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

[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.

[NotCranky]

I think any approach not insightfully adjusted for the kid, to some extent, is problematic. While I give some value to the saying “give me the boy until he is seven and I’ll give you the man” It isn’t going to be much of a man if in those seven years you obliterate the individual he was born as.

I have a kid who probably would thrive in that stereotypical Chinese family, one who would probably get sick and die and one who would be in between those extremes.

[NotCranky]

I think any approach not insightfully adjusted for the kid, to some extent, is problematic. While I give some value to the saying “give me the boy until he is seven and I’ll give you the man” It isn’t going to be much of a man if in those seven years you obliterate the individual he was born as.

I have a kid who probably would thrive in that stereotypical Chinese family, one who would probably get sick and die and one who would be in between those extremes.

[NotCranky]

I think any approach not insightfully adjusted for the kid, to some extent, is problematic. While I give some value to the saying “give me the boy until he is seven and I’ll give you the man” It isn’t going to be much of a man if in those seven years you obliterate the individual he was born as.

I have a kid who probably would thrive in that stereotypical Chinese family, one who would probably get sick and die and one who would be in between those extremes.

[NotCranky]

I think any approach not insightfully adjusted for the kid, to some extent, is problematic. While I give some value to the saying “give me the boy until he is seven and I’ll give you the man” It isn’t going to be much of a man if in those seven years you obliterate the individual he was born as.

I have a kid who probably would thrive in that stereotypical Chinese family, one who would probably get sick and die and one who would be in between those extremes.

[NotCranky]

I think any approach not insightfully adjusted for the kid, to some extent, is problematic. While I give some value to the saying “give me the boy until he is seven and I’ll give you the man” It isn’t going to be much of a man if in those seven years you obliterate the individual he was born as.

I have a kid who probably would thrive in that stereotypical Chinese family, one who would probably get sick and die and one who would be in between those extremes.

[Coronita]

[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]I’m going to hire the guy who learned how to be social, friendly, persuasive, tactful, creative, etc. [/quote]

You make a good point. But our world is becoming a lot more objective in the sense that we want to see certifiable results and hard numbers.

How do you know that a person is creative and a good manager just looking at the resume and talking to that person for 1/2 hour? What are the objective criteria for your decision? And how do you justify hiring a 3.5 GPA over a 4.0 GPA?

And how do truly creative students with bad math skills and low GPAs enter the best universities? They can’t.

That facts are that test scores and published results are what count most. That’s why the houses in neighborhoods with the highest API scores are worth more money.

You can argue that students can succeed going to Clairemont high school all you want (and I would agree with you), but nobody will listen to you.[/quote]

I call sheniganns on both accounts.

My uncle was a Plant Manager for Motorola. He ran 147 acre facility in Mesa Az that no longer exist. He made it a point of hiring 3.0 GPAs over 4.0 everytime and NEVER just interviewed someone for a half an hour. This doesn’t happen in our field. I have spent as many as 12 hours interviewing for a upper echlon position. Anyway, in his many years of experience he found the following and made damn sure I knew this before I graduated.

1. 3.0 worked at thier job and played with things rather than just sit around and theorized

2. 4.0 wanted more money because they believe better grades warranted such as opposed to a stronger work ethic outside of academics

3. The 3.0s usually had better social skills which was a VERY necessary part of the job due to the fact the engineer would have to interface with anyone from a line work with high school education to the VP of Engineering in for a plant visit

4. Race was of no concern but he made sure that every team was well balanced after they were hired. He did not allow racial cliques in his work enviorment this lead to better team work and social skills

Of course these were his theories but they were the result of many years of observation in a real world envoriment.

So in this particular case 3.0s met the requirements better than the 4.0s. This is probably not the same case for working at Bell Labs or JPL but at the end of the day who employees more workers?

