[OT] WSJ: “Why Chinese Mothers are Superior”

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=flu]I think one perhaps different is that stuff you see probably at a economic level in some families here, I think among asians probably happen at a lower economic levels.[/quote]

Bingo. I recently went to a barbershop with my son and a nice asian lady cut his hair. She asked him which school he went to. As soon as he told her, she replied – “good school, xyz API”!

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AK]These days I’d say networking and people skills are key to getting even the first job out of college … not to mention prestigious internships.

Test scores, GPA, education, etc., give you a better chance of establishing those essential connections and recommendations. But they’re not enough in and of themselves.[/quote]

My kid in SF who just finished all their credits at SFSU last month for a Bachelor of Science Degree has already landed a FT position in their field with a well-known large firm (1000-2000 emps) five minutes away. Starts today but it will be 6 mos before benefits kick in. This is NOT the same firm that they interned in last semester. They had just applied for the job on 12/28, was interviewed last week (and at that time introduced to everyone they would work with). If this job works out, I have no doubt my kid could make $100K annually in five years or less.

My kid didn’t graduate anywhere near the top of their class in HS or college but has great people skills.

In my long working career, selection for positions and promotions was all about “like,” nothing else. If the interviewers didn’t like you, you wouldn’t be hired/promoted. Even in civil service positions that an applicant had to take a written examination for, the hiring managers would find a loophole in order to reach a lower scorer and bypass the higher scorers if the lower scorer was someone they liked more and wanted to hire.

Edit: It helped that my kid WORKED throughout college. Having work experience when trying to get your first FT job out of college helps A LOT.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AK]These days I’d say networking and people skills are key to getting even the first job out of college … not to mention prestigious internships.

Test scores, GPA, education, etc., give you a better chance of establishing those essential connections and recommendations. But they’re not enough in and of themselves.[/quote]

My kid in SF who just finished all their credits at SFSU last month for a Bachelor of Science Degree has already landed a FT position in their field with a well-known large firm (1000-2000 emps) five minutes away. Starts today but it will be 6 mos before benefits kick in. This is NOT the same firm that they interned in last semester. They had just applied for the job on 12/28, was interviewed last week (and at that time introduced to everyone they would work with). If this job works out, I have no doubt my kid could make $100K annually in five years or less.

My kid didn’t graduate anywhere near the top of their class in HS or college but has great people skills.

In my long working career, selection for positions and promotions was all about “like,” nothing else. If the interviewers didn’t like you, you wouldn’t be hired/promoted. Even in civil service positions that an applicant had to take a written examination for, the hiring managers would find a loophole in order to reach a lower scorer and bypass the higher scorers if the lower scorer was someone they liked more and wanted to hire.

Edit: It helped that my kid WORKED throughout college. Having work experience when trying to get your first FT job out of college helps A LOT.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AK]These days I’d say networking and people skills are key to getting even the first job out of college … not to mention prestigious internships.

Test scores, GPA, education, etc., give you a better chance of establishing those essential connections and recommendations. But they’re not enough in and of themselves.[/quote]

My kid in SF who just finished all their credits at SFSU last month for a Bachelor of Science Degree has already landed a FT position in their field with a well-known large firm (1000-2000 emps) five minutes away. Starts today but it will be 6 mos before benefits kick in. This is NOT the same firm that they interned in last semester. They had just applied for the job on 12/28, was interviewed last week (and at that time introduced to everyone they would work with). If this job works out, I have no doubt my kid could make $100K annually in five years or less.

My kid didn’t graduate anywhere near the top of their class in HS or college but has great people skills.

In my long working career, selection for positions and promotions was all about “like,” nothing else. If the interviewers didn’t like you, you wouldn’t be hired/promoted. Even in civil service positions that an applicant had to take a written examination for, the hiring managers would find a loophole in order to reach a lower scorer and bypass the higher scorers if the lower scorer was someone they liked more and wanted to hire.

Edit: It helped that my kid WORKED throughout college. Having work experience when trying to get your first FT job out of college helps A LOT.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AK]These days I’d say networking and people skills are key to getting even the first job out of college … not to mention prestigious internships.

Test scores, GPA, education, etc., give you a better chance of establishing those essential connections and recommendations. But they’re not enough in and of themselves.[/quote]

My kid in SF who just finished all their credits at SFSU last month for a Bachelor of Science Degree has already landed a FT position in their field with a well-known large firm (1000-2000 emps) five minutes away. Starts today but it will be 6 mos before benefits kick in. This is NOT the same firm that they interned in last semester. They had just applied for the job on 12/28, was interviewed last week (and at that time introduced to everyone they would work with). If this job works out, I have no doubt my kid could make $100K annually in five years or less.

My kid didn’t graduate anywhere near the top of their class in HS or college but has great people skills.

In my long working career, selection for positions and promotions was all about “like,” nothing else. If the interviewers didn’t like you, you wouldn’t be hired/promoted. Even in civil service positions that an applicant had to take a written examination for, the hiring managers would find a loophole in order to reach a lower scorer and bypass the higher scorers if the lower scorer was someone they liked more and wanted to hire.

