Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother - new book about Chinese parenting

kellybkk · February 13, 2011, 8:45am

The difference between US and Chinese Moms is only one of emphasis. US Moms drive their kids to interminable sports practices at all hours of the day and night. Chinese moms whip their kids to do piano and math. Both sets of parents are completely driven and motivated by the same desire to see their kids succeed.

Frankly, if you go by what Stanford accepts these days, and more and more of the Ivies are doing with their own admissions practices, SPORTS is absolutely the most critical, defining attribute an American applicant can have. Even the best American prep schools have long lists of sports-related choices for applicants to check off. In America, it is the sports star who gets the acceptances. There are 1,000s of Koreans and Chinese with perfect SATs – the American colleges prefer the lacrosse goalie, thank you. . . .

thumper1 · February 13, 2011, 10:28am

kelly, I find your post ironic since MOST of the schools you are talking about do not give athletic scholarships at all. Stanford is an exception…I believe they do but the Ivies…nope.

skrlvr · February 13, 2011, 10:42am

I know this is OT, but I like to counter the above the idea that sports are the golden ticket to the Ivy League or Stanford.

First off, if you aren’t a recruited athlete, then participating in a varsity sport at your high school or a club sport in your community is just like any other extra-curricular activity.

Now, if you are good enough to be recruited, then you might get help from the coach with admissions. Great! But the problem is being good enough, being seen, and then playing a position they need.

First off, take a sport such as soccer. A program will recruit about 5-10 players a year, so let’s say about 7 on the average. So the Ivy League plus Stanford will take about 60 kids in that particular sport. These positions are divided between forwards, midfielders, defenders and keepers. Sometimes, the team doesn’t need a particular position for that recruiting cycle. So if you’re a keeper and the school doesn’t need a keeper, then you’re out of luck no matter how good you are. Stanford this year took no defenders and no keepers. Penn took no defenders and one keeper.

So you get the idea here–you are competing for a very, very limited number of spots (less than 20 spots, most likely) for a particular position for a particular sport. There are hundreds of players interested in those spots.

Next, you need to get a coach interested enough to come see you play. This most likely happens at a showcase event, where there are lots of games being played over a long weekend. A coach has to watch lots of players. Even if a coach does come out to watch, a coach may look at you for a half a game to a game at most. You better have a good day!

And there are elements that are out of your control. Hopefully, you didn’t get hurt the previous week and have to sit out. These showcases happens maybe 2-3 times a year and let’s say you manage to get a coach to finally come out to that last showcase. But let’s say you got hurt the week before and can’t play. You’re out of luck. Also, let’s say you play a weak team, and the coach doesn’t get a good feel for you. Because there is so much talent and so many kids, the coach will simply move on (happened to my kid).

Of course, the most talented in the country (let’s say the top 30) out of the thousands of kids who play soccer will be the most actively pursued. Hopefully, the grades are there as well. But for many of the rest, who have the grades, scores, etc. but are not necessarily at the tippy-top of the recruiting pool but still have the ability, it is very, very difficult.

mafool · February 13, 2011, 11:12am

I didn’t read kellybkk’s post to imply that the applicants were being recruited for sports, but that having played sports competitively is seen as a plus (team work, work ethic, etc.)

musicprnt · February 13, 2011, 1:37pm

I think that claiming sports is the golden ticket to an HYP program is pretty far off the mark, as others have said, it is simply a good EC for the most part. Unless it is in a targeted sport (football and basketball come to mind, where there are signs they will loosen the requirements a bit for an athlete they want) that is a major exception, given the nature of their students and the fact that most sports are pretty much at a club sports level in the ivies and such (they don’t offer athletic scholarships), and the number of athletes that they will recruit that way are going to be very, very small (most of the kids on the sports programs are as good as anyone else in the school).;

And quite honestly, claiming that sports parents are doing what Chua et al do is ludicrous, it is comparing apples and oranges. First of all, by high school, the number of kids seriously going at sports, where they do travel teams, sports clinics, and so forth is really small, and most of that I can guarantee you is not driven by getting junior or missy into an HYP, when kids get serious with sports it is generally with the hope of achieving a goal, whether it is an olympic sport (figure skating, gymnastics, etc) or a pro sport. If they are angling for college, it won’t be a HYP level school (with the exception of stanford, that is division 1), it is going to be division 1 sports school. Plus sports are very different then the violin or the piano, for example, sports are something kids want to do because frankly it is a)fun for them and b)also tends to make one popular in high school, even if they don’t want to pursue it (most kids who play sports in high school, including those going to HYP programs, don’t play competitive sports in college). In some cases there are parents who drive kids in sports, but it isn’t HYP mania, for a lot of kids from hardscrabble places, playing sports could be their ticket to college at any level, and it is what has driven kids from the Pennsylvania steel mills into football 60 or 70 years ago or kids from the inner city into basketball or football, and this is about getting away from a bad background, not about gaming things to get into an HYP

