* Nanyang JC (NYJC)

[ilovelaksa]

jtoh:

phtthp:

Which are the dumping ground faculty in NUS, NTU ?


Often, these faculty would require the lowest, entry points.

For these \"dumping ground\" faculty, what is the lowest UAS required, to enter ? Anyone know?

It isn't nice to call these faculties 'dumping grounds'. For some students, those are their desired courses. As for the indicative grades to enter the unis, such information is easily found on the internet.

:goodpost:
You will never know. The least popular faculties might turn out to be best-earning ones. Less supply cld lead to high demand hence higher salaries.

[schweppes]

ilovelaksa:

jtoh:

It isn't nice to call these faculties 'dumping grounds'. For some students, those are their desired courses. As for the indicative grades to enter the unis, such information is easily found on the internet.

:goodpost:
You will never know. The least popular faculties might turn out to be best-earning ones. Less supply cld lead to high demand hence higher salaries.

This is true. My cousin entered one of the less popular faculties, worked hard enough and graduated with two degrees by the time he was done. Even worked at GIC for a bit.

[mathtuition88]

phtthp:

Which are the dumping ground faculty in NUS, NTU ?


Often, these faculty would require the lowest, entry points.

For these \"dumping ground\" faculty, what is the lowest UAS required, to enter ? Anyone know?

According to current trend, Nursing and Mother Tongue Language related courses have the lowest entry requirements, followed by certain unpopular branches of engineering like Civil Engineering.

Low entry requirement doesn't mean that the course is bad or anything, just that it is unpopular with students, so there is low competition.

[candyfan]

mindays:

I hope your niece did not lie to you, because 100% were eligible to a local U (good enough to get a course)..

Wasn't the above written by you, mindays?

[candyfan]

mindays:

Candyfan, you didn't read my posts properly and came to accuse me of saying something that I didn't state. That's pure slandering and if I know of such a case in real life, I will sue you for defamation. This is a very serious matter and I hope you check my posts with greater detail before putting words in my mouth. I didn't say that: eligibility to apply to local U = good enough to get a place


Candyfan, I really think you didn't do your research on eligibility of local university. It was your mistake to assume that I assume eligibility = securing a place in local U. I said with clear conscience and heavily EMPHASISED the word ELIGIBILITY when I post about the results. I stated a fact that NYJC has 100% eligibility for local U, and you made used of what I said and twisted it to say that one needs 75 UAS to secure a course.

Furthermore, I can prove to you that a person with 65 UAS can get a course in NTU. If you had done your research, you wouldn't have said that one needs 75 UAS to secure a course. Let me show you here:

Art, Design & Media CCD/C (15+15+12.5+7.5+7.5+7.5 = 65)

This is not just one scenario, even a person with 66.25 UAS can get 2 courses in NTU

Physics / Applied Physics CCC/D (15+15+15+6.25+7.5+7.5 = 66.25)
Civil Engineering CCC/D (15+15+15+6.25+7.5+7.5 = 66.25)

So why even talk about 75 UAS when even a mere 65 UAS can secure a place, the difference is 10 UAS and that is a lot.

Therefore, if one JC has 100% eligibility to apply to local U and another has 96% eligibility, it does mean that the latter will have a tougher chance of securing a place in local U because it is unlikely for all 96% of the latter to score your presumed 75 UAS. In fact, some of the 96% just barely made it into the numbers to formulate a 96%.

And I hate to say this (results are sensitive issue to talk about) but it is integral for me to state it here to address candyfan's concern of \"Obtaining at least two H2 passes with an attempted GP is achievable even for the lower-tier JCs\". I can safely say that:

Eligibility to Local University:
Victoria JC 100%
Nanyang JC 100%
Temasek JC 96.2%
Meridian JC 99%
Serangoon JC approx. 90%

Don't get me wrong that I am using this to compare JCs. I have no intention of doing so. My point is to let candyfan consider what she means by \"achievable\".

P.S. So after all this discussion, you didn't call up to check against my statistics (integrity) provided?

You are obviously trying to mislead the viewers here as you clearly stated that nyjc 100% eligibility to U = good enough to get a place. Go check your previous posts

Pg 41 of this forum, you stated:
I hope your niece did not lie to you, because 100% were eligible to a local U (good enough to get a course). I emphasised heavily on the word ELIGIBILITY, your niece friends' may not have gotten into their course choice, as a result, they \"didn't make it to the local university\", but they surely are able to secure a place in the U.


Even if Arts, Design and Media, Physics, Civil Engineering, etc courses require 65 UAS, will the nyjc graduate' definitely secure' a place just because his UAS matches these courses IGP? He MAY NOT meet the minimum subject requirements or pass the selection interviews. How did the nyjc staff be so sure if what you said is true? You have to be responsible enough to state there are conditions applied before stating that 'they surely are able to secure a place..'.

http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/oad2/website_files/ALevel/Min_Subject_Requirements.pdf

Hence I reitierate that most jcs will quote 75 UAS as the safe score for local U entrance.

Let me tell you, no jc will dare declare they have 100% eligibility to local U. If you are trying to bring tjc down, show your evidence in this forum. You can't trick the readers here by your verbal declaration. It gets to how ungracious and kiasu nyjc parent projects himself here.

And if you have no connection with nyjc as you had said, please leave this forum.
As it is, my SIL who has an nyjc graduate dd here is very ashamed of you selling nyjc like koyok in the street. :oops:

[candyfan]

mindays:

Therefore, if one JC has 100% eligibility to apply to local U and another has 96% eligibility, it does mean that the latter will have a tougher chance of securing a place in local U because it is unlikely for all 96% of the latter to score your presumed 75 UAS. In fact, some of the 96% just barely made it into the numbers to formulate a 96%.

