TEACHING SERVICE (Promotion System)

Dr Lau Teik Soon asked the Minister for Home Affairs and Education, in view of the long period of interview, heavy costs in terms of man-hours, manpower and organisation support and the small percentage of officers promoted, whether there is any plan to rationalise the promotion system in order to save time and cost as well as to reduce the frustrations of officers in the teaching profession.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: The present promotion exercise was in fact an attempt to rationalise the promotion procedures taking account the experience gained from the first two promotion exercises in 1972 and 1974. In the last two promotion exercises, only about 1,200 officers, or about 7% of those eligible, were shortlisted for a single round of interviews by the Public Service Commission. Many of the 93% of those not shortlisted voiced their disappointment at not being called. This time, after months of discussion and consultation with the Public Service Commission and planning by the Ministry, a total of about 7,000 were originally shortlisted based on their records. The names of these 7,000 were then provided to their Principals who were asked to comment on the list and to suggest further names for inclusion if they felt any deserving officer had been left out. This resulted in another 2,000 or so names being added to the shortlist. Although the number shortlisted was large, totalling more than -9,000, the Public Service Commission and the Ministry felt it would be well worth the time and effort to interview them. Firstly, it would give as many as possible the opportunity to appear for interview and be considered for promotion. Secondly, they would be given the chance to express their views on the education system, the teaching service and their own personal problems, preferences and career expectations to the interview boards comprising Public Service Commission members and senior Ministry officials and Principals. Thirdly, and very importantly, it would allow as many as possible to be identified for future career development leading to appointments as Principals, Vice-Principals, Senior Assistants and in specialist capacities. All these objectives were, to a large extent, achieved in this last promotion exercise which was the most thorough and comprehensive of all the promotion exercises held so far in the Education Service. No doubt, the numbers promoted were far less than those not promoted. This is so in any promotion exercise.

The considerable time and effort put into this exercise were not counter-productive. Nevertheless, a thorough post mortem on this exercise is now being conducted and the lessons learned from this will be used to make further improvements, in consultation with the Public Service Commission and others, to the next promotion exercise for which initial planning has already begun.