<p>I don’t disagree with you, Xiggi–it’s just that in the past, in discussions like this, somebody always had to helpfully point out that Vietnamese immigrants, etc., etc., etc. didn’t show these traits. Perhaps what we really mean is immigrants families featuring professional parents, coming from countries with a strong cultural preference for education, hard work, and parental control, and also coming from countries with high-stakes testing. That’s certainly true for immigrants from China, India, Korea, and some others. Are there other countries with this configuration? We’ve been hearing recently about very successful African immigrant students–do African countries have this same kind of high-stakes testing? (Maybe I need to read Amy Chua’s new book…)</p>
<p>
Gross exaggeration. There might be a few families with limited means who believe only HYPMS are worth the prohibitive cost of a private college, but it’s far from being a phenomenon prevalent in any community. I think a big part of this “craziness” when it comes to recent immigrants is that these families take education more as “work” than anything else, so the attitude is that if you are doing the work, you’d better do your utmost best and try to achieve the best results possible. An analogy is that they may tell their kids - if you are playing golf, you should aim to become Tiger Woods. Obviously, most if not all of them do realize the long shot of becoming a Tiger Woods, but they figure if one works hard to become Tiger Woods, chances are he won’t end up in too bad a place. </p>
<p>As some posters pointed out upthread, there are all kinds of “craziness” in child education out there. As GMTplus7 humorously acknowledged, his craziness is to go after the merit-money. Well, you know, the truth is that a great number of Harvard and other top school admits would/could have merit money or a full ride somewhere, so @GMTplus7, you are playing the same game. There’s not a separate route leading to merit-money. It’s all about working to become what the colleges want most so at the end of the process you have choices. </p>
<p>Benley, I wish I could agree that the “HYP or bust” attitude was uncommon. I’ve seen it too many times, both IRL and on CC to agree–the problem it creates is college lists with reaches and safeties, but no matches. I know it’s not a tragedy for very qualified kids to go to the University of Maryland, when they could have gone, say, to Tufts, but it happens pretty often.</p>
<p>Is there evidence to suggest that this parental craziness actually works? Not just in terms of getting into elite programs but in terms of eventual success? And not just in terms of taking already competent students and making them super-achievers, but in terms of taking average kids and making them “ivy material”? </p>
<p>The reason I ask is that I think high expectations are great. (Can I admit that I didn’t find “Tiger Mom” as obnoxious as most people did?) But I’m not sure that an “average” kid can really be packaged for success at an elite university. I think it was Mark Twain who was quoted as saying something like “Don’t waste time trying to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time and annoys the pig.”</p>
<p>I think packaging can work–but what doesn’t work, in my opinion, is assuming what constitutes a good package in another country will also constitute a good package at selective private US colleges. </p>
<p>Well, for Asian immigrants, good luck with whatever “packaging” they can find useful and affordable. With an “anti-hook” born with, let’s say it does take a whole lot more than “packaging” to get in the elite colleges! </p>
<p>If one is in California where the Asians top 13% of the population, state schools are considered far superior to Tufts.</p>
<p>I guess “packaging” wasn’t the right word in my question above. I agree “packaging” and “positioning” can be effective. Encouraging talented kids to stick with an instrument or enter competitions rather than doing things just for fun probably does pay off in many cases.</p>
<p>I wonder more about the efforts you can witness here on the boards where parents want to take a 7th grader who is working a year above grade level and put him a super-accelerated program that starts with calculus in 9th grade or where parents are putting a lot of effort into raising a student’s average ACT score by five points to make it just barely within the range for elite colleges rather than rethinking their own consideration set. Or, for that matter, the mom of the tall but not particularly athletic 9-year-old that I remember from my son’s basketball team. </p>
<p>Seems like a lot of misplaced effort and frustration on the part of both students and parents. </p>
<p>
I agree. I think the fallacy is thinking those 5 points on the ACT will have a huge impact on the kid’s future. They probably won’t, because in this country, going to Harvard vs. Tufts vs. the state flagship probably won’t have a huge impact on your future. There may be a difference–and you may do somewhat better if you manage to go to Harvard–but the difference isn’t that enormous. In some countries, the difference can be really large, which I think helps generate this attitude.</p>
