Located in Hougang, Montfort Junior School is a distinguished institution with a 100% application rate. Excelling in both academics and co-curricular activities, it has garnered numerous accolades, including the School Excellence Award.
Montfort offers unique programs such as the Montfort Leadership Institute, focusing on character and leadership development. The school's popularity and competitiveness are evident in its consistent, high application rates.
This all-boys Catholic school, steeped in history and tradition, offers a holistic education in a nurturing environment, making it a sought-after choice for many Singaporean parents.
Montfort Junior School
Principal:
Mr Tan Boon Hong Victor
Vice Principals:
Mdm Poh Lee Siew, Mr Tan Wee Boon
Session Type:
Single Session
Email:
Nearest MRT:
Hougang MRT & Bus Interchange
School Type:
Government-aided Sch
Ballot Results
Learn About the Phases Here
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Vacancy | 90 | 68 | 41 | 118 | 107 | 81 | 81 |
| Applied | 22 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 26 | 0 | 70 | |
| % Applied | 24% | 9% | 12% | 9% | 24% | 0% | 86% | |
| Taken | 22 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 26 | 0 | 70 | |
| % Taken | 24% | 9% | 12% | 9% | 24% | 0% | 86% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2024 | Vacancy | 90 | 62 | 39 | 114 | 90 | 48 | 150 |
| Applied | 28 | 5 | 3 | 24 | 42 | 0 | 102 | |
| % Applied | 31% | 8% | 8% | 21% | 47% | 0% | 68% | |
| Taken | 28 | 5 | 3 | 24 | 42 | 0 | 102 | |
| % Taken | 31% | 8% | 8% | 21% | 47% | 0% | 68% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2023 | Vacancy | 90 | 68 | 40 | 113 | 88 | 50 | 150 |
| Applied | 22 | 7 | 8 | 25 | 38 | 0 | 100 | |
| % Applied | 24% | 10% | 20% | 22% | 43% | 0% | 67% | |
| Taken | 22 | 7 | 8 | 25 | 38 | 0 | 100 | |
| % Taken | 24% | 10% | 20% | 22% | 43% | 0% | 67% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2022 | Vacancy | 90 | 64 | 38 | 101 | 72 | 8 | 150 |
| Applied | 26 | 9 | 15 | 29 | 64 | 0 | 143 | |
| % Applied | 29% | 14% | 39% | 29% | 89% | 0% | 95% | |
| Taken | 26 | 9 | 15 | 29 | 64 | 0 | 143 | |
| % Taken | 29% | 14% | 39% | 29% | 89% | 0% | 95% |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Vacancy | 140 | 120 | 118 | 76 | 137 | 94 | 44 | 180 |
| Applied | 20 | 2 | 7 | 14 | 45 | 50 | 0 | 138 | |
| % Applied | 14% | 2% | 6% | 18% | 33% | 53% | 0% | 77% | |
| Taken | 20 | 2 | 7 | 14 | 45 | 50 | 0 | 138 | |
| % Taken | 14% | 2% | 6% | 18% | 33% | 53% | 0% | 77% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2020 | Vacancy | 80 | 62 | 61 | 46 | 86 | 23 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 18 | 1 | 10 | 5 | 63 | 37 | 0 | 134 | |
| % Applied | 23% | 2% | 16% | 11% | 73% | 161% | 0% | 112% | |
| Taken | 18 | 1 | 10 | 5 | 63 | 23 | 0 | 120 | |
| % Taken | 23% | 2% | 16% | 11% | 73% | 100% | 0% | 100% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2019 | Vacancy | 80 | 67 | 69 | 51 | 87 | 42 | 18 | 120 |
| Applied | 13 | 0 | 7 | 15 | 45 | 24 | 0 | 104 | |
| % Applied | 16% | 0% | 10% | 29% | 52% | 57% | 0% | 87% | |
| Taken | 13 | 0 | 7 | 15 | 45 | 24 | 0 | 104 | |
| % Taken | 16% | 0% | 10% | 29% | 52% | 57% | 0% | 87% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2018 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 48 | 82 | 41 | 120 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 43 | 46 | 0 | 104 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 31% | 52% | 112% | 0% | 87% | |
| Taken | 12 | 3 | 9 | 14 | 41 | 41 | 0 | 120 | |
| % Taken | 10% | 3% | 8% | 29% | 50% | 100% | 0% | 100% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2017 | Vacancy | 150 | 150 | 150 | 63 | 120 | 96 | 84 | 150 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 24 | 12 | 0 | 41 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 20% | 13% | 0% | 27% | |
| Taken | 19 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 24 | 12 | 0 | 66 | |
