
“If you get a C or lower, I’ll buy you a present” - hypertexthero
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/17/opinion/my-asian-pussycat-parents.html
======
JumpCrisscross
Part of the problem is our culture lauds perfectionism as a case of someone
caring too much or being too ambitious. That's not what it is.

Perfectionism is a failure to optimize across a complex goal space, settling,
instead, on ignoring the difficult (and beautifully complex) prioritisation
problem in favour of over-optimizing a limited set of easily-defined goals
("getting an A") over longer-run priorities ("being a fulfilled and productive
citizen").

~~~
nostromo
A long time ago I noticed a trend in job listings. Words you would associate
with perfectionism (detail-oriented, accurate, etc.) are usually used with
lower-paid and lower-status jobs. For example: admins, data-entry, etc.

Words you see in higher-paid and higher-status jobs often focus on strategy
and planning in a complex goal space, as you note.

What's interesting about our education system is we focus a lot on precision
and accuracy and not that much on strategy and planning. It seems like a
system built to produce accountants and actuaries more than a new generation
of entrepreneurs.

~~~
Radim
Let me offer an opposing point of view.

In all the people I ever hired and worked with over the years (data entry,
devs, bizdev, sales or otherwise), attention to detail was the single most
predictive trait for good performance. "Conscientious" is a better word
perhaps. People who can't be bothered to understand how things work rarely
produce amazing "high level" work either. It's a fallacy to assume you can
"skip the details" IMO.

It's like inspecting a house: if you see shoddy plumbing and the walls are
crooked and all the details are off, it is still possible the construction is
amazing in all the attributes you CAN'T inspect so easily. But it's also quite
likely the construction company didn't give a shit and were cutting costs left
and right, and buying this house would be a safety hazard.

Also, you can pay attention to detail in strategic jobs as well. "Attention to
detail" and "complex spaces" are not mutually exclusive.

~~~
bartread
Yep - totally.

I have literally no patience for the idea that attention to
detail/conscientiousness is anything less than absolutely necessary at any
level of an organisation.

Lack of attention to detail leads to screw-ups. Lack of attention to detail at
a higher level just leads to bigger screw-ups. Lack of attention to detail at
the top leads to colossal screw-ups.

Just think, for example, of RBS. No attention was being paid, certainly not at
the top, to the details of all those supposedly investment grade CDOs. And
then one day... BOOM! Turns out they were stuffed with junk and the whole
shebang comes crashing down.

I also have literally no patience with people who describe themselves as "big
picture thinkers" (thankfully this seems less prevalent these days; maybe I
just move in different circles). You may as well skip the BS and say, "I am
totally useless and ineffectual," because to me they're synonymous.

If you do anything without paying attention to the details you will do it
badly.

(As an aside: I'm not here talking about micromanagement - you can't pay
attention to _all_ the details, obviously, at a higher level, but you _can_
pay attention to the details that are appropriate at that level. This
obviously only works if the people working for you are also trustworthy. If
not, you clearly weren't paying attention when you hired them.)

~~~
VLM
I don't disagree with the correct general claim but the specific example is
much more of a control fraud problem... you can't expect someone to understand
something if their paycheck next week depends on their careful avoidance of
understanding...

~~~
bartread
I don't know. I may be interpreting this wrong, but having read "Making it
happen" (which obviously has a bias) I came away with the distinct impression
it was more of a lack of interest; very little of what I read would suggest
that Goodwin was in any way careful about RBS's investments, even if that
carefulness was manifest in avoiding understanding. It is just one perspective
though.

------
unabst
In Japan perfectionism is not encouraged. The rough translation _kanpeki
shugi_ (完璧主義) will bring up more ways to fix it than become it on the first
page of google.

What the Japanese culture and other Asian cultures similarly encourage however
is discipline ( _majime_ , まじめ), and the proper way ( _matomo_ , まとも）. This
means parents instill time management (basically they force kids to take the
time to study) and procedure (study environment, tools, focus, resources).
This is the true cultural advantage.

With regards to suicide, this too can be correlated to culture with
statistics, but it has nothing to do with perfectionism. I would attribute it
more to their naivety when it comes to mental well being, and to self
sacrifice. In other words, they think it's okay to suffer and sacrifice their
mental health far past the safe line, and fare more than most would permit in
the west. In Japan, your "self" takes a back seat to the onus of being the
majime and matomo Japanese citizen.

The answer is to learn time management, discipline, and procedure, but while
staying healthy, both physically and mentally. That's what OP's father did. He
made sure his daughter's mental health was okay. That's what parents ought to
do, and he deserves all the credit in the world.