Secondy you cite that students coming out of CHS couldn’t possilable be as succesful as some of thier stronger school counterparts. Again Sheniganns… I went to school with a unique set of guys. Basically… We were all high school fvck ups. Exception being two brothers that came from a poor nieghborhood as immigrants with superior secondary backgrounds. Many of my friends graduated in Tau Beta Pi or Eta Kappa Gnu. These same guys did not even have High School diplomas or GEDs. I barely graduated myself but they went on to become leaders in thier respected fields. Why? Because they had strong work ethic and good social skills. We also graduate from a Top 30 Engineerig school. How? We snuck in through the back door… Community College… But we got lucky there… We went to the 5th best CC for math in science in the nation.

So desire for something better trumps schooling and good neigborhoods everytime.

And have the ability to interact with people is key.

Now that I think of it our valdictorian, who was on my senior design team, was the last one to get a job because he had no socail skill… BTW he was a white dude.

CE[/quote]

I know what you meant…
but but but but… I hope Motorola isn’t the poster child of how U.S. companies will end up…

Me thinks Motorola was a prime example of what happens when you let non-techie folks try to run a techie company (into the ground)…That, and what happens when you let really nerdy techies leave……. They end up at Apple making the iPhone.

Hey now, I know. I like MOT too. Excuse me, I meant MMI and MSI now. And like everyone on else in the business, I paid my dues there some time too.. But, I think we’re all hoping Sanjay Jha turns this puppy around.

[Coronita]

[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]I’m going to hire the guy who learned how to be social, friendly, persuasive, tactful, creative, etc. [/quote]

You make a good point. But our world is becoming a lot more objective in the sense that we want to see certifiable results and hard numbers.

How do you know that a person is creative and a good manager just looking at the resume and talking to that person for 1/2 hour? What are the objective criteria for your decision? And how do you justify hiring a 3.5 GPA over a 4.0 GPA?

And how do truly creative students with bad math skills and low GPAs enter the best universities? They can’t.

That facts are that test scores and published results are what count most. That’s why the houses in neighborhoods with the highest API scores are worth more money.

You can argue that students can succeed going to Clairemont high school all you want (and I would agree with you), but nobody will listen to you.[/quote]

I call sheniganns on both accounts.

My uncle was a Plant Manager for Motorola. He ran 147 acre facility in Mesa Az that no longer exist. He made it a point of hiring 3.0 GPAs over 4.0 everytime and NEVER just interviewed someone for a half an hour. This doesn’t happen in our field. I have spent as many as 12 hours interviewing for a upper echlon position. Anyway, in his many years of experience he found the following and made damn sure I knew this before I graduated.

1. 3.0 worked at thier job and played with things rather than just sit around and theorized

2. 4.0 wanted more money because they believe better grades warranted such as opposed to a stronger work ethic outside of academics

3. The 3.0s usually had better social skills which was a VERY necessary part of the job due to the fact the engineer would have to interface with anyone from a line work with high school education to the VP of Engineering in for a plant visit

4. Race was of no concern but he made sure that every team was well balanced after they were hired. He did not allow racial cliques in his work enviorment this lead to better team work and social skills

Of course these were his theories but they were the result of many years of observation in a real world envoriment.

So in this particular case 3.0s met the requirements better than the 4.0s. This is probably not the same case for working at Bell Labs or JPL but at the end of the day who employees more workers?

Secondy you cite that students coming out of CHS couldn’t possilable be as succesful as some of thier stronger school counterparts. Again Sheniganns… I went to school with a unique set of guys. Basically… We were all high school fvck ups. Exception being two brothers that came from a poor nieghborhood as immigrants with superior secondary backgrounds. Many of my friends graduated in Tau Beta Pi or Eta Kappa Gnu. These same guys did not even have High School diplomas or GEDs. I barely graduated myself but they went on to become leaders in thier respected fields. Why? Because they had strong work ethic and good social skills. We also graduate from a Top 30 Engineerig school. How? We snuck in through the back door… Community College… But we got lucky there… We went to the 5th best CC for math in science in the nation.

So desire for something better trumps schooling and good neigborhoods everytime.

And have the ability to interact with people is key.

Now that I think of it our valdictorian, who was on my senior design team, was the last one to get a job because he had no socail skill… BTW he was a white dude.

