2025年1月8日，新加坡教育部高級政務次長黃偉中代表人力部長在國會口頭答覆盛港集選區議員何廷儒、盛港集選區議員林志蔚副教授關於2024年中一分配結果的相關數據。‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍

以下內容為新加坡眼根據國會英文資料翻譯整理：

何廷儒（盛港集選區議員）：關於2024年中一分配結果，教育部長是否可以提供以下數據：

(a) 有多少小六學生未能被分配到其六個志願學校之一，並按以下類別細分：

(i) 數量

(ii) 百分比

(iii) 分配組別；

(b) 此分配結果與過去三年相比有何差異？‍

(c) 在出生率較高、競爭更激烈的年份，是否向家長提供指導或幫助，以便他們更好地為中學派位做準備？

黃偉中（教育部高級政務次長，代表教育部）的答覆：

教育部為每一屆小六離校考試（PSLE）學生規劃充足的中一學額。這意味著，每位參加PSLE且符合資格進入中學的學生都能保證獲得一個中學學位。

2024年的PSLE考生人數高於往年，這已在我們的規劃中考慮。

在2024年的中一分配結果中，超過90%的學生被分配到他們六個志願學校之一。這一比例在所有分配組別中一致。其餘學生則被分配到離家最近、符合其分配組別且有學額的學校。整體分配結果與過去三年相當。

學校錄取分數線（COP）會因每屆學生的PSLE成績及學校志願情況而波動。當更多同分學生選擇同一學校時，該校的COP可能比往年更嚴格。2024年較大規模的考生人數也可能加劇了一些熱門學校COP的變化。

因此，除了鼓勵學生和家長僅將前一年的COP作為參考外，我們在2024年也特別建議他們至少選擇兩到三所學校，其PSLE成績優於這些學校的去年COP。這將提高他們進入首選學校的幾率。我們還建議學生和家長不要僅以COP為依據，而是綜合考慮學校的文化、特色項目以及學生的興趣和特長。

何廷儒（盛港集選區議員）的補充提問：

感謝高級政務次長的答覆。我有三個補充問題：

1.關於對家長的指導：由於今年的考生人數較多，一些學校的COP出現波動。家長反饋選擇學校時遇到了困難。教育部是否會針對這一情況為家長提供額外的指導？另外，今年有多少學校的COP比2023年下降？

2.關於上訴：每年分配結果公布後，都會有家長希望上訴，請問今年有多少起上訴？其中有多少成功？此外，是否能為未能進入六個志願學校的學生家長提供更多關於上訴流程的指導？

3. 關於校友優惠（Affiliation Benefits）：家長中有一種看法認為，現行制度下校友優惠的影響可能與之前的系統有所不同。教育部是否在監控這一變化？校友優惠是否對現行制度產生了更大的影響？是否需要對現有系統進行調整以評估校友優惠的作用？

黃偉中（教育部高級政務次長，代表教育部）：感謝何議員的補充提問。

關於第一個問題——家長指導方面，我們非常重視家長的知情度和教育工作。學校在PSLE成績公布前已經開展了許多相關工作，與學生和家長進行接觸和溝通。在成績公布當天，我們也確保向家長傳遞建議，鼓勵他們選擇更廣泛的學校範圍。具體來說，前三個志願可以是學生理想的學校，但後面三個志願至少應選擇兩至三所錄取分數更低的學校，以確保志願的分布更具多樣性。

第二點關於COP，COP是基於前一年歷史數據得出的參考值。雖然這一數據具有一定的參考價值，但分數波動是正常現象。大多數學校的分數線通常會在上下1分範圍內波動。這種變化在4分至20多分的分數範圍內是較為常見的。

關於第三個問題——上訴，我們沒有直接統計上訴的具體數量，但可以確認，近年來的上訴比例一直維持在較低水平。家長和學生通常被鼓勵直接聯繫目標學校，並了解學校的上訴流程。此外，MOE網站也提供了相關上訴的在線資源。如果這些方式都無法滿足需求，家長還可以聯繫教育部，我們會幫助他們了解更靠近家庭住址的學校的空餘學額情況。

至於關於校友優惠的問題，這與分配結果本身的直接關係不大。我建議議員在下一次國會會議中針對校友優惠提出更具體的問題。

林志蔚副教授（盛港集選區議員）的補充提問：

感謝高級政務次長的答覆。我有兩個後續問題：

1.關於分配時的平分決勝規則：根據我的理解，分配時的決勝機制結合了COP和學生所選學校的優先順序。但部長提到，在分配結果中還使用了距離作為決策依據。請問距離是否也會在平分決勝中起作用？

2.關於距離的衡量：教育部是否考慮過用通勤時間而非直線距離來衡量距離？許多居民反映，雖然某些學校在地理距離上較近，但通勤時間卻可能接近一小時。相比之下，他們更傾向選擇通勤時間更短的學校，即使地理距離更遠。

黃偉中（教育部高級政務次長，代表教育部）：感謝林志蔚副教授的提問。關於平分決勝機制，您已經提交了第47號國會提問，我們將在稍後做出詳細回答。

至於距離的衡量，MOE的原則是儘可能將學生分配到離家最近且有學額的學校。這一原則目前以地理距離為衡量標準。

未完待续,请点击[下一页]继续阅读

{nextpage}

以下是英文質詢內容：

Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Education in respect of the 2024 Secondary 1 posting exercise (a) how many Primary 6 students are not posted to any of their six school choices, with a breakdown into (i) numbers (ii) percentages and (iii) posting group; (b) how does this posting outcome compare to the numbers in the previous three years; and (c) whether any guidance or preparation is given to parents for years where there are more competition for places in secondary schools such as years with higher birth rates.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong) (for the Minister for Education): The Ministry of Education (MOE) plans for sufficient Secondary 1 places to cater to all Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) students in that cohort. This means that every student who takes the PSLE and qualifies for secondary school will be guaranteed a place at one of our secondary schools.