~~~
teek
I'm not so sure what you're defining is completely different. Doing things the
"right way" in Japan and other east asian cultures has more or less the same
effect as trying to be "perfect" in American culture. The effect is both
cultures encourage the individual to act in a manner they may not accept
themselves. The difference being that in a conformist culture the avenues for
self expression are limited by culture and society. In an ambition oriented
culture the concept of "failure" has the same damaging effects.

This isn't to say that both traits, conformity and perfection are inherently
bad, instead we should be teaching the purpose or reason to do so rather than
blindly require the behavior without justification.

~~~
unabst
Conformity and perfectionism is the western translation, but they are
inaccurate, for the same reasons most translations are inaccurate. They are
translations by appearance only. As a culture perfectionism is shunned, and
individuality is encouraged. The translation would have you believe the
opposite.

The cause lies in their extremely specific moral values as a society. They
call it the Japanese spirit ( _nihon no kokoro_ , 日本の心) and it embodies
discipline, proper procedure, mastery, sacrifice for the greater good, among
other things. A good member of society is one that aspires to be an iconic
Japanese. And when an entire culture behaves in this manner, they do appear to
conform, and to value perfection, and to even act as one. But they're aligned
only because they uphold similar values and share common goals.

The Japanese are conformist as much as a good Christian wants to be a good
Christian. Christians don't conform to Christianity. They embody it, and hence
become similar as a result, not as their motivation.

They are perfectionist as much as an aspiring athlete wants to be like Mike.
They aren't looking to master Perfect or become Perfect. They just want to be
like Mike.

And we don't say kids playing basketball are conformist for all wearing Jordan
or Steph Curry gear, nor do they wear it to conform. They do it because they
love those players (just as the Japanese love their country).

Another great Japanese word is _kodawari_ (こだわり). It's the obsessively picky
and uncompromising soul of a craftsman. This too could easily be translated as
perfectionism, but "perfection ( _kanpeki_ )" is not their goal. "Ideal (
_risou_ )" is their goal. And _kodawari_ is an emotion, whereas perfectionism
is not. And "ideal" is a dynamic and personal target, where as "perfection" is
not. Perfection is for amateurs.

------
11thEarlOfMar
Do you think there is more uncertainty about the future today than there was,
say, 50 years ago?

Anxiety about school and grades may be an outcome of an increasing sense of
uncertainty. The less confident one is about the prospects of the future, the
more safety net they will desire. Getting the best possible education is
perceived to be the best safety net short of a trust fund.

One major difference between 2016 and 1956 is the perceived likelihood (for
Americans, anyway) that you'll be able to work on an assembly line, or, a
customer support group, or that your white collar job will be done on-shore.

My advice to my kids was to seek a profession that could not be sent overseas,
one way or the other. Such as dentist or lumberjack :-) But of course, we now
have hair transplant robots which bodes poorly for both professions.

What it means to me is that navigating the rest of the 21st century requires
thoughtfulness, sound analytical skills and a sense of agency. People have to
be able to understand the relative impact of all manner of dynamic systems in
the world, not just technology, but economics and government, and the way they
all interact. Then, they need to plan how to do to stay relevant and execute
their plan.

Learning that seems like a lot to ask from a public high school education
these days, yet, I believe I learned it 40 years ago.

What has changed?

~~~
sotojuan
I wasn't alive in 1956 nor have I studied the 1950s enough to make a valid
judgement, but I graduated college this year and high school in 2012 and the
attitude was definitely one of uncertainty. If you didn't get X grade or Y
internship (or any random thing like that), your chances at a good career were
well, uncertain.

