. the cohort which took the A-level in 1997. L1R5 is the aggregate score for JC admission and the cut-off score is 20.

5 Mean L1R5 Aggregate: This is the average L1R5 aggregate score of students who took the A-level exam for the first time in 1997.

6 Mean A-Level Points: This column gives the average A-level points obtained by students based on their performance in the best 3 A-level and 2 AO-level subjects (General Paper and mother tongue language). The maximum number of points is 20 (grade A) for A-level subjects and 8 points (grade 1) for AO-level subjects, giving a maximum total of 76 points.

7 Mean Subject Grade: For A-level subjects, students are awarded grades A, B, C, D, E, O or F. For the purpose of computing the mean, a grade A is assigned a value of 1, B a value of 2 and so on. The mean subject grade for a particular college is obtained by adding each of these values for each subject taken and dividing by the total number of subjects taken.

8 Percent Grades A & B: This column shows what percentage of the subject entries in each JC were graded A and B. It is computed by summing all the grades A and B and dividing the sum by the total number of subjects taken by students.

9 % Passed 3 A-Levels or More: This is the percentage of students who obtained at least 3 A-level passes (grades A-E).

10 % Passed GP: This column shows the college’s pass rate in GP (grades 1-6).

11 Fitness Index: The Fitness Index (FI) is based on students’ height and weight, and their performance in the National Physical Fitness Award (NAPFA) test. The Index is based on all students (JC1 and JC2), and it is defined as the average of:

the percentage of students within the acceptable weight range (based on weight-for-height table provided by Ministry of Health’s School Health Service), and
the percentage of students who passed the NAPFA test.

The acceptable weight range is from 80% to below 120% of standard weight.

12 Percent Overweight: This column shows the percentage of students who were overweight by 20% or more, based on standards provided by Ministry of Health.

13 Percent Passed NAPFA Test: This is the percentage of students who passed the NAPFA test in 1997. The NAPFA test comprises 6 test items developed by the Sports Medicine and Research Centre of the Singapore Sports Council.

14 Aggregate Scores of Students Admitted: Table 3 shows the L1R5 aggregate scores of those admitted to the different courses in 1998.