<p>Absolutely. University of Missouri. Harvard. Tufts. Not much difference. In profs. Student body. Rigor. Future prospects.</p>
<p>Immigrants are really dumb to obsess about Harvard over Mizzou (or other flagships). If they realized that, it would make things easier at Harvard for the rest of us descendants of immigrants!</p>
<p>
Are you being serious or sarcastic? I can’t tell. There are plenty of differences–it’s just that the differences in outcomes are not huge, and are often overstated. And even more importantly, the differences in outcome between one college and one that’s ten slots behind on USNews’ ranking are really quite small.</p>
<p>Sorry. Sarcastic. No excuse. Interesting that you couldn’t tell though.</p>
<p>So, I don’t get this 20+ page thread (serious). Outcomes among Harvard, Tufts, and State U are not “huge” we have been told. Immigrants who don’t read CC shoot for Harvard. What’s the problem? CC families should be perfectly happy at State U. What is all the criticism and in some cases, hand-wringing, all about?</p>
<p>I hope someone can disabuse me of the suspicion that it is about immigrants taking spots at Harvard from Murricans. No, it can’t be, because we’ve been told there’s not much difference between Harvard and State U. And this is a capitalist society that reveres fair competition.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/full-list-of-schools”>http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/full-list-of-schools</a></p>
<p>Harvard: starting salary: 55, 300 and mid career, 119,000
Missouri starting salary 44.300 and mid career 80,000</p>
<p>Now I am more inclined to value quality of life (hard to quantify) and graduate education/intellectual development (can’t find numbers), but it does seem a little insincere to act as if all flagships are the same as the world class universities. There may be world class flagships, but I’m not convinced of that in view of all the cutting of monies for higher education. </p>
<p>
I thought this part of the thread was about Asian immigrants who don’t get into Harvard because they don’t know how to play the game. And their obsession keeps them from taking spots at Tufts from other students, because they go to the state U if they can’t get into Harvard. My observation is that immigrants who are more “Americanized” in their approach do very well at top schools.</p>
<p>mamalion, do you consider those differences in salaries between Harvard and Missouri to be huge? I don’t. They are significant, obviously, but it’s not the difference between being a doctor and a ragpicker.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not for me, at least. For me, it’s about unrealistic expectations and parents living through their kids. It’s about average kids being made to feel like they’re not good enough because they’re not superstars. It’s about kids making decisions that will affect the rest of their lives because that’s what their parents want not because that’s what they want for themselves. It’s about being so focused on a particular prize that you lose sight of the fact that you might not even be in the race. It’s about grooming kids for admission into an elite school rather than living a productive and happy life after graduation. It’s about a lot of things…but it’s not about uppity upstarts. (Heck, I’d love to be an uppity upstart myself!)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What’s interesting is if you use the cost-of-living calculator for Boston vs. Columbia, MO. That Missouri grad is doing just as well if not better:</p>
<p>“If you are currently earning $55,300 in Boston, you need to earn $37,209 to maintain the same standard of living in Columbia, MO.”</p>
<p>“If you are currently earning $119,000 in Boston, you need to earn $80,069 to maintain the same standard of living in Columbia, MO.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Apologies if I missed that. (still searching) Wonder how anyone would know this to be demonstrable trend more than anecdote? Rhetorical…no response invited</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wasn’t directed at you…but interesting that you thought it might have been.</p>
<p>Oh, I was just responding as part of a generic “you”. 
And procrastinating because I should be doing something more productive but very boring. </p>
<p>I think elite schools are great. I think they are worth the money (if you have it), and that they provide an outstanding educational experience. They also provide very good employment opportunities and networks for graduates. But they are not a magic, golden ticket to success. They are not the exclusive path to success. What they are, really, is a very nice luxury that’s nice to have if you can afford it, and a fantabulous deal if you can get it for free or at a huge discount (something that doesn’t happen for other luxuries).</p>