A lot of people paint the 1950s and early 60s such that you could do okay in
high school and not go to a 4-year college and still manage to provide for a
middle class family. Can anyone who has studied or otherwise know if this was
true? The only thing I can be certain of is that this is only true if you were
white.

~~~
pdonis
_> If you didn't get X grade or Y internship (or any random thing like that),
your chances at a good career were well, uncertain._

You left out one thing: if you _do_ get X grade or Y internship, your chances
at a good career are still uncertain. There is no magic bullet.

 _> A lot of people paint the 1950s and early 60s such that you could do okay
in high school and not go to a 4-year college and still manage to provide for
a middle class family._

To an extent this was probably true in the US, but the reason was something
temporary: there was a huge economic expansion going on in the aftermath of
WWII, with new markets being created, and many industries were willing to
basically overpay their workers in order to increase production and capture
market share. In the US auto industry, for example, most new car sales in the
1950s and 1960s were genuine _new_ sales--families who had never had a car
before or who were adding a second (or even third) car they hadn't had before.
In that environment, yes, a person with a high school education can have a
middle class income, because the cost of his labor is a minor expense compared
to the potential value to be captured.

In the current US auto industry, by contrast, almost all new car sales are for
replacement of previous cars--the market is saturated. That means there is a
huge price pressure being exerted, and hence a huge pressure to drive down
wages and to automate jobs that used to be done by human workers in order to
reduce costs. In this environment, a person with only a high school education
is unlikely to have the skills that would make them valuable enough to a
company to be able to earn a middle class income. (Note that I said
"unlikely"; it's possible to develop such skills without a college education,
but statistically few people do.)

Does that mean things are more uncertain now? I'm not sure. I said the
situation in the 1950s and 1960s was temporary; it was also not the same in
all industries. So I don't know that one can make a general statement either
way.

~~~
nxc18
There certainly are magic bullets. Look at any software engineer who has ever
interned at Google. For anyone else, the hiring process is uncertain, chaotic,
and basically random. Success is a function of your past performance, your
appearance, the emotional reaction your interviewer has to you, your
interviewers mood and frame of mind during the interview, how stressed you
happen to be that day, etc. There are exceptionally strong candidates who are
rejected by the Google process and poor candidates who make it through. The
latest thing in the Google interview crapshoot is a new emphasis on GPA - I've
never (in the past two years) heard of someone with less than a 3.5 even being
considered for an interview and they ask for a transcript with the
application. There are lots of exceptional candidates who push themselves into
hard subjects, work on personal projects, and lead on campus that are ignored
because of that magic number. On the other hand, once you have that Google
internship, every other tech company is falling over themselves to interview
you and extend an offer - I've never heard of a Google intern not getting ab
excellent full time offer months before graduation.

Group affiliation helps, too. On my campus there is a very strong and old
computing interest group with a strong alumni network. Every year, company
recruiters do interviews directly with that group of people before even
considering applicants at the career fair.

~~~
existencebox
Let me rebuke both parts of your statement.

I both got a google internship with a well sub 3.5 GPA; and have since then
gotten both accepted and rejected at equivilent tier bigCos with that (and
other "prestigious" establishments) on my resume and nonetheless saw a good
mix of clean and chaotic hiring processes.

What I'm trying to say is there is NO silver bullet; as other sister comments
say, it's a crapshoot even with your cards all in order. I believe the aspects
you list of the "normal" level of chaos are quite accurate, my tailoring to
your statement is merely one that the leg up helps less than you seem to
imply. (from both my and peers in similar situations's anecdotes.) I make this
statement not to be pessimistic but to be optimistic. Someone without G on
their resume shouldn't feel helpless, they are not alone, and they are not in
an impossible or insurmountable situation. The only "real" path I've found,
regardless of who or what background you have, is to just keep bullheadedly
driving towards your goals and building the skills required to do this more
effectively. Everything else for me has been ephemeral and less impactful. (I
would note, you're right re: network, but I bucket that more under a skill you
can build than something implicit, since for better or worse, networking is a
skill one must practice in modern professional life as one mechanism to
support ones stability)

------
zodPod
This sentiment, while important to remember if you ARE a perfectionist, also
sounds like a really slippery slope similar to something like eating right.
"Well if I just eat when I'm hungry" you'll find you're frequently "hungry" if
you're a certain type of person. That said, if you're a certain type of
person, "not being a perfectionist" could be a great avenue for never pulling
yourself out of your slump.

"I messed up at school" Well, I'm not a perfectionist so that's fine I'll just
keep at the same pace. TURNS OUT, that pace wasn't so useful. "I am failing
Chemistry" OH WELL. I'm not a perfectionist so it doesn't matter.

You can see how this can be a problem as a mantra to a certain type of person.

