新加坡：在一个竞争激烈、极其看重学历的环境中，家长们希望动用一切可用资源来确保孩子未来的教育，这是可以理解的。教育部意识到这些压力，近期宣布对小学一年级入学注册框架进行调整。在2C阶段，为与学校没有预先联系的儿童预留的名额将从40个增加到60个。此外，在私人住宅较多的社区，有12所学校将提供双轨制的2C阶段注册，将居住在通常2公里半径范围之外的儿童也纳入其中。
SINGAPORE: In a high-stakes, credential-conscious environment, parents understandably want to deploy every available resource to secure their child’s educational future Recognising these pressures, the Ministry of Education recently announced adjustments to the Primary 1 registration framework There will be more reserved places in Phase 2C for children with no prior connection to the school, up from 40 to 60 spots. Additionally, twelve schools in neighbourhoods with more private housing will offer a two-track Phase 2C to include those living beyond the usual 2km radius.
这些变化释放了一个重要信号，表明教育部致力于扩大入学机会。然而在实践中，这些改变可能显得微不足道。
These changes send an important signal about MOE’s commitment to broadening access to schools. Yet in practice, they can feel incremental.
在每年招生人数为300人或以上的学校（其中许多是热门学校）中，60个名额最多仅占年度招生总数的20%。对于许多超额认购的学校而言，增加的20个名额在“改善入学机会和支持包容性”方面，最终可能收效甚微。
In schools with larger cohorts of 300 students or more, many of them popular schools, 60 spots translate to at most 20 per cent of yearly enrolment. The 20-seat increase may end up making little practical difference at many oversubscribed schools to “improve access and support inclusivity”.
“家长统治”的实践：要了解改革还能走多远，我们需要审视小学一年级注册框架背后的政策目标。
"PARENTOCRACY" IN ACTION Understanding how much further reform can go requires us to examine the underlying policy goals of the P1 registration framework.
2A和2B阶段的既定目标是通过校友、宗乡会馆和教会联系来维护学校文化，并认可志愿者或基层贡献。几十年来，这些优先事项界定了新加坡人对小学一年级注册框架所能及应能实现的目标的想象。
The stated goals of Phase 2A and Phase 2B are to preserve school culture through alumni, clan and church connections, and recognise volunteer or grassroots contributions. For decades, these priorities have defined the boundaries of what Singaporeans imagine the P1 registration framework can and should accomplish.
然而，尽管这些政策目标在理论上听起来合理，但旨在实现这些目标的注册规则在实践中已成为可被操纵的优势杠杆。
Yet while these policy objectives sound reasonable in theory, the registration rules meant to achieve them have become gameable levers of advantage in practice.
校友优先权曾经是对机构传统的颂扬，如今却经常被用作应对不可预测的2C阶段抽签的“保险单”。它以“学校文化”为由，将公共教育机会转化为可继承的私人资产，使顶尖学校得以保持其自我繁衍的封闭圈子。
Alumni priority, once a celebration of institutional heritage, is now frequently used as an “insurance policy” against the unpredictable Phase 2C ballot. Justified by the language of “school culture”, it converts public educational opportunities into inheritable private assets, allowing top schools to remain self-reproducing enclaves.
同样，家长志愿者计划与其说是积极的社区服务，不如说更关乎获得入学名额这一潜在回报。这实际上将时间转化为准入资格，从而偏向那些工作时间灵活、全职在家或负担得起家政服务的人群。
Likewise, parent volunteer schemes are less about active community service, and more about the possible reward of securing a spot. This in effect turns time into access—favouring those who have flexible working hours, are stay-home parents or can afford domestic help.
即便就近入学规则从便利性和儿童福祉的角度来看完全合理，但在某些社区，进入公立教育体系的途径却依赖于高端房地产市场。
Even proximity rules, which are wholly defensible from a convenience and child well-being standpoint, mean that access to public education in some neighbourhoods comes via the luxury real estate market.
若不加审视，这种为孩子争取最佳资源的天然父母本能，可能会助长“自我延续的封闭圈子”的形成——前总理李显龙曾对此发出警告。
Left unexamined, this natural parental instinct to give their children the best can encourage the formation of “self-perpetuating closed circles”—something that former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong warned against.
平衡正在转变 一年级注册制度将教育准入与父母所能带来的优势直接挂钩，其关联程度远高于其他招生环节。然而，修订后的规则正在逐步削弱这些机制，并延续了此前改革的方向。
THE BALANCE IS SHIFTING The P1 registration system directly ties educational access to the advantages that parents bring to the table, to a much greater degree than in other admission exercises. However, the revised rules chip away at these mechanisms, building on the direction of previous reforms.
在第二阶段2C中额外预留20个名额，使得校友和志愿者获得入学名额的保证性降低。这进一步扩大了2022年注册改革中的变化，当时第二阶段2C的预留名额已翻倍至40个，同时取消了校友协会成员相对于普通校友的优先优势。
Reserving 20 additional spots in Phase 2C makes it less guaranteed that alumni and volunteers will secure a spot. This expands on the last change in the 2022 registration exercise, which doubled the number of reserved places in Phase 2C to 40, in addition to removing the advantage that alumni association members had over regular alumni.
