HONG KONG – A growing number of educators and public figures have joined the chorus in denouncing a highly inflammatory history question in the city’s college entrance exams, calling it hurtful and insensitive to Chinese people’s suffering from Japanese aggression in the 20th century.  

The question, which was part of the history exam on May 14, asked candidates to write whether Japan did more good than harm to China between 1900 and 1945, a period that covered both world wars, based on two supplied references of Japan’s aids to China in the early years of the 20th Century.  

The Education Bureau on Friday requested the exam-setting authorities to invalidate the “one-sided” and “leading” question.  

Executive Councilor and barrister Ronny Tong Ka-wah pointed out that Japanese militarism led to 35 millions Chinese casualties, displaced 100 million people and ruined countless families. It was a great tragedy in human history, and discussing its pros and cons is an insensitive idea, Tong said in a social media post.  

ALSO READ: Education Bureau expresses regret over offensive exam question 

He compared the question to the hypothetical situations in which the Jewish people were asked if the Holocaust did more good or more harm to them, or the Japanese people were asked a similar question about the dropping of two atomic bombs on the soil by the United States.  

Former CE Leung Chun-ying said the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union had let its political stance override its professional judgment, becoming the protective umbrella of wayward educators 

Wong Kwan-yu, president of the Hong Kong Federation of Education Workers, said on Saturday that the exam question obscured Japan's wartime aggressions.  

Exam question-setting should be handled with greater care, especially when it is on issues that could hurt the feelings of people from nations that were traumatized by the experience, he said in a radio program.  

Lawrence Tang Fei, principal of Heung To Secondary School (Tseung Kwan O), believes that the one-sided question was framed by politicized staff members of the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority.  

Tang expressed disapproval of such practice, where those in charge of setting exam questions have imbued their own political stance in designing biased questions.  

He mentioned the reference materials for the controversial history exam question — focusing on the aids Japan offered to China in the early 20th century — would very likely mislead students to draw biased conclusions.   

Public figures and educators have also criticized a small number of people who insisted the question was fine while blaming the Education Bureau’s move to invalidate the question as restricting the freedom of educators.  

Ip Kuen-yuen, vice-president of the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union and lawmaker from the education sector, has repeatedly defended the question and challenged the Education Bureau’s handling over the past few days.  

Barrister Tong found such reaction from these educators unethical. In his view, they have failed to respect basic human decency when they defended the insensitive question and attacked the government’s response as trampling on education freedom. 

READ MORE: Education chief requests invalidation of biased question 

Tong wondered what kind of influence these educators would have on the young people. He expressed concern that many students may have been deprived the chance to receive quality education, because some educators put their political bias ahead of their professional conduct.  

Former chief executive Leung Chun-ying hit out at the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union, which described the education authority’s handling of the matter as stifling open and rational discussions at schools.  

Leung said the union had let its political stance override its professional judgment and has become the protective umbrella of wayward educators.  

Contact the writers at bingcun@chinadailyhk.com