In his opinion piece Humbugs in the Chinese education movement , Josh Hong implies that a sincere promoter of Chinese education must necessarily send his or her child to a Chinese school.

With that logic, and given the fact that Dong Jiao Zong (DJZ) also supports Tamil education and SAR, the leaders of that organisation ought to send their children to those kinds of institutions as well.

There are many reasons why people, including those from DJZ, might have sent their children to non-Chinese medium schools. Hong's friend was quite right: most Chinese schools in the old

days were inferior and prospects were limited for Chinese high school graduates.

There were far fewer colleges in Singapore or other countries which could or would accept students with a Chinese high school diploma. Further, before the Asian economic boom that accompanied globalisation, few Chinese parents were able to send their Chinese-educated children overseas for college education.

In short, Hong's comment about "matching word and deed", meaning a champion of Chinese education should have sent his child to a Chinese school, is valid o­nly if the circumstances under which that person selects a school for that child are similar.

It was because of the poor prospects facing Chinese-educated students that, alone among six children, I was reluctantly sent to an English medium school. Though I loved my experience,

so much so that I was later moved to seek my undergraduate and graduate degrees in the United States, I'd always felt a cultural lack, an uncertain sense of self, because I didn't know Mandarin.

That was why, after I reached middle-age, I began to study Chinese history and culture, and also tried to learn the rudiments of the language. That was also why I hired private tutors to teach my children Chinese until they reached middle school. (Incidentally, regarding Hong's other comment, if "the so-called advent of the 'Chinese century' isn't a good reason to learn Mandarin, why should we learn English in this present age of the 'American Century'?)

To return to the subject: support for Chinese or Tamil or Malay education must be based o­n the principle that everyone, every community, has the right to mother tongue education.

Whether or not that supporter's child has the kind of education the supporter promotes is irrelevant and immaterial - just as I support the right of anyone to get a Buddhist, Hindu or Islamic education, although I'm a Christian.

Hong has, in fact, touched o­n the same theme when he says he respects "the right of each and every person to receive different streams of education". He has all the correct data and concepts: he just doesn't seem to be able to apply them properly.

Which is all right, for as he says, again correctly, "to err is human, to forgive divine".