It takes a whole village to raise a child” is an African proverb. This concept is not traditionally found in Chinese society.

In the past, there was a low literacy rate in China. School principals and educators were all distinguished, learned individuals. The wider community, which included parents, revered these figures and felt grateful to them for educating the younger generation. “A man who confers upon you the gift of education even for a day merits a lifetime of the kind of veneration you would accord a father.” This Chinese saying gives a good idea of the absolute respect and authority commanded by educators of the past. Parents called up by the school would be filled with fear and trepidation. In those days they accepted whatever the teachers said, and no one would dare to utter any criticism at all.

Historically, Singapore was a country of immigrants. The colonial government of the time showed little concern for the well-being of the people they ruled over, so it was left to the clan elders and religious organisations to raise money and provide an education for the children of Singapore. In line with the principle of “taking care of oneself”, these sponsors were investing in their own future. The people who made this possible were largely business owners and towkays. They were able to give money, even though they could not provide professional guidance. Many of our most prestigious schools were set up by these visionaries. Subsequent generations staunchly kept these schools going, and they eventually evolved into what we know as the government-aided schools today. This, then, was how Chinese schools came into existence in Singapore. English schools, of course, were mostly established by Christian bodies.

Because these schools were established by the community, and only later became government-aided schools, they all had Boards of Directors by as early as 1946. The present-day term for a school’s Board of Directors is School Management Committee (SMC). A similar entity, the School Advisory Committee (SAC) for government schools was established afterwards in 1968.

In the late 1990s, the then-Minister for Education, Mr Teo Chee Hean, now Deputy Prime Minister, was a perfect exponent of the philosophy that “it takes a whole village to raise a child”.

At the time, community involvement in education was sparse; there were only 60 parent support groups or parent-teacher associations in some 300 schools. The then-Principal of Yu Neng Primary School Mr Tan Kah Teo observed that throughout his 30 years of experience as an educator, “schools had always been insulated, almost solitary entities, concerned only with their own internal affairs”.

“Some schools habitually locked their gates during non-schooling hours, and barred outsiders from entering,” said Mr Tan. It is clear from such comments that even though schools should be an integral part of the community, at that time they were very detached.

It was Mr Teo who made every effort to demolish the walls that isolated schools from the wider community. He felt that schools and their surrounding neighbourhoods needed to establish tightly-knit relations, because these would benefit the students immensely. Such close relations would then create feelings of obligation and responsibility amongst the community, parents, and alumni. Accordingly, people would feel the need to dedicate their time and effort to helping their schools, which in turn would set a good example to the children.

At the 3rd SAC/SMC Service to Education Awards Presentation Ceremony conducted on 8 January 1998, Mr Teo announced the amendment of the Primary 1 registration scheme. The amendment was made to recognise the SAC/SMC members’ role and contributions, and as an attempt to encourage the formation of alumni associations for primary schools.

In the 1999 Primary 1 registration period, the existing Phase 2A in the Primary 1 Registration Priority Scheme was divided into Phase 2A(1) and Phase 2A(2). Children of SAC/SMC members and children of members of schools’ alumni associations were registered under Phase 2A(1). Parent volunteers who offered over 40 hours of service to a school were recognised under the Phase 2B scheme. Phase 2B had already been in place since 1992, but the 1999 revision was the first time that 40 hours of parent volunteering was set as the criterion for eligibility.

In December 1998, Mr Teo made another announcement. This time it was to establish the National Advisory Council known as COMmunity and PArents in Support of Schools (COMPASS). The 20 members appointed that year were made up of various stakeholders representing parents, Parliament, self-help groups, alumni and the business community. It marked another successful move towards strengthening the links between school and community.

“In COMPASS we hope to develop a common understanding about what the different roles of the school are, and how parents and the community play a part in the upbringing and education of our children,” said Mr Teo in the announcement. “For example, how we can work hand-in-hand to help build a child’s character, increase his motivation, develop a sense of belonging and spirit of service to the community, and create the best environment to enhance his learning. In short, to devise strategies for parents, the community and the school to work in tandem to achieve the Desired Outcomes of Education.”

In the initial stages of this tandem arrangement, the relationship between parents and the school was subject to doubt. Some principals were unwilling to accept parents’ offers to come into schools to read to the children. “Unless we’re very confident the parent can read well, we don’t want the kids to pick up the wrong pronunciation,” said one principal.