在主要被低密度私人住宅环绕的学校，双轨制方案在确保家庭便利性的同时，更好地平衡了让无法负担这些优质区域住房的家庭也能获得入学机会的目标。
At schools surrounded primarily by low-density private housing, the two-track scheme achieves a better balance between ensuring convenience for families and keeping access open to families that cannot afford to live in these prime areas.
这种向更具包容性方向的转变，在现实中正日益得到认可。据报道，越来越多的小学已取消了家长志愿者计划。
This drift towards more inclusivity is increasingly acknowledged on the ground. A growing number of primary schools have reportedly scrapped the parent volunteer scheme.
这些是至关重要的初步步骤，我们支持推动政策变革成功的各项努力，包括家长教育和交通安排。
These are vital first steps, and we support efforts to encourage the success of the policy change, including parent education and transportation arrangements.
关于基本价值观的辩论 然而，在现有参数内调整规则，无法替代一场更为根本的文化辩论。
A DEBATE ABOUT FUNDAMENTAL VALUES But tweaking the rules within existing parameters cannot substitute for a more fundamental cultural debate.
有人问道：为何不更大胆地思考？例如，有人提议取消那些给予校友和 parent volunteers 优先入学权的规则。也有人根据经验建议，取消将附属小学与附属中学连接起来的“黄金通道”，这些通道将竞争压力极大地推向了小学阶段。
Some have asked: Why not think bolder? For instance, some have proposed eliminating rules that grant priority access to school alumni and parent volunteers. Anecdotally, others have suggested removing the golden pipelines linking affiliated primary schools with affiliated secondary schools that super-charge competition into the former.
在我们考虑这些提议之前，必须首先面对一个根本问题：如何在“自我优先”的竞争冲动与“集体优先”的集体理想之间取得平衡。
Before we can consider these, we must first confront a fundamental question about the balance to strike between a “me-first” competitive impulse and a “we-first” collective ideal.
在小学一年级注册框架内，两者以一种非常直接的方式相互冲突：给予某些家庭优先权的规则，必然降低其他没有关系和人脉、没有资本的家长的入学机会，从而按照财富和特权划分了以学校为基础的社会网络。
Within the P1 registration framework, the two are at odds in a very literal way: Priority rules that grant certain families a leg up necessarily reduce the odds for other parents without connections and capital, thereby carving up school-based social networks along lines of wealth and privilege.
如果我们认同学校服务于比个人出人头地更宏大的集体目标，那么学校就应当是孩子们能够与不同背景的人互动的场所。
If we agree that our schools serve a larger collective purpose than our individual need to get ahead, they ought to be places where children can interact with others from backgrounds different than their own.
早期的跨阶层友谊将陌生的他人变为熟悉的同伴，培养认知灵活性、同理心和社会信任，而这些对于长期的社会凝聚力和国家韧性至关重要。
Early cross-class friendships turn unfamiliar others into familiar peers, building the cognitive flexibility, empathy, and social trust that are essential for long-term social cohesion and national resilience.
事关重大。归根结底，一个群体之间社会距离不断扩大的社会，是一个极其脆弱的社会。
There is much at stake. In the end, a society of growing social distance between groups is a deeply fragile one.
不要误解。指出特权和“家长统治”的存在，并不是要对个体家长进行道德评判——他们只是在既定规则下，出于对孩子的天然关爱而行事。
Do not misunderstand. Pointing out the existence of privilege and “parentocracy” is not about moralising against individual parents, who act out of natural care for their children within the rules they are given.
这关乎如何运用智识勇气去审视并重写那些结构性规则。如果将来自不同背景的孩子聚集在一起共享共同的经历是小学公共使命的一部分，那么在决定如何制定这些规则时，这一点就应占据更大的分量。
It is about exercising the intellectual courage to inspect and rewrite those structural rules. If bringing together children from different backgrounds to share a common experience is part of the public mandate of primary schools, then that should carry greater weight in deciding how those rules are written.
如果新加坡要繁荣发展，我们的小学校门就不应再由家长的私人优势所把守，而应敞开大门，成为每一位新加坡儿童共同的起点。
If Singapore is to flourish, our primary school gates must no longer be guarded by the private advantages of parents, but opened wide as the common starting point of every Singaporean child.
何嘉琳（Jacqueline Ho）是新加坡管理大学社会学助理教授。
Jacqueline Ho is assistant professor of sociology at the Singapore Management University.
陈锦荣（Jason Tan）是国立教育学院政策、课程与领导力副教授。
Jason Tan is associate professor of policy, curriculum and leadership at the National Institute of Education.
蔡文强（Vincent Chua）是新加坡国立大学社会学副教授。
Vincent Chua is associate professor of sociology at the National University of Singapore.