Sengkang Green Primary School

15 Fernvale Road, 797636

63864255

At a glance

Sengkang Green Primary School, located in the heart of Sengkang, Singapore, is a highly competitive and sought-after school with an application rate of 138%. This indicates that for every 240 placements, there were 331 applications.

School Type
Government School
Session Type
Single Session
Nearest MRT
Fernvale LRT (SW5) - (Sengkang West Loop)
Latest Ballot Year
2025
Government School Co-ed School Single Session sessions Nearest MRT: Fernvale LRT (SW5) - (Sengkang West Loop)
Principal

Mr Gau Poh Teck

Vice Principals

Mdm Adila Ong Kim Luan, Mr Tan Keng Lim Jeremy

Website

https://sengkanggreenpri.moe.edu.sg/

Email

sengkanggreen_ps@moe.edu.sg

School Image
School Image
School Image

Ballot Results

See each year at a glance, then compare phase-by-phase demand in a cleaner format.

Learn About the Phases
P1 Registration Phases
  • Phase 1: For siblings of current students.
  • Phase 2A(1): For children of alumni and School Advisory/Management Committee members.
  • Phase 2A(2): For children of former students and staff.
  • Phase 2A: Combined 2A phase used in newer ballot records.
  • Phase 2B: For parent volunteers and selected community affiliations.
  • Phase 2C: For children with no prior link to the school.
  • Phase 2C(S): Supplementary phase for remaining vacancies.
  • Phase 3: For international students.
Trend by Year

Applied rate and taken rate compared across ballot years.

Applied Rate Taken Rate
95% 108% 120% 133% 145% 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 129% 100% 126% 101%
Recent format

Vacancy shows available places. Applied rate shows demand. Taken rate above 100% means the phase was oversubscribed.

2025
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
126%
Taken Rate
101%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 175%
Metric Phase 1 2A 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 180 95 20 48 0 0
Applied 85 119 15 84 0 0
Taken 85 95 15 48 0 0
Taken Rate 47% 125% 75% 175% - -
2024
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
138%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 224%
Metric Phase 1 2A 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 180 77 20 42 240 240
Applied 103 116 18 94 0 0
Taken 103 77 18 42 0 0
Taken Rate 57% 151% 90% 224% 0% 0%
2023
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
280
Applied Rate
125%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 193%
Metric Phase 1 2A 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 220 92 20 45 280 280
Applied 128 121 15 87 0 0
Taken 128 92 15 45 0 0
Taken Rate 58% 132% 75% 193% 0% 0%
2022
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
280
Applied Rate
126%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 245%
Metric Phase 1 2A 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 220 110 23 49 280 280
Applied 111 100 21 120 0 0
Taken 111 100 21 49 0 0
Taken Rate 50% 91% 91% 245% 0% 0%
Older format

Vacancy shows available places. Applied rate shows demand. Taken rate above 100% means the phase was oversubscribed.

2021
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
280
Applied Rate
116%
Taken Rate
101%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 158%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 124 125 44 74 280 280
Applied 116 0 78 14 117 0 0
Taken 116 0 78 14 74 0 0
Taken Rate 48% 0% 62% 32% 158% 0% 0%
2020
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
280
Applied Rate
129%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 319%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 123 123 26 36 280 280
Applied 117 0 111 17 115 0 0
Taken 117 0 111 17 36 0 0
Taken Rate 49% 0% 90% 65% 319% 0% 0%
2019
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
270
Applied Rate
129%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 210%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 230 118 118 43 70 270 270
Applied 112 0 73 15 147 0 0
Taken 112 0 73 15 70 0 0
Taken Rate 49% 0% 62% 35% 210% 0% 0%
2018
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
270
Applied Rate
67%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 291%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 270 270 270 39 54 270 270
Applied 0 0 0 24 157 0 0
Taken 125 0 68 23 54 0 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 62% 291% 0% 0%
2017
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
102%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 222%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 240 240 59 102 240 240
Applied 0 0 0 18 226 0 0
Taken 121 0 1 16 102 0 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 31% 222% 0% 0%
2016
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
133%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 223%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 240 240 77 133 240 240
Applied 0 0 0 21 297 0 0
Taken 85 0 1 21 133 0 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 27% 223% 0% 0%
2015
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
129%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 228%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 240 240 71 130 240 240
Applied 0 0 0 12 297 0 0
Taken 99 0 0 11 130 0 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 17% 228% 0% 0%
2014
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
110%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 133%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 240 240 100 193 240 240
Applied 0 0 0 7 256 0 0
Taken 40 0 0 7 193 0 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 7% 133% 0% 0%
2013
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
240
Applied Rate
97%
Taken Rate
100%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 103%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 240 240 240 113 223 240 240
Applied 0 0 0 2 230 0 0
Taken 15 0 0 2 223 0 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 2% 103% 0% 0%
2012
Historical ballot data
Vacancies
210
Applied Rate
59%
Taken Rate
75%
Highest Demand
2C
Highest demand: 2C at 52%
Metric Phase 1 2A(1) 2A(2) 2B 2C 2C(S) 3
Vacancies 210 210 210 105 210 102 52
Applied 0 0 0 0 109 15 0
Taken 0 0 0 0 108 50 0
Taken Rate 0% 0% 0% 0% 52% 15% 0%

School Reviews

Read Google and parent-contributed reviews for Sengkang Green Primary School, or share your own experience below.

"played against their basketball senior girls team (2025) very ugly behaviour, they were very rude and aggressive. No manners at all. I fell down on the ground during the game and they started laughing, we lost to them in the end. Very arrogant behaviour towards us after the match. Please teach your children proper etiquette and how to act during a match."

Irene Mathavan
Irene Mathavan

April 08, 2025

"Nice school but crazy fight between fenvale primary and this school"

Tethys Lee Yi Xiang (Andersonss)
Tethys Lee Yi Xiang (Andersonss)

February 26, 2025

"I really like this school principal and the discipline people because their speech always help me sleep 💤💤💤"

Tan Jee Hao
Tan Jee Hao

February 01, 2025

"Thruout the years, except for Ms Beh who have left, who put in effort to send regular emails to update the progress, alot of the times I heard teacher on MC, teacher not here, teacher goes on leave, relief teachers. The overall grade was very bad as well, compared to other kids in other school for PSLE. Was it the teaching method? Neighbours and some other parents share the same thoughts too. With teachers who can't bother to reply parents emails."

Winnie Li
Winnie Li

January 03, 2025

"Not a good school who made the parents wait outside the gate when we came earlier than 1030 for the PSLE Results. Cmon lah, have some compassion for the parents who were waiting outside. Would not even let us wait at the canteen. Never had a good impression of this school from beginning. A backward school. Management committee of the school, please review your process. I've never come across a school who treats the parents like they don't matter."

NuHAF
NuHAF

November 20, 2024

"i love and don love this school y? firstly i love this school because it brought a lot of fun memory i had in this school,secondly i dont like this discipline master because he only finds problem between my siblings and me, a lot of racist people in this school.I have graduated this school since 2020 i would still recommend this school because its fun and to those that is near from their block"

Ariel Erwan
Ariel Erwan

July 29, 2024

Write A Review