~~~
Normal_gaussian
> if I just eat when I'm hungry

That is how I lost way too much weight. Got hungry, wasn't able to eat _right
then_ by the time I was able to eat I was no longer hungry. I gradually taught
myself to eat very little and was very ill because of it.

Eating is a slippery slope in all directions.

~~~
77pt77
Have you ever practiced controlled intermittent fasting?

~~~
Normal_gaussian
I have since, but not before the incident I was referring to.

------
yaacov
These parents were able to send their kid to NYU, an extremely expensive
private college with almost no financial aid.

Many of the parents who put insane pressure on their kids to succeed
academically do so because they can't afford schools like NYU- they have to
get into more competitive schools that offer more financial aid or lower
tuitions.

~~~
DarkTree
That sounds pretty anecdotal, only because (also anecdotally) I was surrounded
by many, many wealthy kids at my school whose parents put insane pressure on
them due to the perceived status of telling others that their children go to
"insert well-branded school here"

~~~
sotojuan
Same.

I don't doubt many lower income families pressure kids to get merit
scholarships, but it's not true that higher income families don't pressure
kids as much.

In fact, I'd argue (anecdotally also!) that the American upper middle class
has the most pressured kids. It's not always to say that "my kid goes to
Harvard" but rather it's some strange attitude that parents have one they
reach a "not wealthy enough to not work, not poor enough to get state
financial aid" stage.

~~~
muddyrivers
They say "my kid goes to college in Boston". :)

------
drakonka
I have experienced both types of approaches from my family. As a kid attending
school in Ukraine we had classes 6 days a week and hours of homework each day.
My grandmother was a teacher before retirement - I remember her having some
very harsh words over my late nights doing math homework in 3rd-5th grade (I
can't remember why but in my school there was no 4th grade, everyone in my
class went from 3rd into 5th). I just could not get long division for the
longest time - there was yelling and tears.

When my family (not including grandparents) moved to the U.S., my parents
noticeably loosened up. I think it was because they didn't feel like they had
to chase after me to do well so much anymore. They were kind of caught off
guard by the school system. Math was the most important, but the stuff we were
learning in math at the U.S. school were things we learned long ago in Ukraine
so to them it looked like I was doing well and needed no chasing. In truth I
was only doing well because my grandmother made me drill math so hard in
Ukraine in prior years!

Unfortunately when in later years what we learned in American schools started
to overtake what I had already known from Ukrainian schools, the relaxed
attitude began to show in my grades. Perfect scores slipped to mid-lower 90s,
then to Bs, and even some Cs. I remember failing one test - still can't
remember why, even my teacher was shocked. I ended up graduating high school
with "above average" grades, but nowhere near as good as they would've been
had my grandmother kept charge of my learning.

While I don't miss my grandmother's yelling, I do wish my parents were a bit
more strict back then (and at the same time realize that my lack of motivation
in school was entirely my fault). I turned out ok, but feel like having a
stronger grasp of math and more structured study habits would've been very
beneficial later in life.

~~~
geebee
That's an interesting story.

One reason I'm not a perfectionist about my kids' homework is that a lot of it
is crushingly uninteresting. I have two kids, and I work with them often on
homework, especially math. I like to look for interesting ways to approach
problems, to show them there are ways to do things that aren't a series of
steps that need to be followed with high levels of exactness. Sometimes the
teacher heaps on so much basic arithmetic that there's no time to do both. if
it comes down to a choice between investigating interesting ways to go about a
problem or chugging along with a mechanical approach, I'd rather investigate a
problem in greater depth. That may mean a worse grade, but it's a balancing
act. To be clear, I always advocate respect for the teacher in terms of
civility and politeness, but I do want my kids to independently assess the
learning value of their assignments.

There have been assignments that seem to be little more than an exercise in
penmanship. I have reflected on how teachers used to (perhaps still do) force
kids to write a dull sentence 100 times as punishment. In that sense, at
times, my kid's homework is nearly indistinguishable from a punishment.