Edit: It helped that my kid WORKED throughout college. Having work experience when trying to get your first FT job out of college helps A LOT.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AK]These days I’d say networking and people skills are key to getting even the first job out of college … not to mention prestigious internships.

Test scores, GPA, education, etc., give you a better chance of establishing those essential connections and recommendations. But they’re not enough in and of themselves.[/quote]

My kid in SF who just finished all their credits at SFSU last month for a Bachelor of Science Degree has already landed a FT position in their field with a well-known large firm (1000-2000 emps) five minutes away. Starts today but it will be 6 mos before benefits kick in. This is NOT the same firm that they interned in last semester. They had just applied for the job on 12/28, was interviewed last week (and at that time introduced to everyone they would work with). If this job works out, I have no doubt my kid could make $100K annually in five years or less.

My kid didn’t graduate anywhere near the top of their class in HS or college but has great people skills.

In my long working career, selection for positions and promotions was all about “like,” nothing else. If the interviewers didn’t like you, you wouldn’t be hired/promoted. Even in civil service positions that an applicant had to take a written examination for, the hiring managers would find a loophole in order to reach a lower scorer and bypass the higher scorers if the lower scorer was someone they liked more and wanted to hire.

Edit: It helped that my kid WORKED throughout college. Having work experience when trying to get your first FT job out of college helps A LOT.

[sdrealtor]

Flu and Sduude
Thanks for the entertainment. One of the funniest htreads in a long time. Perhaps we should all meet for cocktails in a La Jolla adjacent community to settle this all like men.

[sdrealtor]

Flu and Sduude
Thanks for the entertainment. One of the funniest htreads in a long time. Perhaps we should all meet for cocktails in a La Jolla adjacent community to settle this all like men.

[sdrealtor]

Flu and Sduude
Thanks for the entertainment. One of the funniest htreads in a long time. Perhaps we should all meet for cocktails in a La Jolla adjacent community to settle this all like men.

[sdrealtor]

Flu and Sduude
Thanks for the entertainment. One of the funniest htreads in a long time. Perhaps we should all meet for cocktails in a La Jolla adjacent community to settle this all like men.

[sdrealtor]

Flu and Sduude
Thanks for the entertainment. One of the funniest htreads in a long time. Perhaps we should all meet for cocktails in a La Jolla adjacent community to settle this all like men.

[kcal09]

[quote=davelj]When I first read that article (which was prior to finding it discussed here) my very first inkling was that it was an April Fool’s joke, but then I quickly realized it was just January.

I don’t have kids. Never will. But I feel sorry for kids who endure the kind of upbringing enforced by Ms. Chua. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll agree that the typical Caucasian approach to discipline, education, etc. is lacking. You’ll get no argument from me there. But I think the militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua and her cohorts is just as wrong-headed, just in the opposite direction. While many kids that grow up under the typical Caucasian approach will be unprepared for the rigors of the real world, I suspect that many kids that grow up under the militaristic approach will be prone to insecurity and depression, and have difficult relationships with their parents. I’m not a parent, but neither approach appears to be a recipe for producing “contentment,” which should be the real goal (in my opinion).

I’ve known kids who excelled academically, went the math & science magnet school route, and still managed to not amount to much professionally or otherwise. Conversely, I’ve known kids who went the Montessori route, didn’t work particularly hard, spent plenty of time smelling the roses and went on to great success. I just don’t see it as an either/or proposition. And, in my view, anyone who tries to portray it as such is really revealing more about themselves than anything else.

Although it’s a cliche, there’s some truth to it: The C-students own the company in which the B-student is the President and the A-student is the accountant. Again, clearly that’s not always the case. But the rote/militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua does not engender much imagination or inspiration. And while perspiration is important, too (as Einstein noted), in this day and age there is a lot of global competition from the automaton set. Personally, I don’t value “computing power” – which is Ms. Chua’s focus – because it’s so easily found – and it’s cheap. I value imagination, initiative, and a high social IQ on top of a fundamental competence as a baseline. But that’s just my view of the world.[/quote]

This world needs nerds, artists and “normal” people. I believe that the best approach to raise kids is to mix it up: teach them discipline, hard work but also how to enjoy life. Granted, it’s very hard to do and there are not many parents who are able to do this as they themselves have to be well balanced and intelligent to do this.

[kcal09]

[quote=davelj]When I first read that article (which was prior to finding it discussed here) my very first inkling was that it was an April Fool’s joke, but then I quickly realized it was just January.

I don’t have kids. Never will. But I feel sorry for kids who endure the kind of upbringing enforced by Ms. Chua. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll agree that the typical Caucasian approach to discipline, education, etc. is lacking. You’ll get no argument from me there. But I think the militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua and her cohorts is just as wrong-headed, just in the opposite direction. While many kids that grow up under the typical Caucasian approach will be unprepared for the rigors of the real world, I suspect that many kids that grow up under the militaristic approach will be prone to insecurity and depression, and have difficult relationships with their parents. I’m not a parent, but neither approach appears to be a recipe for producing “contentment,” which should be the real goal (in my opinion).

