<p>The Context article is also written for a general audience and lacks the kind of scholarly details that would make it possible to decide whether we should consider its findings persuasive or not.</p>
<p>The authors do intend distinguish between different types of ECs, some that involve greater expenditures than others, some that are more linked to academics and others to sports or arts, or community service, etc... and detect some connection between the pursuit of these ECs and matriculations at top colleges. </p>
<p>They go on to note that there is an even stronger correlation between museum-going parents and admission to top colleges of their offspring. Why museum-going? Is it assumed that museum-going parents also listen to classical music, read high-brow literature and pursue other elements of what the authors describe as elite culture?</p>
<p>While we may limit ourselves to commenting on the story as it is presented in the Context article, a research scientist by training such as NMD can wish for more data to ascertain whether we should accept its findings or not. </p>
<p>I personally have no real problems doing so. In our case, however, I would substitute classical music for museum-going. I went down to our basement the day before yesterday to see could be thrown away and saw shelves full of old LPs. The complete Bach cantatas, Beethoven symphonies, etc... The LPs were replaced by cassettes (drawers full of them) then CDs and now MP3. Our musical tastes have not rubbed off on our Ss. They share the same tastes as most of their contemporaries, whatever their parental income, status and education. But I suppose that our music collection is an indication of cultural capital just as strong as museum-going.</p>
<p>Marite,
I certainly agree that parental cultural influence, and particularly maternal influence, can play a significant role in a child's development and educational performance, and as this article suggests, might give an admission edge to certain students. I also agree that museum-going can be happily compared to acquired tastes in classical music. Indeed, the "Mozart Effect" is a fascinating topic related to cultural heritage and academic performance. The study under question, however, casts doubt on whether or not actually performing in musical activities as an EC gives any particular advantage to the student applying to elite schools.</p>
<p>"there IS a group that's viewed education as the sole means to gain status and power in the community for close to 4000 years...Jews."</p>
<p>This may be somewhat off-topic, but anyway ...</p>
<p>My father-in-law (who is Chinese), in response to criticism that SAT tests are biased against minorities, used to say, "Let any minority group that believes standardized tests are racially or culturally biased design (and provide detalis of) their own standardized test, for example even including rap lyrics and ebonics. I guarantee that within a couple years Jews will be among the top scorers."</p>
<p>This was my father-in-laws recognition that parents' emphasis on education plays a huge role in how well their children do, not only in classes but also on exams. "Jews" was really just an example he used for involved and concerned parents.</p>
<p>As I said, I agree with much of what the article says, but that is mostly because of my own experience rather than because I found the article wholly persuasive in its own right. NMD found the article disappointing, and in some ways, so do I. Sometimes, articles written for a general public reference more scholarly ones, but this one did not seem to. </p>
<p>I wish the Mozart effect had actually had an effect on Ss! The men in the family have permanent ear plugs. One listens to Mozart (and other classical music composers--dad) the other two listen to different types of modern music--metal, techno, etc... I once listened to a remix that butchered Carmina Burana, Swan Lake, Beethoven's 5th, all in about 2 minutes.</p>
<p>Marite:
I can understand that you might find the insidehighered article disappointing - I don't think it was meant to do much more than pique our interest in a study that proposes to asess the relationship between EC's and (elite) college admissions. </p>
<p>You might find the following article more interesting:</p>
<p>Thanks, asteriskea. The article looks much more solidly supported than the Context one, and of course, the insidehighered one.<br>
I will try to go through it later, in between maintaining my cultural capital (i.e, doing "real work" :))</p>
<p>I certainly agree that parental cultural influence, and particularly maternal influence, can play a significant role in a child's development and educational performance, and as this article suggests, might give an admission edge to certain students.</p>
<p>My son was recently admitted to Notre Dame. We are a lower middle-class family from a rural area of Ohio, and my son is one of only three graduates from his class of 154 to attend a college outside of Ohio.</p>
<p>My son was ranked first in his class (tied with five other students), had a 4.0 GPA, and earned a 33 on his ACT. He is a gifted writer, and his admissions essays were excellent, as were his teacher recommendations.</p>
<p>My wife stayed home to raise my son and his siblings from six months after his birth. I am certain that her teaching, reading, and guiding my son's learning outside of the classroom led to his academic accomplishments, and directly, to his admission to Notre Dame.</p>
<p>It was the high stake test that led me to assume you were referring to East Asians</p>
<br>
<p>I was; I just didn't remember that the testing system (and the Confucian classics themselves) are much younger than Chinese literature in general. I've done a quick history brush-up in the meantime. :)</p>
<p>I do think the theme of ethnic background leading to cultural capital is relevant to the thread. To push the analogy, all immigrant groups arrive in the US rich in the cultural currency of their home. But some groups find that their currency is accepted 1-to-1 in the US, while others find that a low exchange rate leaves the currency they bring nearly worthless in the US. Jews and East Asians are the two groups that I believe came to America with cultural capital that (from sheer luck) happens to be the sort that leads to rapid economic success here.</p>
<p>I've always felt a strong kinship with my East Asian friends because in so many ways, our family culture is similar. In our families, it is taken for granted that the whole point of coming to America -- maybe even the whole point of life -- is to give the children the best possible education.</p>
<p>You might find the following article, "Opening Up the Elites" worth a read. Essentially, it explores the role of ethnic background and "cultural capital" in elite admissions from a different angle. </p>
<p>Your latest link is interesting. Implied in the discussion and Karabel's work:
[quote]
He also proposed a form of class based affirmative action that would compare students performance to what might be expected of them based on their families, schools and backgrounds, and push elite colleges to consider how successfully students have overcome their disadvantages in the admissions process.