Just to be clear, this isn't always the case, my kids have also had good
teachers and interesting assignments as well.

------
webkike
My dad always believed that if you're going to do anything, you should try to
be the best at it. In terms of grades I certainly have not seen a positive
effect, but I think the reason is I don't value professional education as much
as passion learning, which for me is much more rare. The sentiment however has
been instilled in me, and when I discover something that I enjoy doing its
hard for me to be second place.

~~~
BeetleB
>My dad always believed that if you're going to do anything, you should try to
be the best at it.

My dad would say similar things.

Boy, how wrong he was. (Fortunately, he was not pushy about it.)

In my years, I have learned the value of making mistakes, and _not_ pursuing
the path of minimal mistakes.

I have also learned the value of quitting. Always trying to be best in what I
pursue would mean I would often pursue the wrong goals.

(Tangentially, "Finish what you start" ranks highly on my list of really bad
advice).

I have also learned the value of "good enough". There are things I
passionately want to be the best at. There are other things that have no value
for me beyond being "good enough". Our dad's advice would ensure we either do
not pursue the latter, or we aim for perfection in it to the expense of other
endeavours.

Simply put, the advice is good only if you have unlimited time. When you get
old enough and can reflect on your past, you'll get a better sense of how much
time you have left and what you can accomplish in it. That time is very
precious, and it may be in your best interest to be good at many things, as
opposed to the best at a few (and poor at the rest).

~~~
pitaa
>(Tangentially, "Finish what you start" ranks highly on my list of really bad
advice).

I tend to agree. People have told me that they were only doing something
because they started it and 'don't want to be a quitter'. My response is
always that the concept of a 'quitter' doesn't really exist to anyone but high
school football coaches.

In the words of Kenny Rogers, "You've got to know when to hold 'em, Know when
to fold 'em, Know when to walk away, And know when to run…"

------
lr4444lr
That motivation may have been contextually valuable for Ms. Chia, but speaking
as a former teacher, the majority of American students would probably benefit
from parenting that sits further down toward the "Tiger Mom" end of the
parenting spectrum. Not off the deep end, of course, but definitely further
than at present.

~~~
cesarbs
> former teacher

Sorry but I'm going to be that person :)

How much do you think parents should be involved with kids' homework?

My wife and I got tired of the daily battles with our 3rd grader over
homework. Until a few days ago one of us would review it at home and point out
any mistakes. The response to _any_ mistake was a fit of rage. Our daughter
gets extremely frustrated whenever we point out she did something wrong.

So we decided to try a different approach. We told her we won't review her
homework anymore, unless she explicitly asks us to. Her end of the deal is
that at the end of the week she has to read her teacher's feedback and take
note of what she got wrong, and figure out how she could have gotten it right.

Do you think it might be a good strategy?

~~~
lr4444lr
I'll preface by saying that most issues surrounding homework are in general
very debatable, and even the best educational research (which is not great)
suggests a lot of age and subject dependent policy variation. And even the
individual teacher and his or her relation with your daughter are confounding
variables, not to mention whatever lessons in values and character building
you and your wife might have, so this answer comes with a lot of unstated
speculation on my part.

It sounds like the original interaction you had with her consisted purely of
negative reinforcement. That rarely produces the long term results loving
parents want, even in very obedient kids.

Your second approach is fine for a child who is either mature or has
significant intrinsic motivation. A weekly assessment is a good frequency, but
you're leaving it entirely up to her to report, and she seems to have the
option to give you no feedback. Can you trust her not to slack off and
surprise you with an unacceptable grade at the next test? Maybe you can; I
don't know your child. Maybe she's naturally bright in the subject, or can at
least pull her act together and study hard enough when test time comes around.
Do you expect 100% mastery on each assignment? Not every mistake reflects a
gap in knowledge or conceptual understanding, and the smartest children are
often the most acutely aware of when they're penalized for careless errors or
unnecessary formalism. That's not to say diligence and tolerating unliked
procedures are bad lessons to learn either, but a good teacher can distinguish
from the nature of the error what kind of feedback to give. I realize I'm
raising more questions and factors instead of answering directly, because I'm
trying to convey that parents should grow more sensitive in general to the
academic behaviors and values their rules encourage. Be ready to iterate on
your strategy (maybe 1 month of weekly feedback) make sure you're able to get
reliable feedback. If you wanted a more proactive suggestion, why have her
demonstrate her knowledge around homework at all? Typical 3rd grade psych.
development sees children still interestep in showing their parents their
accomplishments to seek their approval across the board. What if when you see
her in a good mood, and not engrossed in something else, like around the
dinner table in casual conversation, you ask her to teach _you_ something new
she learned in class that day? (Maybe start with other subjects if the
homework one is too sensitive.) Feign surprise and gratitude, as if she really
taught you something new. Having to reexplain content knowledge in one's own
words from memory is a very powerful retention technique.

