Removing the 'privileges' of the IELTS certificate is a reasonable move!

There are differing opinions. One side considers it a reasonable policy, while the other complains, feeling confused and regretful about having invested a large sum of money in their children's pursuit of this certificate. The cost is not only financial but also time-consuming. All the time previously allocated to other subjects for English now seems wasted. Now, will they even be able to catch up with the remaining time? So, what's the real issue here?

First of all, let me state that my child is also preparing for the high school entrance exam this year, an exam predicted to be extremely competitive, much more so than even just last year due to the sudden increase in the number of candidates. (This is obvious; anyone can predict it from the education enrollment figures from over a decade ago). But we are not letting the fierce nature of this "battle" lead us to focus all our efforts on IELTS preparation for our child (of course, to be honest, this is partly due to our limited finances). Our child may have average academic abilities, but our greatest wish is for them to excel in all subjects, avoiding the pitfalls of unbalanced learning that our generation faced. Of course, the story isn't just that. I've outlined a few points for our child to consider before making a final decision.

First of all, we cannot completely deny the role of foreign languages ​​simply because we don't have a choice. Foreign languages, including English, and especially English, play an extremely important role in modern life, especially now that the term "global citizen" has become commonplace and is crucial in educational programs. Equally important is knowing another language, which means living a more culturally rich life. Foreign languages ​​can contribute to a more humane life if people can develop and internalize the cultural values ​​they have acquired. Of course, it's important to note that immediately thinking of English, or even equating it with English, is a systemic error, regardless of whether it's a preference for English among a significant portion of the population or the entire education system.

However, I do not support using the IELTS certificate as a "passport" for students to directly enter high schools, or even just for preferential points. That is to say, I support abandoning this policy for the following reasons.

Firstly, regarding the validity period of the IELTS certificate, it is only valid for two years. A certificate recognized for only two years cannot be used to determine a person's cultural and educational future (high school education is three years, university is four to seven years). If direct admission or bonus points are awarded, as some institutions have done in the past, will the educational institution force the student to retake the exam to obtain the certificate again, thus "guaranteeing" the remaining time? If the student does not meet this requirement, can they be forced to drop out?

Secondly, foreign languages ​​are subjects in themselves, essential for survival. At the very least, each language offers a unique cultural experience, making individuals more humane and adaptable through communication and social skills, compared to learning only one language. Generally, anyone with the means should equip themselves with additional foreign languages, the more the better. If one only has one language, is it really necessary to only have English, when Chinese, French, and Japanese all contain profound and valuable cultural elements that help us understand ourselves better through our perceptions of similarities and contrasts?

Foreign languages, especially English, do not reflect the general intelligence of learners. While it demonstrates competence, it is only one of many skills learners need to possess. More importantly, it does not fully meet many of the fundamental quality requirements set out in the 2018 General Education Program.

Thirdly, prioritizing IELTS, in a way, creates discrimination between learners in urban areas and those in mountainous and rural areas, and between the rich and the poor… I have witnessed many families in remote areas, where there are no large training centers or qualified teachers for IELTS preparation, having to drive their children fifty or sixty kilometers to the city every afternoon to get this certificate, some families even traveling by motorbike, which is very expensive and dangerous. And even in the city, not everyone has the means to send their children to IELTS preparation courses, because not every family is well-off. In short, prioritizing IELTS, if considered thoroughly, is nothing more than creating an exclusive playing field for those who can afford it.

Incidentally, the requirement for B1 or B2 English certificates by some universities for undergraduate students, graduate students, and faculty candidate candidates should be reconsidered, and ideally should be abolished. These certificates are only valid for two years and don't prove professional competence. For example, some education students may be very proficient in English but lack the professional competence of many others. After graduation, they may not necessarily be proficient, let alone excel, in their profession. In reality, they will teach subjects like Math, Physics, Chemistry, Literature, etc., not English.

And finally, what I want to say is about the comprehensiveness and consistency of the industry's policies and guidelines. Because consistency and stability of policies and guidelines are one of the factors that demonstrate the organizational and management capacity and the strategic thinking and philosophy of the industry.