There were also principals who were cautious about parents who offered to come in and help with co-curricular activities. “Say a parent helps coach a sports team. What if students don’t like him? I’m in a fix! How can I remove the coach without offending him?” said another principal.

Fortunately, such problems have now been ironed out.

In this issue we set out to discover how schools are benefiting from the involvement of the wider community. To do this we sat down with the chairmen from across the whole range of primary, secondary and university boards. We also managed to speak to the President of the Singapore Buddhist Lodge. We think that these interviews shed valuable light on the tremendous assistance that the “village” can give to its schools.

从前的华人社会，一般人受教育不多，学校的校长教师是有识之士，社会人士包括家长，都以崇敬之心感激他们把自己的孩子教育成才。“一日为师，终生为父”是为人师表得到的至尊荣誉。被学校传召去的家长，都是诚徨诚恐，只懂唯唯诺诺，哪敢到学校去说三道四？

新加坡是一个移民社会。从前殖民政府不管人民死活，有地缘关系的宗乡父老或宗教组织合资合力办学，“自己照顾自己”，培养自己的新生代。当时这些民间力量，主要是“老板和头家”的身份，只有出钱的份，并不能提供专业指导。新加坡不少名校就是当日民间先贤创建，后辈坚韧维持的“政府辅助学校”。这是早期华校情况。早期民间英校则多是教会办学。

所以由民间创办，后来政府辅助的“政府辅助学校”，早在1946年就各设有董事会，现代称为“学校管理委员会”。政府学校相似的“学校咨询委员会”则要在1968年才设立。

发达国家的社区，早已有合力扶助学校成长的历史，否则哪来“培养一个孩子要一村人力量”这句话呢？他们怎样做，成了新加坡的模范。

上世纪九十年代末，张志贤出任教育部长，这句“培养一个孩子要一村人力量”的西谚，让他深有感慨。

当时社会参与建设学校的力量很稀薄，300所学校中只有60所学校有家长会。只要看当日育能小学的校长陈家章说在他30年教育生涯中“学校几乎是孤立的个体，只顾校内的事。有些学校甚至在非上课时候锁上闸门，不准外人闯入。”可见学校虽是社区的一环，两者的关系却非常疏离。

有见及此，张志贤尽了一切努力，拆掉了学校的四堵墙，把社区带进学校来，也把学校带出去。他认为学校应该和社区建立紧密的联系，因为这是互惠互利的，能使学生得益。这个紧密关系也让社区、家长、校友感觉他们有义务和责任，付出时间、精神和气力，协助搞好学校，服务社区。他们为学校贡献力量的行动，也为孩子做了好榜样。

1998年1月张志贤出席第三届学校咨询/管理委员会常年服务奖颁奖礼，就宣布为了认同学校咨询/管理委员会委员为学校出钱出力的贡献，以及鼓励更多学校成立校友会，鼓励校友参加校友会，他修改了小一报名条例。

1999年小一报名，他让学校咨询/管理委员会委员，或加入校友会的校友，都享有在2A（1）期报名的优先权。至于为学校服务超过40小时的家长义工获2B优先权，则早在1992年已实行，1999年则正式列明必须最少做40小时。

1998年12月，他再宣布成立“社区与家长辅助学校咨询理事会（Community and Parents in Support of Schools, COMPASS）”，20名成员来自学校、媒体、工会、会馆、商界和国会议员。可说一下把学校与整个社会结合起来。

张志贤当时说：“教育部认识到培养良好市民的教育工作，不是单靠学校和校长独立支撑。学校必须与家长和社区联手合作，才能达到理想的教育成果。成立这个三方理事会，就为了能发展彼此互信互助的关系，三方达成共识，建立合理的期望，共同把孩子培养成为国家有用的栋梁。”

在这个“三方理事会”成立之初，学校和家长的关系是互相猜疑的。有校长不愿随便请家长来帮忙上“故事”课。她说：“除非我们确定这个家长有标准的语音，我们不希望家长的错误语音误导学生。”

也有校长对家长做体育教练抱迟疑态度：“如果学生不喜欢这个人怎么办？我怎么在不冒犯他的情况下请他走？”

然而，今天这些问题显然都被克服了。

本期社会力量辅助学校专辑，我们访问了大学、中学和小学的董事会主席、咨询/管理委员会主席，还有居士林林长。且让我们看一下新加坡的学校，如何在企业家和社组织协助下发展成为伟大的学校。