Plus with sports you cannot do a Chua like push to get a kid good, while to become a topnotch athlete you need to work at it, you can’t create a topnotch athlete from someone who doesn’t have the ability. With the exception of some jock high schools that are kind of like a feeder to division 1 sports, most kids playing high school sports are not gifted athletes and aren’t pushed by the their parents. In sports, unlike playing an instrument and athletics, the end result is not some artificial thing, like winning competitions or playing technically at a high level, there are real results there. if you can’t hit a baseball, block in football, dribble a ball in basketball and score, etc, if you can’t demonstrate mastery of the game, no manner of drilling and pushing will make a mediocre person a great athlete (conversely, a kid with great natural ability who doesn’t work or have good coaching won’t make it). Actually, the same thing is true in music and in intellectual pursuits, the real results cannot be horsed, either, the kid who can play paganini 24 at double speed on the violin isn’t necessarily a musician, but a technician…which is what you would get with an athlete so pushed, someone with decent skills but not a good athlete in the sport in question.

Also, you have to look at a cultural perspective to see the fallacy, sports are a part of the popular culture here and is considered a good thing for kids to do.When kids start sports, in things like little league, very few coaches or parents expect the kids to become great athletes, it is about having fun, learning the game, getting exercise and so forth, and while there are ‘sports parents’ who Chua would recognize, their goals are different, most of them (dads usually) have dreams of glory for what they were never able to do…and by high school,it generally becomes clear what kids have the potential to become great athletes, those ones push hard to try go get to the next level (which is generally not HYP), the rest of the kids do it because they enjoy it and they don’t go at it the way the OP said. In US culture, sports are respected, the NFL alone is 9 billion dollar a year industry. More importantly, the sports parents and the less involved ones probably love to watch sports, whereas the Chua type parent in music probably doesn’t even like classical music, it is a different emphasis.

I think sports for the most part is what another poster said, it is part of the whole package, not a golden ticket, any more then music is. I doubt very much, for example, that outside a few exceptions sports will get a B student into an ivy or make much difference over other EC’s, it just doesn’t compute for the whole.

I am also sure that the Chua’s with their focus on music, specifically the violin and piano, are kidding themselves if they think it weighs more heavily then other ecs, I am pretty certain it doesn’t.

oldfort · February 13, 2011, 1:52pm

musicprnt - you are off the mark on sports. Ivies are Division I for most sports, as a lot of other top tier schools. The only thing they don’t do is to give scholarship. At my kids’ private school, which admits over 35% of kids into top 20s, most of them eot in through sports. Some of those do sports for fun, but many of them do it to get recruited, and they most certainly continue to play in college. Most athletes at my kids’ school have private coaches, and got to summer training camp (they know which one to go to in order to be seen). Parents with swimmers spend hundreds on those suits (the kind that dissolve after few wears) in order to help with their kid’s speed.

My kids are not into sports, but I know quite a few kids who have been recruited by HYPS. I will leave other parents who are more of experts in this area to opine.

thumper1 · February 13, 2011, 2:04pm

Gotta ask…why isn’t this thread in the Cafe?

Re: sports…absolutely, kids at the top of their game (the level of recruited athlete) and are top students too are going to have an edge at tippy top schools.

But so would an actress (e.g. Brooke Shields) or a musician who was reknowned.

Sports are a fabulous EC…but they are NOT the only EC that top schools look at. I thought Kelly’s post implied that sports ECs were the big ticket item for every Ivy applicant to have in order to be considered for admittance. Since I KNOW a lot of Ivy students and grads who did NO sports (none) in high school, I would have to disagree with that assessment.

oldfort · February 13, 2011, 2:18pm

The only difference is a soccer coach at one of those schools would get guaranteed spots for top players, but an orchestra director or head of drama department wouldn’t be given guaranteed spots for top talents.

thumper1 · February 13, 2011, 2:32pm

True…and isn’t that ridiculous.

And musicians and other artists aren’t “recruited” either. I mean…when did you ever hear of a college doing a recruited weekend (all expenses paid) for arts students? Don’t get me going!!!

Pizzagirl · February 13, 2011, 2:44pm

Me neither, thumper!

Sample of one - two kids in top 20 schools. S had zero sports. D played a sport fr, soph and jr year, had fun but wasn’t #1 or recruitable.

kellybkk · February 13, 2011, 2:52pm

Nicely argued by musicprnt. However, I believe the virtue of this board is that we all tend to argue from our own experience and generalize and then see whether the generalizations indeed are broad enough for consensus. In sports vs. music as a predictor of college application success, I believe that – hands down – the quarterback will always get the nod versus the first seat violinist. That’s the simple test. In my school, Stanford rejected all the URM violinists (State symphony , etc. etc., no slouches) and took the one good running back with middling ACT scores. That’s my experience. And, believe me, that mother had been on that kid for football summer camps and school coaching since 3rd grade. I would put her up against Chua anyday for obsessive-compulsive . . . succeess.

