<p>Just FYI. Comment away. Good news: Harvard saw the kid as a kid and didn't "punish" her for the views of her parent.</p>
<p>Bad news (maybe): Everyone will now read the Tiger Mom book as the blueprint for getting your kid into Harvard. Piano teachers and tutors command huge salaries and de-unionized teachers now have new and much more lucrative careers!</p>
<p>I could’ve predicted she would get into a bunch of top-10 schools. Her mom practically planned her life so that she would. Don’t forget though, she’s a legacy at Harvard so that must have helped considerably too.</p>
<p>This is a little disheartening. It’s almost as if Harvard is indirectly advocating “tiger parenting.” The daughter did work for this though, so I suppose she deserved a slot.</p>
<p>The legacy card holds weight, and the poor girl did work extraordinarely hard, whether by choice or not. I’m glad Harvard did not punish her for her mother’s craziness.</p>
<p><-----convert and future Tiger Dad!</p>
<p>April fools? I can’t believe you guys think she didn’t deserve to get into Harvard because her mother was “crazy” (for the record, I believe tiger parenting is a good thing). Also, if any of you read the book, Sophia certainly has many qualities Ivies look for. We cannot say she got in because she was “forced” to do everything she did. The book indicates that she did enjoy playing piano, for example, and she never rebelled against her mother like her younger sister did.</p>
<p>The tiger mom’s timing for release of her book couldn’t have been more perfect: it was a huge topic of discussion during the admissions season, obviously getting the attention of admissions reps at every school she was hoping it would! Name recognition works wonders, not that the girl isn’t qualified. Yet, many, many qualified students were rejected from Harvard, yet she was lucky…I think it has a lot to do with seeing MOM’s name on the application under “Parent” and connecting to the book…</p>
<p>sorry I’m not up to speed with this…who’s this tiger mom you’re talking about?</p>
<p>Google ‘Amy chua’</p>
<p>“many, many qualified students were rejected from Harvard”</p>
<p>Not many prep school seniors who played Carnegie Hall at age 14 get rejected from Harvard. There really is an echelon of applicant where a denial would be shocking, and that’s what we’re talking about here. This is Olympic gold medal territory – it means you’re among the very best in the world at your skill. Combine achievement at that level in ANY skill with consistent performance at an excellent high school and you’re pretty much in (and rightly so, in my opinion). Legacy/famous parents is irrelevant in that situation.</p>
<p>I’m not necessarily a proponent of “tiger parenting” (my parents have been fairly hands-off with me, since I’m more independent than my brother and sister), but I do think there’s a certain value to it. Chua herself put it best by saying that her parenting style assumes strength rather than weakness in a child, and her kid was clearly pushed to perform to the very best of her ability in a way that kids often are not. There’s value in becoming extraordinarily good at things, even if the value is just learning that hard work is meaningful and that you can do things you never thought possible, like master a difficult finger sequence. </p>
<p>I only hope that she’s not so attached to her mother’s constant pushing that she doesn’t thrive in college without her there.</p>
<p>Good for this young lady! More power to her. Though I disagree with the Tiger mom concept, I certainly can’t wish the daughters anything but success.</p>