Both of my kids were required to play a music instrument until they went off to college. I viewed it as part of their overall education. They both played piano and D2 decided to pick up violin too. They practiced half an hour each day so they wouldn’t embarrasse themselves at their next lesson. There was no competition and they didn’t play in orchestra. On their own, they focused on ballet. Both of them danced around 20 hrs/week. Their “punishment” for not doing well in school was not to go to ballet until their grades went up again. Their ballet teacher(s) knew my rule, so they didn’t give my girls a hard time whenever they had to take time off for major tests.
I think that tiger parenting is not going to disappear until the waves of fresh immigrants subsides or kids are not longer pooled and compared based on race. Right now parents and kids with Asian heritage have no choice than to participate in the arms race if they aspire to attend a top ranked school.
The tiger phenomena is really a result of an educational system where the main hurdle is competitive and perceived prestige of admission and less the difficulty of passing college level studies and graduating.
In my previous post, I did mention that I was drawn to studying the pros and cons of the “Asian way” and the “American way,” and as we continue with this discussion, my mind kept going back to this book that was published in 2006, five years before Amy Chua’s book, written by a couple of Korean sisters, Dr. Soo Kim Abboud, a surgeon and a clinical assistant prof at UPenn, and Jane Kim, an attorney and an immigration specialist at the Children’s Hospital of Penn, at the time of the publication. The book is entitled, “Top of the Class: How Asian Parents Raise High Achievers – and How You Can Too.”
When I came across this book, judging by both the title designed to entice more than anything and the authors’ disparate and unrelated background in their respective specialties, I wasn’t all that inclined to even give the book a chance to begin with. But, I did, and while the book was certainly written by a couple of non-specialists, I thought the book did provide some very good service in the way of offering some useful advises or at least some perspectives to remember.
Interestingly, the book’s “Afterword” was devoted to “Where Asian Parents Go Wrong.” It begins:
“If you think we have all the answers, think again. Asians may make up a disproportionate percentage of the student population at the top universities, but they are also plagued by the highest suicide rate amongst college students and young adults. We may be doing something right, but we’re also doing some things wrong.”
This is why the subject of Tiger parenting needs critical examination and discussion as opposed to taking the either/or side. How we approach our parenting can and does have lifelong consequences. Because the book came out 5 years before the term, Tiger Mother, became universally known through Amy Chua’s book, it doesn’t specifically use the term “Tiger parenting.” But when you look at all the examples that the authors do provide with, there are plenty of damaging “side effects” of such upbringing that Amy Chua later described as Tiger parenting. I remember heeding these authors’ messages to heart since life’s more important than attending an Ivy League and landing a career with big paychecks.
I actually think this is an important skill for everyone. On another thread, I am in a discussion with another poster about the importance of learning to persevere even in tasks that seem boring, redundant or uninteresting.
I think the difference between myself and what I understand of the tiger phenomenon is on the lengths we will go and of the subjects that we find crucial. In my family, this plays out in different ways with each of my three kids. My oldest was always more of a humanities kid then a STEM kid. She got high grades in math through brute force effort, not through any natural talent or enjoyment. It was very clear early on that she was not ever going to pursue a STEM field. So I didn’t push for her to take more math then was necessary for graduation. I occasionally let academic work take a back seat to certain extra curricular activities in the field she loved. It worked out well because she is now in college and very successfully headed toward a career in her field of interest.
I had a conversation here on CC once with someone about whether we would let our kids continue to be in the school play if their grades dropped. She said “no” she would not allow any slippage. I said I would allow daughter’s grades to go down a bit – to a B+ or a B in certain subjects because I believed she was getting so much out of her extra activities — important life skills that I felt were every bit as important as grades.
My middle child is a different story. She desperately wants to be a doctor. I know, and she knows, that she will have to maintain near perfect grades in college to make that happen. So I am on top of her now. It isn’t that I really care what her high school GPA is, but if she doesn’t learn to get A’s in high school, she won’t have that skill when she needs it in college. So I am much more “tigerish” with her. She understands and I think she appreciates it. I don’t get angry, and I never punish her, but I do work with her to help her understand what she needs to do to succeed. And she knows what to expect from herself. She always does the school play, but if her grades slipped I would make her stop.
