Quick Summary of the Key Points
Tang Jiafeng, a renowned mathematics tutor for postgraduate entrance exams, has publicly called for the removal of English as a core subject. She argues that ordinary people spend over a decade and a significant amount of money on learning English, only to find that almost no one uses these skills after graduation. She views this as a form of pointless competition that affects everyone, even linking the nationwide emphasis on English with a worship of foreign cultures. Her statement has sparked widespread debate online, with supporters criticizing the uselessness of English for exam purposes and opponents fearing that it will cut off opportunities for ordinary people to advance in society. This article exposes the logical flaws in her argument: while Tang Jiafeng seemingly speaks on behalf of ordinary people, she actually confuses the concepts of "practicality of subjects" with "the essential function of education." What we should really oppose is not the subject of English itself, but the endless cycle of exam-oriented learning that turns all subjects into mere tools for passing exams.
---
Detailed Analysis
1. Why Does Tang Jiafeng’s Statement Resonate with So Many People?
Her argument resonates with the vast majority of people because it accurately reflects their real-life experiences:
From a very early age, children are exposed to English through various educational programs. Kindergartens offer expensive foreign teacher classes, and English accounts for nearly a third of the learning time in primary and secondary schools. English is a compulsory subject for the middle school entrance exam, college entrance exam, and postgraduate entrance exam. The cost of tutoring English alone can be equivalent to the price of a car. However, once people graduate, they realize that 90% of their daily activities—working, shopping, taking care of children, visiting parks—do not require English skills at all. Delivery workers, couriers, office clerks, factory workers, and even most employees in tech companies do not need to communicate with foreigners. The thousands of words memorized, the grammar exercises done, and the complex sentences practiced are all forgotten within a few months after the exams, rendering the investment futile. This sense of high investment with no return is a common frustration for many families, and Tang Jiafeng has pointed this out directly.
2. Logical Fallacy: Core Subjects Are Not Designed for Practical Use in the Workplace
Tang Jiafeng’s biggest mistake is assuming that what is learned in school must be useful in the workplace; this is a misconception. The middle school and college entrance exams are not vocational training programs but serve as a fair mechanism to select the best candidates for university, research, and high-end industries. English is an especially fair screening tool because it requires no special talents or innate abilities. With just half an hour of daily practice, anyone can achieve good scores, providing a path for children from less privileged backgrounds to succeed through hard work.
3. Many Subjects Are Useless in Real Life—So Why Target English?
If English is useless in the workplace, why criticize it specifically? The same argument applies to other subjects: 90% of what people learn in school is never used in their jobs. For example, trigonometry and conic sections from high school are rarely applied in daily life. Should we also remove these subjects from the core curriculum? The purpose of learning these subjects is not the knowledge itself but the skills they develop, such as communication and logical thinking. Learning English provides access to global information, which is essential for various professions.
4. Equating English Learning with Worship of Foreign Cultures is a Misleading Association
Tang Jiafeng’s claim that learning English equates to worshipping foreign cultures is misleading and inflammatory. China needs to use English to attract international investment and share its achievements. Many successful entrepreneurs use basic English skills to conduct business, and cutting off English learning would hinder this process. Moreover, 90% of cutting-edge research is published in English, so not knowing English means missing out on important information.
5. The Real Problem is the Endless Cycle of Exam-Oriented Learning
The real issue is the endless cycle of studying for exams, which turns all subjects into tools for passing the next test. People spend years learning English but end up with no practical skills. Even if English were removed from the core curriculum, people would still focus on other subjects in the same way, creating a pointless competition. The problem lies in the system that values exams over practical skills.
In summary, Tang Jiafeng’s argument misses the essence of education and focuses on the wrong aspect. What we should oppose is not English as a subject but the exam-oriented learning culture that consumes people’s time and energy without providing real benefits.