[inabis]

Have you guys read this article? We're really lucky to have a pretty diverse background here on the forum and was wondering what your guys opinions are about this thing. Many of you guys have your own kids and are first gen from what I gather. What do you think?



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...abs%3Dcomments

[JayKay335i]

Once upon a time maybe. But with ever increasing social interactions and social abilities being so important in life today they may be less successful. From what I've seen with my Chinese friends it seems that their parents may have moved to America but they want to raise them as if they are in China.

[Swashplate]

Sounded like a crap article to me.
I see little truth in it, not to mention it makes many assumptions about "Westerners".

Hey, Saddam used to torture his Olympic athletes and did that make them the best. Ya don't think so.

[Kroy]

i'm surprised torture didn't increase performance...

[schoy]

Originally Posted by TheBroker

Sounded like a crap article to me.
I see little truth in it, not to mention it makes many assumptions about "Westerners".

Hey, Saddam used to torture his Olympic athletes and did that make them the best. Ya don't think so.

Obviously, the article has some over-generalizations, but I would say there's a large amount of truth. Just look at the numbers: The Asians to Non-Hispanic Caucasian ratio in the US is roughly 1:4 (roughly the same in California, where I live). And yet, the ratio to Asians to Whites in, say, the UC system is almost 3:2. The UC results are eye-opening because there's no affirmative action in the UCs; however, you'll also find similar disparities in other elite private colleges (Harvard, etc.), though at not such a large degree since many such colleges have affirmative action (and I believe some studies have shown that affirmative action have created caps on Asian admissions).

Asians also test significantly better in standardized tests (I believe it's like a 50-point difference on average, although standardized tests aren't any reliable indicator of intelligence, it is a large factor in college admissions, which is were a large proportion of Asian parents focus their children's attention).

So the results seem to indicate one of 2 things (or both): either Asians are born smarter than Whites (perhaps in math (but not likely), but probably not in English/languages) or their upbringing is more education/college-focused (one of the points that the WSJ article is trying to make).

Edit: Having gone through it myself, I will have to say, as much as I detested it, I think it was good for me, and a lot of my Asian friends (back in high school, junior high, etc.) would say that it was more beneficial that detrimental. I don't know if I would say it's the BEST way to raise a child, but one can definitely learn from the old-school Asian parenting-style of strictness and goal-oriented achievement. Ultimately, I think that somewhere in the middle ground is the best: significant parental oversight to make sure the child is on track, but slack/freedom where the child has earned it and won't be a material deterrent to achievement.

[kyleb350]

[CollinsE90]

Force fed books instead of people skills is the reason for being smarter

[335e92tx]

This specific book and author have been even more closely discussed of late. ABC had a crew over there and they showed another family that was typically of what we would think of as a western focus. The author has since even gone as far as to clarify that the book was not intended to be representative of the prototypical chinese family but only the envirionment she was brought up in.

[dth656]

Originally Posted by schoy

Obviously, the article has some over-generalizations, but I would say there's a large amount of truth. Just look at the numbers: The Asians to Non-Hispanic Caucasian ratio in the US is roughly 1:4 (roughly the same in California, where I live). And yet, the ratio to Asians to Whites in, say, the UC system is almost 3:2. The UC results are eye-opening because there's no affirmative action in the UCs; however, you'll also find similar disparities in other elite private colleges (Harvard, etc.), though at not such a large degree since many such colleges have affirmative action (and I believe some studies have shown that affirmative action have created caps on Asian admissions).

Asians also test significantly better in standardized tests (I believe it's like a 50-point difference on average, although standardized tests aren't any reliable indicator of intelligence, it is a large factor in college admissions, which is were a large proportion of Asian parents focus their children's attention).

So the results seem to indicate one of 2 things (or both): either Asians are born smarter than Whites (perhaps in math (but not likely), but probably not in English/languages) or their upbringing is more education/college-focused (one of the points that the WSJ article is trying to make).

Edit: Having gone through it myself, I will have to say, as much as I detested it, I think it was good for me, and a lot of my Asian friends (back in high school, junior high, etc.) would say that it was more beneficial that detrimental. I don't know if I would say it's the BEST way to raise a child, but one can definitely learn from the old-school Asian parenting-style of strictness and goal-oriented achievement. Ultimately, I think that somewhere in the middle ground is the best: significant parental oversight to make sure the child is on track, but slack/freedom where the child has earned it and won't be a material deterrent to achievement.

+10000x

if you look at the corporate world, you see the same difference in numbers: asian american and/or desi (indian/pakistani/etc) people are disproportionately represented (as compared to their percentage of the overall US population). A couple of areas where i've seen this are:
-ibanking
-management consulting
-in a corporate setting, any corporate strategy, corp development group, engineering, product management

in contrast (at least in the hi tech companies i have experience with), i'll see more whites in back office functions like finance, HR, procurement, etc

[Maestro]

Personally, how many kids who had this kind of up bringing and "success" early in life went on to do great things later. This is more about the parent bragging rights than anything else. Also, can any of you name a successful adult who was one of these child prodigies we all seen plaster over the news.

As the saying goes they shoot the wade and the are history. If you really think about some of the most successful people in the world, and I mean that in a board sense were successful later in life, there are plenty of example where those individual childhood was not that great.

So do you want the brainyack kid that blows people away with their smarts at a young age want turn up like man with the voice Ted, or have an average kid who grows up and before successful through out their entire life.

[dth656]

you may be referring to statistical outliers (both in terms of child prodigy types, as well as 'mega' successful later in life)

most of my friends growing up had a similar upbringing---chinese, asian, indian, etc. they studied hard, excelled academically, and went to elite colleges. after undergrad, they ended up in fields such as engineering, business, medicine, etc. now, a few years later, they may not be uber-rich CEO success stories like mark zuckerberg or athletic stars, but i would consider them successful based upon a few dimensions:

-income many multiples of the median US family income
-solid education, alumni networks
-upwardly mobile (in terms of career progression, raises, increasing level of responsibility, etc)
-well read, travelled, etc

Originally Posted by Maestro

Personally, how many kids who had this kind of up bringing and "success" early in life went on to do great things later. This is more about the parent bragging rights than anything else. Also, can any of you name a successful adult who was one of these child prodigies we all seen plaster over the news.

As the saying goes they shoot the wade and the are history. If you really think about some of the most successful people in the world, and I mean that in a board sense were successful later in life, there are plenty of example where those individual childhood was not that great.

So do you want the brainyack kid that blows people away with their smarts at a young age want turn up like man with the voice Ted, or have an average kid who grows up and before successful through out their entire life.