Lol, sometimes I wonder if the people most horrified by the tiger notion know many Asian-Americans or their families. I can’t generalize what the family life is like, but sure do know so many well adjusted adults and college age. They have fun, have friendships, can have broad interests, great humor, and the vast majority of the time on CC, you don’t know if you’re discussing with someone of Asian heritage or not, unless they admit it. There are extremes, of course- and we see those parents on CC, pressing about chances for an 8th grader or younger, (tigering not really being exclusive to Asian-born parents.)
The problem- and it’s not universal- is that in some areas of the country, the academic dedication of some has raised the bar for the rest. Whether these kids are Asian American, or some other origin, the fact they can and do excel makes it harder for our little gals and guys.
My own feelings? So be it. And you know I feel Chua was exaggerating.
I pushed my kids to try their best. To know their best and where some “more” could be squeezed out. The actual work and results- the choices- were theirs, with only a few exceptions.
To me, tiger parenting means the extreme form of demanding parenting method as exemplified by Amy Chua’s book. When I first read that book, I was shocked that it was portrayed as a typical Asian parenting method. The book contributed to the stereotyping of Asians and Asian Americans. I’m a first generation Asian American myself. Asian parents are typically more demanding of their kids academically, but vast vast majority of them are not nearly as demanding as what’s portrayed in that book. Does tiger parenting help some kids? I bet it does. But I’ve also witnessed enough instances of the failure of this type of parenting. Extremism is never a virtue in anything, including parenting.
@TiggerDad - Your posts on this thread have been incredibly eloquent and thoughtful, and I appreciated your story about your childhood as well as your experience with your son’s peer. It says a lot about you that you expressed such concern for that girl and recognized her positive qualities despite her treatment of your son.
I agree that parenting approaches, particularly those related to high achieving and accomplished students, is a relevant topic for discussion on this site. I also think your points about the possible negative effects of tiger parenting are important to those who care about children other than our own. Yes, anecdotes may not be that helpful, but rates of suicide, depression and anxiety are important to examine. While there are many contributing factors to mental health problems, I think most professionals would agree that tiger parenting, in extreme forms, can and does have negative emotional consequences for some children/teens/adults. I have seen this many times in my practice.
Thanks for all of your posts on this topic, TiggerDad. They are very illuminating.
I think that taking the view that the influx of academically focused immigrants is raising the academic bar is not actually right. In my view, it is shifting multiple bars instead, raising some, but lowering some. There was an era in which young students (mainly young men) mastered spherical trigonometry as a matter of course, relatively early on, with more sophisticated elements than are currently presented in American high schools, in general. There was an era in which the mastery of Greek and Latin was much stronger than 5’s on the AP exams would indicate, and it was attained at a much earlier age. There was an era in which the mastery of geography was considerably stronger than it is now, generally speaking. There was an era in which Churchill’s memorization of Childe Harold was unusual only for its great length; it would not have been remarkable if he had been able to recite a 1000-line poem, rather than a 10,000-line poem. There was an era in which more biology classes required multiple, fairly complex dissections. Some of these differences are differences in memory and quick recall, but some of them actually represent differences in understanding. Elements of rhetoric tended to be covered in a different way in many American schools in the past. Definitely the chemistry and physics labs in my high school were more demanding than the corresponding labs now, at the local school. AP chemistry covers no more than the one-year chemistry course did in my high school, where the honors designation did not exist. Many high schools have dropped proofs from their geometry courses, as “too hard.” My spouse had 6 weeks of non-Euclidean geometry in his public high school geometry class, and that does not happen much any more, at typical public high schools. I had arithmetic in various bases in 5th grade. That is pretty rare these days.
In my view, many people have realized that mathematically oriented students can forge ahead much faster in mathematics, without loss of understanding, than was traditional. It is helpful to have a mathematically knowledgeable parent to make sure that “without loss of understanding” applies. If people thought of mathematics as an art, rather than as a competition, they might be more accepting of this. After all, other bars have been raised, too, with less backlash, as I see it. For example:
The bar on athletics has also been raised by the existence of travel teams and knowledge about cross-training and its benefits, as well as the existence of U3 soccer teams (joking, but not completely). The bar on stringed instruments has been raised by the existence of Suzuki, and music camps. I don’t know whether the bar on art has been raised or not, but it is possible that just wider internet access to artistic examples has had that effect.
