Canossa Catholic Primary School in Singapore has a 100% application rate, reflecting its high demand and popularity. Its strong Catholic ethos and values-based education make it a unique choice for parents.
Known for its intensive English language and science programs, the school has a history of academic excellence. In addition, the school recently made headlines for its progressive implementation of an integrated arts curriculum, further enriching its diverse educational offerings.
Located in the heart of the city, Canossa Catholic Primary is well-regarded and highly competitive, making it a top choice for Primary 1 admission.
Canossa Catholic Primary School
Principal:
Mdm Sia Lu-Ming Eugenie
Vice Principals:
Mr Lee Kok Meng Clement, NA
Session Type:
Single Session
Email:
Nearest MRT:
Nearest MRT station: Mattar Station (about 7-minute walk)
School Type:
Government-aided Sch
Ballot Results
Learn About the Phases Here
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Vacancy | 60 | 19 | 24 | 60 | 26 | 0 | 0 |
| Applied | 41 | 6 | 14 | 34 | 44 | 0 | 139 | |
| % Applied | 68% | 32% | 58% | 57% | 169% | - | - | |
| Taken | 41 | 6 | 14 | 34 | 26 | 0 | 121 | |
| % Taken | 68% | 32% | 58% | 57% | 100% | - | - | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2024 | Vacancy | 60 | 23 | 26 | 67 | 35 | 16 | 120 |
| Applied | 37 | 5 | 11 | 32 | 19 | 0 | 104 | |
| % Applied | 62% | 22% | 42% | 48% | 54% | 0% | 87% | |
| Taken | 37 | 5 | 11 | 32 | 19 | 0 | 104 | |
| % Taken | 62% | 22% | 42% | 48% | 54% | 0% | 87% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2023 | Vacancy | 60 | 12 | 23 | 50 | 120 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 48 | 3 | 19 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 126 | |
| % Applied | 80% | 25% | 83% | 112% | 0% | 0% | 105% | |
| Taken | 48 | 3 | 19 | 50 | 0 | 0 | 120 | |
| % Taken | 80% | 25% | 83% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2022 | Vacancy | 60 | 26 | 27 | 64 | 4 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 34 | 6 | 16 | 60 | 23 | 0 | 139 | |
| % Applied | 57% | 23% | 59% | 94% | 575% | 0% | 116% | |
| Taken | 34 | 6 | 16 | 60 | 4 | 0 | 120 | |
| % Taken | 57% | 23% | 59% | 94% | 100% | 0% | 100% |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Vacancy | 110 | 77 | 72 | 53 | 92 | 33 | 150 | 150 |
| Applied | 33 | 5 | 8 | 14 | 59 | 53 | 0 | 172 | |
| % Applied | 30% | 6% | 11% | 26% | 64% | 161% | 0% | 115% | |
| Taken | 33 | 5 | 8 | 14 | 59 | 33 | 0 | 152 | |
| % Taken | 30% | 6% | 11% | 26% | 64% | 100% | 0% | 101% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2020 | Vacancy | 80 | 47 | 45 | 39 | 67 | 8 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 33 | 2 | 7 | 13 | 59 | 20 | 0 | 134 | |
| % Applied | 41% | 4% | 16% | 33% | 88% | 250% | 0% | 112% | |
| Taken | 33 | 2 | 7 | 13 | 59 | 8 | 0 | 122 | |
| % Taken | 41% | 4% | 16% | 33% | 88% | 100% | 0% | 102% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2019 | Vacancy | 80 | 61 | 60 | 47 | 79 | 40 | 31 | 120 |
| Applied | 19 | 1 | 7 | 15 | 39 | 9 | 0 | 90 | |
| % Applied | 24% | 2% | 12% | 32% | 49% | 23% | 0% | 75% | |
| Taken | 19 | 1 | 7 | 15 | 39 | 9 | 0 | 90 | |
| % Taken | 24% | 2% | 12% | 32% | 49% | 23% | 0% | 75% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2018 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 46 | 81 | 28 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 53 | 32 | 0 | 95 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 22% | 65% | 114% | 0% | 79% | |
| Taken | 17 | 2 | 10 | 10 | 53 | 28 | 0 | 120 | |
| % Taken | 14% | 2% | 8% | 22% | 65% | 100% | 0% | 100% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2017 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 54 | 107 | 83 | 76 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 24 | 7 | 0 | 33 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 22% | 8% | 0% | 28% | |
| Taken | 6 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 24 | 7 | 0 | 44 | |
| % Taken | 5% | 2% | 3% | 2% | 22% | 8% | 0% | 37% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2016 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 52 | 99 | 83 | 77 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 27 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 10% | 16% | 7% | 0% | 23% | |
| Taken | 13 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 43 | |
| % Taken | 11% | 0% | 3% | 10% | 16% | 7% | 0% | 36% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2015 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 50 | 99 | 76 | 72 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 23 | 4 | 0 | 29 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 23% | 5% | 0% | 24% | |
| Taken | 18 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 23 | 4 | 0 | 48 | |
| % Taken | 15% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 23% | 5% | 0% | 40% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2014 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 45 | 85 | 52 | 42 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 34 | 10 | 0 | 49 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 11% | 40% | 19% | 0% | 41% | |
