When Cabinet changes were announced on Monday, they raised several eyebrows within and outside the Ministry of Education (MOE).

Many wondered why the ministry needed two ministers, and why two political rookies — Mr Ng Chee Meng and Mr Ong Ye Kung — were placed in the same post as Acting Education Ministers alongside an entirely new slate of political office-holders.

But a closer look at the recent history of political leadership at MOE suggests that the ministry has been used as a test bed for up-and-coming ministers.

In 2001, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, then a new face, was made Senior Minister of State for Education and promoted to Education Minister two years later, a position he held until 2008. Taking over from Mr Tharman was Dr Ng Eng Hen (2008-11), who also entered politics in 2001 and was appointed Manpower Minister before he helmed the Education portfolio.

It is evident that the highly visible Education Minister post can serve as a good assessment of leadership capabilities.

Most people would recall Mr Tharman’s push to eliminate streaming and how Dr Ng dealt with the controversy over a proposal to reduce the weightage for Mother Tongue language.

After Mr Tharman and Dr Ng, the pace of leadership renewal quickened.

Mr Heng Swee Keat, a first-time office-holder, was appointed Education Minister after the 2011 election together with fellow fourth-generation leader, Mr Lawrence Wong, as Minister of State.

Both men immediately took on huge tasks.

Mr Wong led the committee to expand university places, leading to the opening of the fifth and sixth universities. He was then promoted to Acting Minister in the Culture, Community and Youth a year later and is now the National Development Minister.

Mr Heng went against the grain to bring back softer aspects of education such as character development, and started reviewing the hot-button Primary School Leaving Examination. He was sworn in as Finance Minister yesterday.

Why is the MOE used as a test bed for new office-holders? There could be two reasons: The internal structure within the ministry and the nature of education. These two factors enable the portfolio to be a sturdy testing ground for fresh faces. MOE is one of the largest ministries with more than 30,000 civil servants, including senior educators who are rotated to policy formulation roles.

To some extent, the MOE’s bureaucracy will serve as a sounding board for policy ideas crafted at the top.

The Education portfolio is also a closely watched one, and parents are known to have taken vocal stances on various issues.

The new Education Ministers can expect to have some direct dealings with parents, and their ability to explain policies and convince parents of their merits will come under test. In short, the high level of public interest in education will be a test of the abilities of education ministers.

However, the pertinent question is: Does the Education Ministry require two ministers?

Some observers said the dual leadership of Mr Ng and Mr Ong — both of equal ranking and seemingly earmarked for bigger future responsibilities — could be an issue as both may feel the pressure to prove themselves, and possibly tinker with policies that are sound. This is especially so if they have only a short runway, as expected, given the urgency of leadership renewal, before they are rotated to other ministries.

Others have also pointed out that having two Acting Ministers would be an assessment of their ability to work together and introduce coherent policies.

It remains to be seen how Mr Ng and Mr Ong balance their communication lines both vertically with their staff and educators, and laterally between each other.

THE TEST AHEAD

Both men, who have different job scopes, do not have to look too far for what is in store for them.

Many feel Mr Ng, who is in charge of schools, could be treading in more difficult waters because of the contentious PSLE review.

However, Mr Ng could take this chance to be bold and perhaps relook past suggestions proposed in Parliament, such as the through-train programme that allows pupils to bypass the PSLE. Going beyond tests to include teachers’ inputs for the final grade or having continuous assessments are other possible policy options.

He could also look into improving the quality of education and outcomes of special-needs students, an area that has been rather neglected. Outstanding tasks include pairing of mainstream and special-needs schools to foster more inclusivity and providing strong vocational training in special schools.

Meanwhile, Mr Ong, who is in charge of skills and higher education, has a bigger canvas to experiment with, given that the higher-education landscape remains fluid and set for changes.

With the emergence of the fifth and sixth universities and new options such as a first liberal arts college and a community law school, he has to ensure distinct positioning of each institution.

This is to avoid situations in other countries where there are huge quality differences among public institutions. Here, timely feedback from industry partners, as technological advancements intensify, will be key. Mr Ong could consider broadening the admissions processes at the Institutes of Higher Learning to better match students with their interests.

With the emphasis on skills, tertiary institutes could perhaps give more consideration to work experience, and other non-academic achievements such as leadership or organisational skills displayed through community work or the sports and the arts.

With rapid technological changes and growing economic uncertainties, the Education portfolio has become more challenging and important at the same time.

The Education Ministry is not traditionally seen as a heavyweight ministry, unlike the finance, defence, and trade and industry ministries. Neither has it been a pit stop for Singapore’s Prime Minister — Mr Lee Hsien Loong and Mr Goh Chok Tong did not cut their teeth in Education.

But that could change, given the portfolio’s growing significance. It is no coincidence that three among the core group of fourth-generation leaders were assigned to MOE. Will the Education portfolio in itself be a good test for the future leaders of Singapore? Singaporeans — and the world — will be watching as the country’s fourth-generation leadership takes shape.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Ng Jing Yng is a senior reporter at TODAY.