You are so right! I never even noticed it until you mentioned it. I LOVED proofs in geometry. It was one of the first match concepts that I really enjoyed. I also loved base arithmetic. My kids never did them. By the way, our school district also dropped the teaching of grammar, civics and sex ed.
I really don’t understand the prevalence of violin and piano in the Asian-American community. Aren’t other instruments worthy? Why just classical music? What’s wrong with picking up a trumpet and becoming the first Asian Miles Davis? Now THAT would sure be “pointy” and unique, an EC that sets the kid apart from the Asian-American cohort.
Wild guess: Piano and Violin or the easiest instruments to start in early childhood. Thats why you don’t see many trumpet prodigies.
D2 wanted to do cello and I said no because it was too big to carry. If you know how to play violin it is easy to pick up guitar, viola, even piano. Same with ballet. Many dances are derived from classical ballet. My kids’ ballet teacher didn’t allow her students to do other form of dance, like modern/jazz/tap/hip hop, until they had few years of classical ballet training.
Some lower schools offer some sort of violin option. These opps exist in communities, it’s not like parents are hiring orchestra violinists to jump start their kids. Many kids like the group lessons. Many talk about how music enhances math ability. Nothing wrong with it. Lots of families have little kids in soccer. In some areas, it feels like every other kid. Or little league. . I don’t see griping that it’s too much pressure or asking why they aren’t started in a less usual sport like lacrosse.
Our school starts orchestra or band in 5rh grade. We started violin lessons the summer before to give her a head start. She came home from the first day of school in tears telling me she was awful and would never be any good. Many of the other kids had been playing since age 5 or.so. She kept persevering and stuck with it through middle school orchestra but was always in the lowest group. She said it was my fault for not being a tiger mom.
@whatisyourquest The reason is there are two programs suzuki for violin and one for piano ( I don’t know the name). Parents starts their kids very early ( 3-5 years old). The suzuki program is very rigid. It teaches kids in steps. And kids sadly begin competing against each other by about the age of 8 ( thru recitals and the song number they are on).
My own kiddo wanted to play violin at 3 from listening to classical kids on the radio. Kept insisting to learn it. Started at 3 and always just wanted to play. Definitely wasn’t a virtuoso. But enjoyed it. At the age of 9 or so, kiddo refused to play in groups ( kids and parents just wanted to compete and it was often against my kiddo who was the most advanced. S/he refused to participate in this competition set up mainly by the parents. Kiddo switched to taking lessons only and playing for enjoying. Plays when angry or upset ( with the door closed). Still hates to play in public. But plays really well and moves people thru music.
Parents who want to use music and art to compete need to rethink things. Your kids are not going to gain a love of music if you make it into a competitive sport. Violin and piano are the areas where this happens most. A kid playing the sax, or the drums or any other instrument is rarely competing against his peers. That’s great. Music is for joy.
For those who advocate tiger parenting:
A. Is it ok for the kid to apply to and attend an affordable college other than an Ivy League school, Stanford, or MIT?
B. Is it ok for the kid to choose his/her own major and professional goals?
I learned a lot about music training for children from Asian moms and feel grateful to them!
Choosing the correct size instrument, upgrading once the child is ready and how to find the right teacher match
and finding community ensembles too.
Suzuki, as I understand it, requires a one on one parent “coach” for the method to work, and the Suzuki trained teacher. We bypassed that, waited until sixth grade, and hired good teachers that got along with my sons. It seems the very early training, if its done correctly could instill some strong musicality , but our sons were not ready to sit still until later. Suzuki is more or less a program for parents with a lot of time on their hands and the desire to work with their child at home, around the lessons, on a complex skill. That was not our family.
I had a son who played viola starting in sixth grade, and was able to master the instrument and catch up to his Suzuki trained peers, and got into some All State ensembles, mostly due to good teacher and practice. Our other son played piano, and horn. They both did two week summer music experience that immersed them, starting in seventh grade. One son did two summers, the other three, as it turned out to be really fun, and they got exposed to choir, chamber and orchestral music.
Oldest son was a little scared to go to an intense music experience, but I gave him an out, (call and I can come get you!) and it turned out to be a very gentle experience, with some fantastic teachers and kids.