------
pingec
If my parents bought me a present after I had received a bad mark in school
when I was a teenager my twisted mind would have interpreted that as a
catastrophe, "my god, they really do think I have failed and now they are even
trying to bribe me to be better, they must be desperate".

~~~
protomyth
I'm with you, I would be staring in the mirror having an existential crisis.
"What the heck? Are they giving me a thinly disguised participation trophy?
They hate participation trophies?!?"

I guess know your audience applies to parenting as well as performance.

------
snowwrestler
By the time her father said this to her, she obviously already had strong
intrinsic motivation. Her parents just did a good job of managing it.

How to create intrinsic motivation is a harder question. There is some
research that parents can create it by setting and clearly communicating
expectations from an early age. But it's not conclusive.

We're clearly deep into nature/nurture territory here.

~~~
clbrook
This article might help give you some ideas or pathways to discover other
ideas on cultivating intrinsic motivation:
[http://www.edutopia.org/blog/intrinsic-motivation-growth-
min...](http://www.edutopia.org/blog/intrinsic-motivation-growth-mindset-
writing-amy-conley)

~~~
q-base
Thanks a lot for that link. Really interesting and a few books now heading my
way from Amazon :)

------
electriclove
I agree with the sentiment and hope to raise my children without tiger parent
pressure. Though graduating with a psychology degree and studying copywriting
seems to make for a tough life ahead. I certainly don't want my child to "have
to break [their] neck to make a living", but it seems like that might end up
being the case here anyways.

------
toomanybeersies
I seem to be saying it even more, but once again I must state that perfect is
the enemy of good.

Often people strive for perfection in their grades, to the detriment of their
finances, friendships, and personal development.

It happened to several people I know, they'd lock themselves away and study
for hours instead of being social and forging relationships (which in the real
world outside university are a lot more important than grades).

At the end of the day, everyone gets the same Degree (unless you're doing
honours, where there are grades). It doesn't really matter what your grades
were if you can network yourself into a job instead.

------
stirner
As others in the NYT and HN comments have said, the best parenting strategy
seems to depend on the psychology of the kid.

My parents were more or less in the pussycat camp, which led me to put an
enormous amount of pressure on myself as I felt like they just said that to be
nice, because they knew I was "gifted" and would ultimately do "what they
really wanted". It wasn't good for me mental health wise.

------
agentgt
The work ethic correlation with suicide at the end of the article in a common
sense way is sort of sound but it also begs the question: "maybe some cultures
are more comfortable with suicide" (a->b) instead of idea of the author has
"since asians work harder/have higher expectations more asians must commit
suicide" (a->b->c). Obviously the author has the stats that asians are in more
prestigious schools but that doesn't necessarily mean they are pressured more
or that they are consequently more likely to commit suicide.

For example you could have devout catholics that have the same work pressures
and stressors but would never commit suicide (I don't know if that is true but
I'm not sure about the authors position either).

~~~
agentgt
I noticed I got downvoted and now I'm terrible nervous I offended someone. I
wish downvoters would comment (I have never downvoted anyone on any forum
without a comment). I don't mind disagreement of opinion even if it deserves
downvotes but I'm concerned if I offended anyone. All I meant is that the
expectation of parents of the culture reference in the article might not
entirely be the cause of the higher % of suicides.

~~~
chillacy
I did not downvote you and as of right now you're comment seems to be hovering
around positive points, but I do have some thoughts.

Keep in mind that even though college aged AAs have higher than average
suicide ideation, the suicide rate of all AAs is half the national average:
[http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-
health/asian-...](http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-
american/suicide.aspx)

In fact from the stats, being engaged in the AA community tends to reduce the
likelihood of suicide. That aligns with what I've seen myself from my parents
and my friend's parents.

