Beyond 70RP: When Portfolio Pressure Replaces Exam Pressure in Singapore’s A‑Level System

From AY2026, the A‑Level UAS for Singapore’s public universities is capped at 70 rank points: 60 from three H2 subjects (A = 20 each) and up to 10 from GP. Project Work is now pass/fail and doesn’t count toward rank points (RP), while the fourth A-level subject (a contrasting H1) can only help if it betters the overall RP score. As a result, Singapore’s A Level students are increasingly laser focused on just three H2s and GP, treating their H1 subject and Mother Tongue almost like afterthoughts. A predictable move. Many students are no longer attempting to go for everything; they are optimising what actually counts in the new system. Students are adapting to the new policy MOE has implemented. The result is a new kind of arms race: more students will hit the maximum RP and raw scores will become less distinguishable. That removes the one‑dimensional hierarchy of RP scores and pushes universities to look at something else beyond the A level transcript.

All autonomous universities are moving holistic

Importantly, Singapore’s autonomous universities are upgrading their selection processes to a more holistic, aptitude‑based model. The entire system is quietly shifting from “can you score the highest RP?” to “who brings the most robust profile, beyond grades?” For students, that’s both an opportunity and a trap.

Learning from the US: equity vs equality

The US experience with elite‑university admissions is a cautionary tale here. When SATs and high school GPAs became less decisive, the door swung open for “holistic” criteria: leadership, extracurriculars, personal narratives. In theory, this was about equity: giving every student a chance to tell their full story, not just their test score. In practice, it often became a game of equality of rules, not of outcomes, because the resources to build a glossy portfolio are unevenly distributed.

Students from higher‑SES backgrounds can afford debate camps, overseas competitions, unpaid internships and expensive project‑based activities. Lower‑SES students often have family caring responsibilities, part‑time work and less access to organised “achievement‑ready” experiences. When universities then judge portfolios under the same standards, the rules look equal on paper, but the playing field is not.​

Singapore’s A‑Level system is not identical to the US, but the same logic is creeping in. If universities ask for “compelling achievements” without adjusting for context, they risk import­ing the same quiet inequality under the banner of “holistic merit.”

What this means for students

For students, this is not just abstract MOE policy. It’s deeply personal. It means that the pressure to “perform” is no longer confined to the exam hall. The bar is now higher, broader and more opaque. It’s not enough to do well in your three H2s and GP; you are also expected to build a portfolio that looks like you are already mini‑professional, mini‑researcher and mini‑leader all at once.

That’s exhausting, and it’s unfair in quiet ways. A student who’s helping out at a family‑run hawker business, or helping siblings with schoolwork or juggling family caregiving: these are forms of resilience and leadership that rarely show up as “achievements” on a university form. A student who spends their free time deep‑diving into a topic out of pure curiosity, instead of chasing trophies now runs the risk of being “invisible” in a portfolio‑centric system.

As mentors, we need to ask harder questions of the system, not just of the students. Are we measuring achievement or access? Are we rewarding genuine character, or simply the ability to package it? And crucially, are we designing a system that supports all students to grow, or only those who already have the resources to put their portfolio scaffolding in place?

For students, the takeaway is twofold. First, be strategic: understand the 70RP rules, but don’t let them convince you that only four subjects “matter.” Your H1s, your Mother Tongue, the way you think and communicate; all of these shape who you become, not just who gets admitted. Second, be honest with yourselves about what you can sustain. A portfolio built on burnout will not serve you at university. Focus on coherence, depth, and authenticity, even if that means fewer “polished” items.

In Singapore, we pride ourselves on meritocracy. But if we’re not vigilant, the new emphasis on portfolios and holistic review could quietly replace one kind of hierarchy (exam scores) with another (portfolio privilege).