| Taken | 26 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 33 | 10 | 0 | 78 | |
| % Taken | 22% | 0% | 3% | 11% | 39% | 19% | 0% | 65% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2013 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 47 | 89 | 36 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 54 | 41 | 0 | 100 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 11% | 61% | 114% | 0% | 83% | |
| Taken | 21 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 54 | 36 | 0 | 121 | |
| % Taken | 18% | 3% | 1% | 11% | 61% | 100% | 0% | 101% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2012 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 50 | 94 | 39 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 57 | 45 | 0 | 108 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 61% | 115% | 0% | 90% | |
| Taken | 12 | 1 | 7 | 6 | 57 | 39 | 0 | 122 | |
| % Taken | 10% | 1% | 6% | 12% | 61% | 100% | 0% | 102% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2011 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 45 | 85 | 55 | 20 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 30 | 27 | 0 | 61 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 9% | 35% | 49% | 0% | 51% | |
| Taken | 24 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 30 | 35 | 0 | 100 | |
| % Taken | 20% | 3% | 3% | 9% | 35% | 64% | 0% | 83% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2010 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 50 | 96 | 57 | 2 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 40 | 36 | 0 | 80 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 42% | 63% | 0% | 67% | |
| Taken | 17 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 40 | 36 | 0 | 100 | |
| % Taken | 14% | 0% | 3% | 8% | 42% | 63% | 0% | 83% |
Google Reviews!
Hear from parents about their experiences with Canossa Catholic Primary School.
"I graduated from this school last year, and the teacher support and help are quite good. They serve breakfast for students early in the morning as some students are not able to have breakfast at home. Teachers are amazing, ofc can be strict. And yea."
January 20, 2025
"I am alumni. I cannot express how badly I was treated in this sch... Most teachers are racists cuz I am from brown poverty country. One of teacher treats everyone nice and gave each of them birthday presents and on my birthday, she didn't even say it and when I said it's my birthday, she didn't give me. It's not the present I wanted it's the respect I didn't get. I may be messy but I am innocent. They only help those who are strong but I am weak in academic cuz my family did not have proper education other than me. I have teachers who humiliated or frame me in front of whole class. People say it's because I did bad things but they don't dare to humiliate some good students who did bad things on purpose. I was supposed to receive award for high scores but someone Chinese who scored lower got the award last minute for Thanksgiving. Don't think about sending your child here if you don't want them to be verbally abused by teachers there especially hearing impaired side. I deal with these for 6+ years. I couldn't even get to attend alumni events cuz of those teachers I hate alot even if I tried to be forgiving. They tried to crash my dreams by saying that I will never make it or calling me stupid or useless. Now I have made it to university when they said I can't even attend ite. Pls for god sake don't send your child here. I have a friend who suffer the same as me cuz of her speech problems. She couldnt speak due to her tongue but teachers were really harsh on her and called her useless in front of sch and don't care about bullying cuz we are bullied by teachers too. 🥲"
February 09, 2025
"i am an alumni here the place is very bad and whenever a person fidget during national anthem or pledge mrs tan the principal will scold them in front of the whole school. i dont know why she make this such a big deal. also the canteen food is expensive and very little, some of the teachers are very mean and grumpy like ms lee but some of them are nice like mrs phee but she is biased with some students."
August 15, 2024
"This School is quite nice,the teachers are very sweet and nice but not all,the students in this school are bad and the teachers could not really help to let them stop. Some students are really very annoying and naughty,they know things that they should not know in their age and talks a lot bad words behind of the teacher and lots of gossiping too. That's why I only give 3 stars but the teachers are good(not all but mostly )"
December 26, 2023
"i was a student here in this school. I recently got graduated, okay so this school system is horrible such as the teachers, the school “policy” I was in my mother tongue classroom and i forgot to bring my textbook to school, I politely apologised to the teacher and the teacher hit me and scolded me saying I was “useless, disrespectful”. and I think she still here on this day. from -joselin If I had a kid I will not let him/her to go this kind of school.. don’t bring your kids here in this school, this system is terrible and the teachers will mistreat you once you are their so called “victim”"
July 13, 2024