CE[/quote]

I know what you meant…
but but but but… I hope Motorola isn’t the poster child of how U.S. companies will end up…

Me thinks Motorola was a prime example of what happens when you let non-techie folks try to run a techie company (into the ground)…That, and what happens when you let really nerdy techies leave……. They end up at Apple making the iPhone.

Hey now, I know. I like MOT too. Excuse me, I meant MMI and MSI now. And like everyone on else in the business, I paid my dues there some time too.. But, I think we’re all hoping Sanjay Jha turns this puppy around.

[Coronita]

[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]I’m going to hire the guy who learned how to be social, friendly, persuasive, tactful, creative, etc. [/quote]

You make a good point. But our world is becoming a lot more objective in the sense that we want to see certifiable results and hard numbers.

How do you know that a person is creative and a good manager just looking at the resume and talking to that person for 1/2 hour? What are the objective criteria for your decision? And how do you justify hiring a 3.5 GPA over a 4.0 GPA?

And how do truly creative students with bad math skills and low GPAs enter the best universities? They can’t.

That facts are that test scores and published results are what count most. That’s why the houses in neighborhoods with the highest API scores are worth more money.

You can argue that students can succeed going to Clairemont high school all you want (and I would agree with you), but nobody will listen to you.[/quote]

I call sheniganns on both accounts.

My uncle was a Plant Manager for Motorola. He ran 147 acre facility in Mesa Az that no longer exist. He made it a point of hiring 3.0 GPAs over 4.0 everytime and NEVER just interviewed someone for a half an hour. This doesn’t happen in our field. I have spent as many as 12 hours interviewing for a upper echlon position. Anyway, in his many years of experience he found the following and made damn sure I knew this before I graduated.

1. 3.0 worked at thier job and played with things rather than just sit around and theorized

2. 4.0 wanted more money because they believe better grades warranted such as opposed to a stronger work ethic outside of academics

3. The 3.0s usually had better social skills which was a VERY necessary part of the job due to the fact the engineer would have to interface with anyone from a line work with high school education to the VP of Engineering in for a plant visit

4. Race was of no concern but he made sure that every team was well balanced after they were hired. He did not allow racial cliques in his work enviorment this lead to better team work and social skills

Of course these were his theories but they were the result of many years of observation in a real world envoriment.

So in this particular case 3.0s met the requirements better than the 4.0s. This is probably not the same case for working at Bell Labs or JPL but at the end of the day who employees more workers?

Secondy you cite that students coming out of CHS couldn’t possilable be as succesful as some of thier stronger school counterparts. Again Sheniganns… I went to school with a unique set of guys. Basically… We were all high school fvck ups. Exception being two brothers that came from a poor nieghborhood as immigrants with superior secondary backgrounds. Many of my friends graduated in Tau Beta Pi or Eta Kappa Gnu. These same guys did not even have High School diplomas or GEDs. I barely graduated myself but they went on to become leaders in thier respected fields. Why? Because they had strong work ethic and good social skills. We also graduate from a Top 30 Engineerig school. How? We snuck in through the back door… Community College… But we got lucky there… We went to the 5th best CC for math in science in the nation.

So desire for something better trumps schooling and good neigborhoods everytime.

And have the ability to interact with people is key.

Now that I think of it our valdictorian, who was on my senior design team, was the last one to get a job because he had no socail skill… BTW he was a white dude.

CE[/quote]

I know what you meant…
but but but but… I hope Motorola isn’t the poster child of how U.S. companies will end up…

Me thinks Motorola was a prime example of what happens when you let non-techie folks try to run a techie company (into the ground)…That, and what happens when you let really nerdy techies leave……. They end up at Apple making the iPhone.

Hey now, I know. I like MOT too. Excuse me, I meant MMI and MSI now. And like everyone on else in the business, I paid my dues there some time too.. But, I think we’re all hoping Sanjay Jha turns this puppy around.

[Coronita]

[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]I’m going to hire the guy who learned how to be social, friendly, persuasive, tactful, creative, etc. [/quote]

You make a good point. But our world is becoming a lot more objective in the sense that we want to see certifiable results and hard numbers.