The 2024 PSLE cohort was larger than cohorts in the previous years and this was taken into account in our planning.

Under the 2024 Secondary 1 Posting Exercise, more than 90% of the cohort were placed in schools among their six choices. This was consistent across all posting groups. For the remaining students, they were posted to the school nearest to their residences that had vacancies in their eligible posting groups. Overall, the posting outcome was comparable to the previous three years.

Schools' cut-off points, or COPs, can fluctuate from year to year, depending on the cohort's PSLE score and their school choices. When more students with the same PSLE score pick the same schools, the COPs of these schools could become more stringent than what they were in previous years. The larger cohort taking the PSLE in 2024 could also have contributed to this effect for some of the popular schools.

Therefore, besides encouraging students and their parents to only use the previous year's COPs as a reference, we have strongly encouraged them in 2024 to select at least two or three schools where their PSLE score better than the school's previous year's COP. This would increase their chances of securing a place in one of the preferred school choices. We also encourage students and parents to look beyond COPs and to consider the school's culture and distinctive programmes alongside the students' strengths and interests.

未完待续,请点击[下一页]继续阅读

{nextpage}

Mr Speaker: Ms He.

Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I have three supplementary questions on this. The first relates to guidance given to parents over choices as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned earlier, because of the larger cohort this year, there were some fluctuations that were experienced in the COPs. Parents have given us feedback that there were some difficulties in choosing the schools that their children might have been eligible for.

My question would be, would there be any extra guidance given to parents, given that this is obviously quite a stressful period for them trying to figure out which schools, which choices to make for their children, especially given that this is still a relatively new system that everyone is not quite so familiar with. So, firstly, whether any further guidance is going to be given to parents in terms of choosing. On the point about COPs, can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary confirm how many schools actually had reduced COPs compared with the 2023 cohort?

My second supplementary question relates to appeals. As the Senior Parliamentary Secretary is aware, every time when the school posting results come out, there are parents who wish to appeal. For this year, I would like the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to confirm how many appeals were received in order to try and get their children into the schools of choice that they did not gain a posting for? How many appeals were made, how many were successful? And would the parents be given guidance in the future about, for example, if their children did not get any of the six choices, would they be given additional guidance or prompts whether an appeal is possible and also how to make an appeal? I understand that there was some confusion among some parents about how to go about appealing and when to expect results. So, I think there was some confusion on the ground from what I understand. So, whether the Ministry could actually provide some guidance and support for parents who find themselves and their children in this situation.

And finally, my third supplementary question relates to affiliation benefits. There is some sentiment on the ground that there might be some differences in affiliation benefits and the effect that it has under the current system. I was just wondering whether the MOE is monitoring that, whether there have been any differences found, whether affiliation benefits actually apply more to this new system compared with the last system, and whether there are any tweaks to the system required in order to find out what effect of the affiliation benefits are.

Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong: I thank Member He Ting Ru for her supplementary questions. I think for the first one with regard to the guidance given to parents and so on, most certainly, awareness and education and outreach is definitely very important. And that is why the school has done much of the work on the ground, especially before the release of PSLE results, engaging students, reaching out to the parents. And on the day of the results, to make sure that they choose a wider cluster of schools, probably the top three choices would be something that they would desire, but that for the bottom three choices, at least select two or three schools that has a much higher COP, so that they make sure that the clustering is a little more diverse. So, that is the first point.

未完待续,请点击[下一页]继续阅读

{nextpage}

The second point in terms of the COP, COP is actually historical data, based on the previous year. Although it is somewhat a good reference, these fluctuations always occur and are very common. A plus or minus one point is common for the majority of the schools. But then again, out of an entire range from four points up to 20-plus points, plus or minus one point in difference of the COPs is actually quite normal.

For the third part, the Member had questions about appeals. We do not have the direct numbers of appeals, but appeals percentages are very low and it is consistent over the last couple of years. The appeals do go direct to the schools and for each of those desired schools, the parents and the students as well are encouraged to go to the school and then find out the process. There is also an online link where the appeals process is well known.

If those aspects or avenues actually fail, then parents are encouraged to also approach MOE and we will see how we can better facilitate and see if within the vicinity or closer to the vicinity, what are the available schools.

On the last query on affiliation benefits, this is not exactly related to the posting, so I suggest the Member to post a more specific question on affiliation at the next Sitting.

Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Thank you to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. I have two follow-up questions. The first has to do with what the decision in terms of allocation of schools when there is a tie-breaker. My understanding is that it is a combination of COPs as well as the rank order that the student indicates. But earlier on, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary indicated that distance was used as a decision metric in terms of allocation after this. Just to clarify, is distance used also for the purposes of a tie-breaker situation? That is the first supplementary question.

My second is, I wonder if the Ministry also considers distance not so much just in terms of geographical distance as the crow flies but rather commute time. This is because we have many residents who inform us that even though a specific school may be located relatively close in terms of geographical distance, it could take in terms of commuting time, close to an hour to get there. Understandably, they would rather have something that could be further but requires less commute time.

未完待续,请点击[下一页]继续阅读

{nextpage}

Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong: I thank the hon Member for the question. With regard to the specifics on the tie-breaker, the Member actually has filed a Parliamentary Question, which is Question No 47, which we will address in full. With regard to the distances, for example, MOE is committed to assigning a school that is closest, with vacancy, within the vicinity.

CF丨翻譯

HQ丨編審

國會丨來源

國會丨圖源