Hong Kong exam question on China and Japan sparked outrage – but debates on potential good from invasions and bloodshed have historical precedent in tests

Past tests have touched on the Cultural Revolution, violent independence movements and even Japanese occupation in Southeast Asia

But educators say if certain questions are to become taboo, the Education Bureau should offer specific guidance on the matter

5-MIN READ5-MIN

A 2014 history question on Hong Kong’s university entrance exam asked whether the Cultural Revolution had ‘good intentions but yielded bad results’. Photo: Li Zhensheng

Published: 8:00am, 21 May 2020Updated: 9:32am, 21 May 2020

Questions asking students to debate the potential good that could come out of invasions and bloodshed have been featured in previous Hong Kong tests, despite recent Education Bureau statements identifying them as taboo, according to veteran examiners and teachers.

However, the question of whether Japan did “more good than harm” to China in the first half of the last century – which sparked a political firestorm for ignoring atrocities it committed as an invader – had not appeared in any history paper over the past nine years of the Diploma for Secondary Education (DSE) exams.

Last week, the bureau took the unprecedented step of asking the body that sets and marks the DSE exams to scrap the question from a history paper that had been taken by 5,200 students last Thursday.

The bureau argued the question was biased and flew in the face of objective facts, and had hurt the feelings and dignity of Chinese people who suffered during the Japanese invasion of China in World War II.

While students and teachers await the final decision of the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority (HKEAA) on how it intends to comply with the directive, a raging debate has ensued over the provocative question, with many trying to explain its possible intent and drawing comparisons with previous exams.

Educators who spoke to the Post said some questions were meant to test students’ ability to think critically, and urged the bureau to clarify if a senior education official’s recent identification of certain topics as off-limits was tantamount to new exam guidelines.