How do you know that a person is creative and a good manager just looking at the resume and talking to that person for 1/2 hour? What are the objective criteria for your decision? And how do you justify hiring a 3.5 GPA over a 4.0 GPA?

And how do truly creative students with bad math skills and low GPAs enter the best universities? They can’t.

That facts are that test scores and published results are what count most. That’s why the houses in neighborhoods with the highest API scores are worth more money.

You can argue that students can succeed going to Clairemont high school all you want (and I would agree with you), but nobody will listen to you.[/quote]

I call sheniganns on both accounts.

My uncle was a Plant Manager for Motorola. He ran 147 acre facility in Mesa Az that no longer exist. He made it a point of hiring 3.0 GPAs over 4.0 everytime and NEVER just interviewed someone for a half an hour. This doesn’t happen in our field. I have spent as many as 12 hours interviewing for a upper echlon position. Anyway, in his many years of experience he found the following and made damn sure I knew this before I graduated.

1. 3.0 worked at thier job and played with things rather than just sit around and theorized

2. 4.0 wanted more money because they believe better grades warranted such as opposed to a stronger work ethic outside of academics

3. The 3.0s usually had better social skills which was a VERY necessary part of the job due to the fact the engineer would have to interface with anyone from a line work with high school education to the VP of Engineering in for a plant visit

4. Race was of no concern but he made sure that every team was well balanced after they were hired. He did not allow racial cliques in his work enviorment this lead to better team work and social skills

Of course these were his theories but they were the result of many years of observation in a real world envoriment.

So in this particular case 3.0s met the requirements better than the 4.0s. This is probably not the same case for working at Bell Labs or JPL but at the end of the day who employees more workers?

Secondy you cite that students coming out of CHS couldn’t possilable be as succesful as some of thier stronger school counterparts. Again Sheniganns… I went to school with a unique set of guys. Basically… We were all high school fvck ups. Exception being two brothers that came from a poor nieghborhood as immigrants with superior secondary backgrounds. Many of my friends graduated in Tau Beta Pi or Eta Kappa Gnu. These same guys did not even have High School diplomas or GEDs. I barely graduated myself but they went on to become leaders in thier respected fields. Why? Because they had strong work ethic and good social skills. We also graduate from a Top 30 Engineerig school. How? We snuck in through the back door… Community College… But we got lucky there… We went to the 5th best CC for math in science in the nation.

So desire for something better trumps schooling and good neigborhoods everytime.

And have the ability to interact with people is key.

Now that I think of it our valdictorian, who was on my senior design team, was the last one to get a job because he had no socail skill… BTW he was a white dude.

CE[/quote]

I know what you meant…
but but but but… I hope Motorola isn’t the poster child of how U.S. companies will end up…

Me thinks Motorola was a prime example of what happens when you let non-techie folks try to run a techie company (into the ground)…That, and what happens when you let really nerdy techies leave……. They end up at Apple making the iPhone.

Hey now, I know. I like MOT too. Excuse me, I meant MMI and MSI now. And like everyone on else in the business, I paid my dues there some time too.. But, I think we’re all hoping Sanjay Jha turns this puppy around.

[Coronita]

[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]I’m going to hire the guy who learned how to be social, friendly, persuasive, tactful, creative, etc. [/quote]

You make a good point. But our world is becoming a lot more objective in the sense that we want to see certifiable results and hard numbers.

How do you know that a person is creative and a good manager just looking at the resume and talking to that person for 1/2 hour? What are the objective criteria for your decision? And how do you justify hiring a 3.5 GPA over a 4.0 GPA?

And how do truly creative students with bad math skills and low GPAs enter the best universities? They can’t.

That facts are that test scores and published results are what count most. That’s why the houses in neighborhoods with the highest API scores are worth more money.

You can argue that students can succeed going to Clairemont high school all you want (and I would agree with you), but nobody will listen to you.[/quote]

I call sheniganns on both accounts.