And I hate to say this (results are sensitive issue to talk about) but it is integral for me to state it here to address candyfan's concern of \"Obtaining at least two H2 passes with an attempted GP is achievable even for the lower-tier JCs\". I can safely say that:

Eligibility to Local University:
Victoria JC 100%
Nanyang JC 100%
Temasek JC 96.2%
Meridian JC 99%
Serangoon JC approx. 90%

Don't get me wrong that I am using this to compare JCs. I have no intention of doing so. My point is to let candyfan consider what she means by \"achievable\".

P.S. So after all this discussion, you didn't call up to check against my statistics (integrity) provided?

Isn't a pass in GP a requirement to local U? I know there are exceptions for some PRC or foreign students in the past. They would need to pass an english provisional test to be admitted.

For tjc, the 4% shortfall in could be due to failing in GP. They could still be getting good overall grades.
The Nyjc's (yet to be proven) 100% could comprise of more mediocre grades.
What I am trying to put across here is DO NOT compare since there are many unknown factors undermining such statistics.

In fact, mindays, nyjc eligibility rate for local U is 93%. The passing rate for 2015 GP is not 100% for 2015 A level results. These stats were provided by my niece nyjc juniors' teachers.

I did call up nyjc. The staff wanted to know the name and class of the student before he can reveal any statistics. How did you manage to get those (fictitious?) info if you do not have a dc in nyjc??

[MyMelborne]

The only evidences we have of NYJC & TJC 2015 A level results are as follows:

(Both are good in their own ways. Can't say one is better than the other as many factors are involved and NYJC didn't openly share much stats).

https://s29.postimg.org/c2cnil7h3/Capture.png\">



https://s23.postimg.org/cu0gnulrv/nyjc_dsa.png\">

[candyfan]

mindays:

candyfan:

Can you give the name of the staff who disclose this 100% eligible to local U to you. I will call him/her personally to verify the claim. I am sure no staff will dare to commit such a figure to anyone.

Well, I don't remember the exact name of the staff, but since it is a fact throughout NYJC, you can ask any academic staff in NYJC and be sure to tell me the reply you get from them. I dare to challenge you to prove my credibility.

Since the NYJC staff couldn't disclose any info to me unless I can give a current student's name and class for his recording purpose, I suggest you call up any academic staff, get his name and direct office number, tell him that someone will be contacting him and prepare him to repeat the 100% eligibility for local U to me since 'is a fact throughout NYJC' . I shall verify and prove your credibility. I dare challenge you.

[ParkYuni]

Last year after results were released, an NYJC senior staff verbally confirmed after much persuasion that the 2015 A level % number of pupils eligible for local uni is 93%, up from the previous 90%. Eligibility for all uni (local and private) would be higher.

[mindays]

candyfan:

mindays:

Therefore, if one JC has 100% eligibility to apply to local U and another has 96% eligibility, it does mean that the latter will have a tougher chance of securing a place in local U because it is unlikely for all 96% of the latter to score your presumed 75 UAS. In fact, some of the 96% just barely made it into the numbers to formulate a 96%.

And I hate to say this (results are sensitive issue to talk about) but it is integral for me to state it here to address candyfan's concern of \"Obtaining at least two H2 passes with an attempted GP is achievable even for the lower-tier JCs\". I can safely say that:

Eligibility to Local University:
Victoria JC 100%
Nanyang JC 100%
Temasek JC 96.2%
Meridian JC 99%
Serangoon JC approx. 90%

Don't get me wrong that I am using this to compare JCs. I have no intention of doing so. My point is to let candyfan consider what she means by \"achievable\".

P.S. So after all this discussion, you didn't call up to check against my statistics (integrity) provided?

Isn't a pass in GP a requirement to local U? I know there are exceptions for some PRC or foreign students in the past. They would need to pass an english provisional test to be admitted.

For tjc, the 4% shortfall in could be due to failing in GP. They could still be getting good overall grades.
The Nyjc's (yet to be proven) 100% could comprise of more mediocre grades.
What I am trying to put across here is DO NOT compare since there are many unknown factors undermining such statistics.

In fact, mindays, nyjc eligibility rate for local U is 93%. The passing rate for 2015 GP is not 100% for 2015 A level results. These stats were provided by my niece nyjc juniors' teachers.

I did call up nyjc. The staff wanted to know the name and class of the student before he can reveal any statistics. How did you manage to get those (fictitious?) info if you do not have a dc in nyjc??

I have also further reiterated that I am not trying to bring down any JCs. I don't know which part of you is inferior to feel it that way. You said you didn't want to compare JCs and yet you elaborated on the possibility of \"For tjc, the 4% shortfall in could be due to failing in GP. They could still be getting good overall grades. The Nyjc's (yet to be proven) 100% could comprise of more mediocre grades.\"

You contradict yourself. Also, I am not trying to be rude but from the tone of your posts, you sound very insolent.

Since you have said that I should leave this thread because I have no relations with NYJC, I think it is a wise choice too. To clarify further, I should have used the word \"apply\" instead of the word \"get\", it would have been more apt. Furthermore, the eligibility to local U info was collected from my visit to 2017's open house, as much as I would like to disclose the staff's name, I cant remember every single minute detail. Moreover, the eligibility to local U is definitely not dependent on whether a student pass in GP because if you have read it properly, according to MOE, it stated \"ATTEMPTED\" GP in the same sitting alongside with 2H2 passes.

Whatever it is, there is no point in doing comparisons or for me to contribute any further to this thread, because things turn ugly due to a lack of substantial information. I will not participate in this thread anymore. KSP just lost another voice.