My husband and I had no encouragement or chance at music training options, so I wanted my sons to have the option to play an instrument, for life enjoyment. My son who is 23 still plays piano for fun. Other son, not as much, but occasionally will take the viola out. Both love to attend orchestra concerts and do that on their own.
We attended a lot of music concerts, starting in late elementary school, which I think got the kids interested. We played a lot of classical music at home, since I like to listen. Music cannot be forced the child either has the desire or they do not like it. The right reacher is key for music training. I learned a lot from Asian moms about choosing the teacher! Many Asian American music students did various test programs in music, (Canadian or British testing programs? ) that would lead to the ability to teach piano as a side job.
It seemed to me that Asian parents both value music itself and value the discipline music gave their children and even valued the ability to teach music to others. All good traits.
I read Amy Chua’s book, and believe both she and her daughters were extraordinarily gifted academically and musically. Amy also had a ferocious independent streak, and disobeyed her own Tiger Parent Father, in where to attend college. So I felt she is in a different category than most people,even other Asian families, and her methods with music training seemed to eventually backfire, as her daughter quit music. I guess I believe the daughter really did a debut at a young age in NYC before quitting though. I think Amy’s intense parent child relationships would be unusual in Asian families.
I see Asian families as fiercely loving their kids! Tiger is more of a kitten, but it may depend on the family goals,
parent’s education, and other factors.
My parents had me take piano lessons in elementary school and beyond. I recall that it was difficult, with my small hands, to span and reach certain chords. So, IME, piano is not ideal for very young kids. The violin might be different though.
I also played saxophone in the elementary school band. I was not particularly good, but it wasn’t because I didn’t have the lung capacity at that age. So, IME, saxophone and clarinet are certainly doable for young kids. The trumpet is more challenging – not the best example that I could have chosen. Of course, percussion (drums, “bells”, etc.) are also easy for young kids to pick up.
Competitions were mentioned several times upthread. Is that it, primarily? Piano and violin are prevalent in the Asian-American community because competitions in these instruments demonstrate prominence and a hierarchy?
Idk, I continue to think that groupthink is going on here, and that other instruments are being deemed “unacceptable.” If true, it’s a shame, and may be one root cause for the inability of some AOs to differentiate Asian-American applicants (cf. adcom notes divulged in the Harvard lawsuit).
Parents can only plan their kids’ life courses up to a point. Our kid #1 studied piano for a few years, got bored, stopped. Kid #2 studied flute for a few years, got bored, stopped. We didn’t push them further b/c they clearly were not destined to be musicians. They had other priorities and other core talents (math, art) and it made more sense to reinforce those areas than music. “Parkinson’s Law” may apply to career development, not just to organizational advancement: “People rise in an organization until they reach their level of incompetence.” Then they get stuck. The trick is move beyond the sticking point – to adapt, draw on other talents and interests, and pursue new endeavors.
Our approach to child-raising was to expose our kids to a variety of ways of contending: literature, art, crafts, music, math, science, sports, etc. Let them discover their interests and their strengths, while also achieving a broad exposure to liberal arts. When they found productive veins of interest, they exploited them. Lessons, special classes, additional resources (equipment, tools). Their childhood hobbies turned out to be closer to their later academic and career directions than any specific set of courses or programs in K-12 or their baccalaureate programs.
The kids ended up being “well-lopsided.” Clear special interests and talents. But how these manifested in remunerative careers took some time after college. They didn’t simply jump full-time into the type of work they are doing now. In one case, college ended with a B.A.; unless he wanted to pursue an academic career (but “academics are boring” – a slam at me!), he had better focus on something that fit his core interests and skills (math, statistics). That he did, while having a series of employers; and he’s been very successful, judging by professional reputation. In the other case, after an early career in product design based on a BFA, she decided to get another degree (MBA) that allowed her to work in “sustainable design” and business incubation. Thus more training, another credential, and now an interesting and financially rewarding job.
Both kids have been ascending the career “climbing wall.” I’ve developed this analogy in previous posts. The basic idea is that once you graduate from college, you need to adapt: sometimes you go up, sometimes you go downward or sideways, and sometimes you need to get off the wall for more training or a refocusing of goals.