| % Taken | 13% | 0% | 4% | 8% | 20% | 13% | 0% | 44% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2016 | Vacancy | 120 | 120 | 120 | 49 | 92 | 72 | 68 | 120 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 20 | 4 | 0 | 30 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 22% | 6% | 0% | 25% | |
| Taken | 14 | 1 | 7 | 6 | 20 | 4 | 0 | 52 | |
| % Taken | 12% | 1% | 6% | 12% | 22% | 6% | 0% | 43% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2015 | Vacancy | 180 | 180 | 180 | 73 | 138 | 116 | 108 | 180 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 22 | 8 | 0 | 39 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 16% | 7% | 0% | 22% | |
| Taken | 27 | 0 | 7 | 8 | 22 | 8 | 0 | 72 | |
| % Taken | 15% | 0% | 4% | 11% | 16% | 7% | 0% | 40% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2014 | Vacancy | 210 | 210 | 210 | 92 | 172 | 135 | 122 | 210 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 37 | 13 | 0 | 61 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 22% | 10% | 0% | 29% | |
| Taken | 19 | 1 | 7 | 11 | 37 | 13 | 0 | 88 | |
| % Taken | 9% | 0% | 3% | 12% | 22% | 10% | 0% | 42% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2013 | Vacancy | 210 | 210 | 210 | 90 | 165 | 112 | 29 | 210 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 53 | 18 | 0 | 85 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 16% | 32% | 16% | 0% | 40% | |
| Taken | 18 | 0 | 13 | 14 | 53 | 83 | 0 | 181 | |
| % Taken | 9% | 0% | 6% | 16% | 32% | 74% | 0% | 86% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2012 | Vacancy | 210 | 210 | 210 | 83 | 155 | 99 | 55 | 210 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 58 | 17 | 0 | 85 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 37% | 17% | 0% | 40% | |
| Taken | 33 | 0 | 12 | 10 | 58 | 44 | 0 | 157 | |
| % Taken | 16% | 0% | 6% | 12% | 37% | 44% | 0% | 75% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2011 | Vacancy | 210 | 210 | 210 | 85 | 162 | 115 | 60 | 210 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 48 | 50 | 0 | 105 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 30% | 43% | 0% | 50% | |
| Taken | 32 | 1 | 8 | 7 | 47 | 55 | 0 | 150 | |
| % Taken | 15% | 0% | 4% | 8% | 29% | 48% | 0% | 71% | |
| Year | Phase 1 | 2A(1) | 2A(2) | 2B | 2C | 2C(S) | 3 | Total | |
| 2010 | Vacancy | 240 | 240 | 240 | 95 | 174 | 119 | 67 | 240 |
| Applied | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 57 | 36 | 0 | 109 | |
| % Applied | 0% | 0% | 0% | 17% | 33% | 30% | 0% | 45% | |
| Taken | 42 | 1 | 7 | 16 | 57 | 36 | 0 | 159 | |
| % Taken | 18% | 0% | 3% | 17% | 33% | 30% | 0% | 66% |
Google Reviews!
Hear from parents about their experiences with Montfort Junior School.
"not bad enjoyed my 6 years in the school. Canteen food was gd but got food poisoning one time lol overall my class was great. mjs sports like badminton is very sigma i feel that the school itself is very skibidi. mr soh is my number 1 sigma Cher"
February 03, 2025
"I had the privilege of attending Montfort Primary School and graduated in 1991. Reflecting on my time there, I can confidently say that it was an amazing experience. The school was located at the Old Premises back then, and I have fond memories of the environment and the people who made my schooling years so special. The teachers, though strict, played a significant role in shaping who I am today. Iām incredibly grateful for the education and values imparted to me at Montfort Primary School. Thank you, Montfort, for everything! Age Quod Agis š¤©š"
September 01, 2024
"From what I saw some boys were very rude on the bus they kept saying rude things to other primary school they should learn manners"
January 09, 2025
"Overall experience is good. My boy made alot of friends, and is happy studying in school. I think the teachers make a difference. I hope my boy continue to be taught by good teachers."
February 12, 2024
"Good Teachers and staffs at MJS. They are doing a wonderful job in upbringing the boys. The lessons are made interesting for them. Teachers are very supportive. Communication plays a key role when children learn, so far I had the best experience with the form teachers and MT teachers. Keep it up!!"
May 23, 2023