~~~
agentgt
But that goes against subtle hinting of the article of parenting being the
cause of suicide. If it were parenting wouldn't suicide be high earlier as
well (before college)?

Maybe it isn't cultural within families but peer social groups that are
setting the bar too high. I'm arguing the stress may not actually be from the
parents but the desire to fit in with others in the group.

~~~
chillacy
Then I misunderstood your toplevel comment as "Asians are more comfortable
with suicide culturally (insert samurai references here) therefore we can
expect higher rates of suicide". My evidence against that was that AAs don't
actually have higher than average suicide rates and that being part of the
culture reduces suicide rates.

Also since you mentioned catholics, you may be interested in this:
[http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-
church-a...](http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-church-
attendance-suicide-20160629-snap-story.html)

~~~
agentgt
Yes that is why I was deeply concerned that my comment was interpreted as _"
samurai reference"_.

I really regret mentioning catholics as I could see how it easily confuses
even more.

My overall point was the author seemed to be connecting too many dots and thus
in my mind might make it less likely to be true.

Originally I contemplated bringing up the the stereotypes of cultural
conformity (as in some cultures are influenced by groups and deeply desire to
be part of the group/conform) but this is a dangerous topic (regardless of
being PC as it can quickly get heated). Peer conformity would certainly be
less points to connect (cause/effect) than parents causing college aged AA's
to commit suicide (regardless of ethnicity).

------
alextheparrot
My parents and collegiate experiences were much like the author's. I would
call them asking for advice, only for them to ask about how I'm pursuing
happiness. That openness and lack of using perfection as a goal allowed me to
pursue first (pre-)medicine, then (pre-)graduate school (Biochemistry), and
finally Computer Science throughout college. After four years, I found myself
with two majors (Biochemistry and CS) and can only thank my parents for not
pushing me in one direction, as I've never been happier as I am now developing
software in the biotech space.

------
gohrt
> Kate Chia, a 2015 graduate of New York University [with a degree in
> Psychology], is studying copywriting at Miami Ad School.

Not sure we should be looking to this person's story as a role model.

------
blahblah3
In my experience, asian parents tend to vastly underestimate the importance of
genetics that predetermine a child's strengths and dispositions. Kids that are
born with some combination of great working memory, processing speed, and
abstract reasoning ability will do fine at math and science with an order of
magnitude less effort than others. For these kids, being pushed to perfection
in school can be beneficial. For others, the expectation that they need to do
as well as the other kid on the SATs or in engineering or medicine or whatever
often leads to the problems the author describes (suicidal ideation,
depression, etc...). Sure, everyone should be encouraged to try their best but
there needs to be more focus on cultivating everyone's unique strengths. Often
times the people getting perfect SAT scores aren't studying any more than
others (in my experience, less), yet asian parents will tend to believe that
their kid's imperfect score is due merely to a lack of effort.

~~~
augustt
Interesting - to me, it seems like asian parents have recognized that genetics
have less of a role than you might think. When I look at math contest results
(in the US), asian kids are completely dominating. Either asian kids are just
inherently better at math (probably not), or their parents have realized that
they can instill the work ethic and studiousness to produce these results even
if their kid isn't a natural genius.

~~~
blahblah3
Yes, preparation makes a big difference in math olympiad but most of those
competing at a high level are already very talented to begin with. The problem
is when a parent expects their kid to achieve similar performance when they
don't have the raw skills. By attributing no role to inherent ability, blame
is always put solely on the child for not trying hard enough. Even within a
given family, you'll notice that some kids are better much more talented than
their brothers or sisters at a given task, and the difference is not really
preparation (especially since these differences can often be seen at a very
young age).

~~~
jiaweihli
You're describing a fixed vs. growth mindset. This applies both to your
current perception of people (notably children), and also your perception of
yourself when you're a child.

I believe in the growth mindset - to explain your example of sibling
dominance, I believe that a child's mindset heavily influences their ability
to learn. If it has a positive effect, the preparation they do is both more
effective and more bountiful (this is usually classified as stubbornness /
determination). But preparation _is_ necessary to perform a task at a high
level. When you hear of 'prodigies', they often started whatever it was -
math, music, sports, programming - at a very early age, and reaped the
interest.