My uncle was a Plant Manager for Motorola. He ran 147 acre facility in Mesa Az that no longer exist. He made it a point of hiring 3.0 GPAs over 4.0 everytime and NEVER just interviewed someone for a half an hour. This doesn’t happen in our field. I have spent as many as 12 hours interviewing for a upper echlon position. Anyway, in his many years of experience he found the following and made damn sure I knew this before I graduated.

1. 3.0 worked at thier job and played with things rather than just sit around and theorized

2. 4.0 wanted more money because they believe better grades warranted such as opposed to a stronger work ethic outside of academics

3. The 3.0s usually had better social skills which was a VERY necessary part of the job due to the fact the engineer would have to interface with anyone from a line work with high school education to the VP of Engineering in for a plant visit

4. Race was of no concern but he made sure that every team was well balanced after they were hired. He did not allow racial cliques in his work enviorment this lead to better team work and social skills

Of course these were his theories but they were the result of many years of observation in a real world envoriment.

So in this particular case 3.0s met the requirements better than the 4.0s. This is probably not the same case for working at Bell Labs or JPL but at the end of the day who employees more workers?

Secondy you cite that students coming out of CHS couldn’t possilable be as succesful as some of thier stronger school counterparts. Again Sheniganns… I went to school with a unique set of guys. Basically… We were all high school fvck ups. Exception being two brothers that came from a poor nieghborhood as immigrants with superior secondary backgrounds. Many of my friends graduated in Tau Beta Pi or Eta Kappa Gnu. These same guys did not even have High School diplomas or GEDs. I barely graduated myself but they went on to become leaders in thier respected fields. Why? Because they had strong work ethic and good social skills. We also graduate from a Top 30 Engineerig school. How? We snuck in through the back door… Community College… But we got lucky there… We went to the 5th best CC for math in science in the nation.

So desire for something better trumps schooling and good neigborhoods everytime.

And have the ability to interact with people is key.

Now that I think of it our valdictorian, who was on my senior design team, was the last one to get a job because he had no socail skill… BTW he was a white dude.

CE[/quote]

I know what you meant…
but but but but… I hope Motorola isn’t the poster child of how U.S. companies will end up…

Me thinks Motorola was a prime example of what happens when you let non-techie folks try to run a techie company (into the ground)…That, and what happens when you let really nerdy techies leave……. They end up at Apple making the iPhone.

Hey now, I know. I like MOT too. Excuse me, I meant MMI and MSI now. And like everyone on else in the business, I paid my dues there some time too.. But, I think we’re all hoping Sanjay Jha turns this puppy around.

[briansd1]

Regarding playing the piano or the violin, I believe that there’s something romantic and beautiful about that.

All else being equal, I would love it my girlfriend or wife played the piano or violin. If I had kids, I would love them to play classical music.

It used to be that, in Western education, music, Latin and Greek were part of a well-rounded education. I was talking to a gal from Poland and she said told me she learned all that back home before immigrating to America.

[briansd1]

Regarding playing the piano or the violin, I believe that there’s something romantic and beautiful about that.

All else being equal, I would love it my girlfriend or wife played the piano or violin. If I had kids, I would love them to play classical music.

It used to be that, in Western education, music, Latin and Greek were part of a well-rounded education. I was talking to a gal from Poland and she said told me she learned all that back home before immigrating to America.

[briansd1]

Regarding playing the piano or the violin, I believe that there’s something romantic and beautiful about that.

All else being equal, I would love it my girlfriend or wife played the piano or violin. If I had kids, I would love them to play classical music.

It used to be that, in Western education, music, Latin and Greek were part of a well-rounded education. I was talking to a gal from Poland and she said told me she learned all that back home before immigrating to America.

[briansd1]

Regarding playing the piano or the violin, I believe that there’s something romantic and beautiful about that.

All else being equal, I would love it my girlfriend or wife played the piano or violin. If I had kids, I would love them to play classical music.

It used to be that, in Western education, music, Latin and Greek were part of a well-rounded education. I was talking to a gal from Poland and she said told me she learned all that back home before immigrating to America.

[Author]

Posts