I’ve known kids who excelled academically, went the math & science magnet school route, and still managed to not amount to much professionally or otherwise. Conversely, I’ve known kids who went the Montessori route, didn’t work particularly hard, spent plenty of time smelling the roses and went on to great success. I just don’t see it as an either/or proposition. And, in my view, anyone who tries to portray it as such is really revealing more about themselves than anything else.

Although it’s a cliche, there’s some truth to it: The C-students own the company in which the B-student is the President and the A-student is the accountant. Again, clearly that’s not always the case. But the rote/militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua does not engender much imagination or inspiration. And while perspiration is important, too (as Einstein noted), in this day and age there is a lot of global competition from the automaton set. Personally, I don’t value “computing power” – which is Ms. Chua’s focus – because it’s so easily found – and it’s cheap. I value imagination, initiative, and a high social IQ on top of a fundamental competence as a baseline. But that’s just my view of the world.[/quote]

This world needs nerds, artists and “normal” people. I believe that the best approach to raise kids is to mix it up: teach them discipline, hard work but also how to enjoy life. Granted, it’s very hard to do and there are not many parents who are able to do this as they themselves have to be well balanced and intelligent to do this.

[kcal09]

[quote=davelj]When I first read that article (which was prior to finding it discussed here) my very first inkling was that it was an April Fool’s joke, but then I quickly realized it was just January.

I don’t have kids. Never will. But I feel sorry for kids who endure the kind of upbringing enforced by Ms. Chua. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll agree that the typical Caucasian approach to discipline, education, etc. is lacking. You’ll get no argument from me there. But I think the militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua and her cohorts is just as wrong-headed, just in the opposite direction. While many kids that grow up under the typical Caucasian approach will be unprepared for the rigors of the real world, I suspect that many kids that grow up under the militaristic approach will be prone to insecurity and depression, and have difficult relationships with their parents. I’m not a parent, but neither approach appears to be a recipe for producing “contentment,” which should be the real goal (in my opinion).

I’ve known kids who excelled academically, went the math & science magnet school route, and still managed to not amount to much professionally or otherwise. Conversely, I’ve known kids who went the Montessori route, didn’t work particularly hard, spent plenty of time smelling the roses and went on to great success. I just don’t see it as an either/or proposition. And, in my view, anyone who tries to portray it as such is really revealing more about themselves than anything else.

Although it’s a cliche, there’s some truth to it: The C-students own the company in which the B-student is the President and the A-student is the accountant. Again, clearly that’s not always the case. But the rote/militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua does not engender much imagination or inspiration. And while perspiration is important, too (as Einstein noted), in this day and age there is a lot of global competition from the automaton set. Personally, I don’t value “computing power” – which is Ms. Chua’s focus – because it’s so easily found – and it’s cheap. I value imagination, initiative, and a high social IQ on top of a fundamental competence as a baseline. But that’s just my view of the world.[/quote]

This world needs nerds, artists and “normal” people. I believe that the best approach to raise kids is to mix it up: teach them discipline, hard work but also how to enjoy life. Granted, it’s very hard to do and there are not many parents who are able to do this as they themselves have to be well balanced and intelligent to do this.

[kcal09]

[quote=davelj]When I first read that article (which was prior to finding it discussed here) my very first inkling was that it was an April Fool’s joke, but then I quickly realized it was just January.

I don’t have kids. Never will. But I feel sorry for kids who endure the kind of upbringing enforced by Ms. Chua. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll agree that the typical Caucasian approach to discipline, education, etc. is lacking. You’ll get no argument from me there. But I think the militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua and her cohorts is just as wrong-headed, just in the opposite direction. While many kids that grow up under the typical Caucasian approach will be unprepared for the rigors of the real world, I suspect that many kids that grow up under the militaristic approach will be prone to insecurity and depression, and have difficult relationships with their parents. I’m not a parent, but neither approach appears to be a recipe for producing “contentment,” which should be the real goal (in my opinion).

I’ve known kids who excelled academically, went the math & science magnet school route, and still managed to not amount to much professionally or otherwise. Conversely, I’ve known kids who went the Montessori route, didn’t work particularly hard, spent plenty of time smelling the roses and went on to great success. I just don’t see it as an either/or proposition. And, in my view, anyone who tries to portray it as such is really revealing more about themselves than anything else.

Although it’s a cliche, there’s some truth to it: The C-students own the company in which the B-student is the President and the A-student is the accountant. Again, clearly that’s not always the case. But the rote/militaristic approach favored by Ms. Chua does not engender much imagination or inspiration. And while perspiration is important, too (as Einstein noted), in this day and age there is a lot of global competition from the automaton set. Personally, I don’t value “computing power” – which is Ms. Chua’s focus – because it’s so easily found – and it’s cheap. I value imagination, initiative, and a high social IQ on top of a fundamental competence as a baseline. But that’s just my view of the world.[/quote]

This world needs nerds, artists and “normal” people. I believe that the best approach to raise kids is to mix it up: teach them discipline, hard work but also how to enjoy life. Granted, it’s very hard to do and there are not many parents who are able to do this as they themselves have to be well balanced and intelligent to do this.

[Author]

Posts