~~~
blahblah3
Why not both? Both preparation and inherent ability are important. I find it
implausible that everything can be explained by "mindset." Perfect pitch is a
good example, it's a useful ability and cannot really be developed through
training. Other factors are more subtle but are also fixed.

------
vtepe
I was raised the oppossing camp. The effects: psyche to fix, loneliness and I
still have to work in warehouses.

------
shurcooL
This phenomenon reminds me of what it's like to send PRs to a project, hoping
it gets approved and merged ASAP... Then being given push rights, and suddenly
finding yourself on the other side of the fence: hoping PRs are reviewed very
rigorously and merged only after much scrutiny, to keep the code quality and
maintainability up, scope low, etc.

------
thomasahle
In high school I asked my parents if they'd pay me for hood grades, like I'd
seen from some of my friends.

Mh parents agreed they'd pay me my GPA, which converted from the Danish grade
range and currency meant I could make from 0 to 2 dollars a year..

I actually quite liked that system.

------
tomcam
What amazing parents. I know Asian parents well, and this is utterly
extraordinary.

------
naveen99
I had to tell my son something similar as he was terrified of getting
detention at school. I told him if he got detention, I'd get him whatever toy
he wanted.

------
honkhonkpants
Had to think for a bit about the sign or direction of "or lower". A and B are
less than C in my everyday existence.

------
andrewvijay
I'm gonna show this to my mom now. Hope she doesnt smack me.

------
haloboy777
That was a very good clickbait for me as a college student.

------
jlebrech
maybe it's just genetics then.

~~~
chillacy
This is where I really wish there were a good dataset of SAT scores of non-
asian kids adopted by asian parents. Of course that also runs into the issue
of asian-american parents who adopt might be different than the tiger parents.

------
supergetting
When I was a 3rd grader in South Korea I had the hardest time solving the
simplest arithmetic problems. My teacher used to keep me after hours as a
punishment until I was able to solve them. I think it was literally something
like "2+3-3+2+2-100+39". You could say that I was pretty much in the opposite
end of "exceptional" on any subject — was NEVER serious about school back then
and completely ignorant of education (probably didn't even know what this
meant).

To me school was a place where I went to hang out with friends for 7 to 8
hours, and yet, I don't remember my parents doing anything about it, not even
a light discussion about my education. This went on for several years even
during my early school years in the U.S. (my family immigrated in the middle
of my 3rd grade year).

It was only when I started watching stargate and other scifi movies/tvshows
that I got interested in science and technology, and thought "Hey, maybe I
might try this thing called education so that I can do things that these guys
are doing in the tv!", but realized that I was still extremely subpar at math
and english (not to mention i even sucked at korean - got worse now, but i
think i got a little bit better at english), and pretty much everything else,
flunked algebra in high school and mostly Cs and rarely Bs on other subjects,
and miraculously A in PE hahaha.

At the time I knew I had to do something about it, so I asked my parents for
help, but sadly got close to none. They hired some tutors for me but it never
worked out (you could really tell, the tutors were frustrated at how stupid I
was). At some point I realized that I had to take this matter into my own
hands - had to start all over from the fundamentals. At which point I actually
started reading books, writing, memorizing, solving (math problems), I had to
pretty much make up for what people usually learned in their primary school up
to jr. high years. I eventually managed to do well in math, improved
speaking/writing/reading in english a little bit, trained myself in scientific
thinking, got into physics at a university and now I'm working as a software
engineer. Buried in financial aid debt... :(

The thing about people though... is that we forget quite a lot of things we
learned 10 years ago, but the most coolest thing nowadays is that as long as
you have a way of getting information into your head, your education only ends
at your last breath. Although when I was growing up I hardly saw my father,
and my parents never intervened in regards to my education, they were there
for moral support, life lessons, and the list goes on. I think that in the
near future if I were to have children of my own, first and foremost I'd hope
to see them growing up healthy, and that they'd find something they're
interested in earlier in their lives, but I'm not sure if it will help to be
strict with their education, we'll see.