[/quote]
I think, is the assumption that the selection process discriminates against low SES kids somehow - that they are more capable or better than their records indicate. </p>
<p>There are, of course, other possible explanations. It reminds me greatly of efforts over the past generation or two to increase the performance of weaker primare and secondary students by various sociological interventionsTo what effect?</p>
<p>NMD:
I don't think that the idea of cultural capital necessarily discriminates against low SES kids. As Hanna, Asteriskea and I have tried to argue, some groups may be low income but have higher cultural capital of the kind valued by colleges than others. As I said, the extreme example of this are the MIT and Harvard graduate students whose children qualify for free or reduced lunch since their stipends usually put them at the poverty level.</p>
<p>My take, without any way to verify it, they followed kids from largely northeastern urban areas that have easy access to art museums. They had very few kids in the survey from Mississippi, Arkansas, Nebraska, west Texas, etc. Of course, for the "top colleges" the majority of the successful applicants are from the northeastern cities, moreso in the period of the survey than now.</p>
<p>The data is a result of the questions asked, as are all polls. If they had asked different questions, they would have found other statistical annomolies.</p>
<p>Good point, bandit TX. So cultural capital is also a function of location, not just parental education or income. </p>
<p>I've always thought that diversity of experience in the classroom is a good thing. Knowing what goes on in a farm may be as valuable as being able to distinguish a Matisse from a Monet.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, location and low SES most likely do play critical roles in how "cultural capital" affects the attainment of educational goals. The EC study focused on 4 year and elite college admission and, as a result, it did follow the educational trajectory of students most of whom came from culturally advantaged and monied urban and suburban areas. In terms of cultural capital and college admission, rural students, just as those in poverty stricken urban areas, suffer a distinct disadvantage and must overcome great obstacles to even get to college much less an elite one. This is most likely why Karabal argues in favor of affirmative action programs that would offset the lack of cultural capital for students in need.</p>
<p>I agree, Asteriskea. But I also know how ignorant students from urban and affluent backgrounds can be about much of the rest of the world. Only one young man who'd lived on a farm understood what it meant to grow old poor. The rest seemed to believe that everyone had government pensions, retirement income, stocks and bonds, etc... </p>
<p>Real life story from college:
The prof is describing the plight of peasants in China during the 1930s.
Student raises his hand: "If they were so miserable in their villages, why didn't they leave?"
Prof:"Hmm. apart from their total lack of money, where do you think they should go?"
Student: "To the countryside?"</p>
<p>I kid you not. That was decades before Paris Hilton made money out of faking The Simple Life.</p>
<p>Marite,
One of the wonderful aspects of rural life, as well in many disadvantaged poor urban sectors, is that the abundance of social capital can compensate on so many meaningful levels for a lack of cultural capital. Maybe this can explain why poor Taiwanese do so well in school?</p>
<p>I don't know about poor Taiwanese. I've never heard of this before, and I would want to know what is meant by poor in Taiwan.</p>
<p>Nor do I know about rural life enough to know whether there is an abundance of social capital (Total urbanite here). I would not go as far as Marx and decry "the idiocies of rural life" but I got the feeling that life on farms could be isolating. No, what I mean is that life in non-urban settings provides experiences that can be just as important as knowing your Matisse from your Monet. It can make you really understand far better what it means to be poor in India or elsewhere in a way that urban folks often cannot comprehend. It can make you understand better what is meant by agricultural cycles in a way that urban Americans who are accustomed to getting tomatoes even in winter cannot.</p>
<p>Another anecdote: early in his career, my brother was asked to settle the estate of a very rich American. The dead man's widow had to sort through many of her late husband's artwork and was putting the paintings she did not want to keep in a pile, ready, I assume, for the dustbin or a bonfire. Her criterion for choosing whether to keep or to reject was whether she had heard of the painter or not. She intended to sell the art anyway. My brother saw she was putting a wonderful painting in the reject pile. He said:"Are you sure you want to throw this Matisse?" The woman replied."Yeah, I've never heard of him. I don't think it will sell. Do you want it?" So my brother got a Matisse gouache of a woman in a bathrobe sitting on a sofa her elbow next to a vase of flower. I've seen another painting by Matisse very similar to this one. I suppose this woman had plenty of capital and was intent on acquiring more through the sale of her dead husband's paintings, but she was low on cultural capital.</p>
<p>No wonder lawyers have such a bad reputation. I'm trying to figure out how many ethics violations were committed in this Matisse scenario........</p>