I am not saying that colleges don’t take music stars or physics stars. They do, of course. What I am saying is that if you seemed destined to have only middling grades and smarts (and parents certainly can figure that out by 2nd or 3rd grade!) the key to major college success is NOT more piano lesson or more math prep but sports prep. There are tons of places and coaches that help your kid get really good, really young, and it is surely not all about “talent.” It is also about skill level, and skill level is eminently teachable. The sports tiger moms know that if their kid isn’t smart, then make him/her great on the field of play where it is much easier to stand out as being remarkable. For one thing, the Koreans and Chinese are all off knocking each other out in violin class, so the field of competition in sports never sees the Chuas of this world. My view is: let all the SAT 800’s cancel each other out – the good distance swimmer slips right in with her 600s.

mafool · February 13, 2011, 3:23pm

after reading kellybkk’s post above, I see that I misunderstood her meaning and was probably doing some projecting of my own!

It is our (limited) experience that, all other things being equal, having been a dedicated athlete in HS seems to be helpful. I hope the same is true of participants in other team activities: e.g., orchestra, band, theater, debate, etc., but I don’t have evidence.

Iglooo · February 13, 2011, 3:32pm

mafool, I disagree. My junior D has an athlete friend, also a junior, who got a “commit” from an Ivy with SAT 1800’s. My D on the other hand plays violin:) not joking, first chair, gets music scholarship, etc, scored much higher on SAT. She is in the race to possibly reatake SAT, a few more SAT2’s, carefully select LORs and other fun things college applicants have to do. All other things being equal? Think not. We don’t regret. Playing music has been good for her. College admission wasn’t even close to our mind when she started the lesson.

xrCalico23 · February 13, 2011, 3:35pm

kellybkk, I think the important part and the lesson to take away is to let your child to do whichever meaningful activity it is that he or she loves and excels in, regardless of what effect it has on college admissions or perceived prestige. If a child loves math or music, then being turned away from that because athletics is easier to stand out is just as tragic as someone being turned away from the instrument of their choice in exchange for the limited choice of either violin or piano.

And I don’t see a lack of Tiger parents in the sports world, nor do I see Chua in only Chinese and Korean parents.

mafool · February 13, 2011, 3:42pm

igloo, my “all other things being equal” comment was referring to “dedicated athletes” (the kids who have played for years at a reasonable level) as opposed to true athletic stars. The dedicated atheletes to whom I refer may never participate in varsity sports in college. I am sorry I was not more clear.

skrlvr · February 13, 2011, 3:46pm

First you said

And then you said

First, you contrast lacrosse and perfect SATs, then football versus musicians, and then swimmers and perfect SATs. You are lumping too many different ideas together here, essentially arguing that sports trumps everything.

My response would be–not all sports are the same. Lumping recruiting for lacrosse with football is not fair. Lacrosse and swimming (minus the divers) holds rosters of about 30, while football about three times as many, usually around 100. But get this–there are over a million boys playing high school football. You have to be very, very good to get recruited.

Second, if you really, really want an edge at an Ivy-League school in terms of pure statistics, then you should try to get a 2300-2400 on the SAT. Princeton lists following percentage of applicants accepted by SAT range (in 2009):

[Princeton</a> University | Undergraduate Admission](<a href=“http://www.princeton.edu/admissions.pdfs/Profile_GC_09.pdf]Princeton”>http://www.princeton.edu/admissions.pdfs/Profile_GC_09.pdf)

2300-2400: 26.3%
2100-2290: 11.4%
1900-2090: 6.2%
1700-1890: 2.2%
1500-1690: .4%

So it’s not like all those high achieving athletes with middling test scores are pushing out the high achieving test scorers.

You also said this:

This is quite true, but there is also an athleticism involved in many sports (agility, speed, etc). Your innate talent here then becomes very important. You can get faster, quicker, etc. but there are limits here, and sometimes, no matter how much heart you have for it, and how much work you put into it, you just won’t be quick enough, fast enough, big enough, tall enough, etc.

So yes, it is true that there are cases where an athlete with test scores lower than the middle 50 percentile gets in. However, these are apparently the minority at Ivy League colleges, if Princeton is any example. The stars really have to align for this to happen.

Unfortunately, these cases stand out, just as those cases of rejection for kids with high scores, etc. And these ‘stand out’ cases, that really catch our eye because they seem surprising, become the proxy for admission in general.

You’d be really surprised at how many athletes with high test scores and grades there are at some of these places. Just snoop around here on CC.

Bay · February 13, 2011, 3:59pm

^It would be fairly easy to look up the stats (but sorry I don’t want to do it), to see the percentage of recruited athletes in each freshman class or total student body for each college, if you really want to see the benefit of sports for admissions. I don’t think it is as great as kelly thinks. For instance, I think I read that Yale’s freshman class has 13-15% recruited athletes, and there are about 1400 or so in the class, so that would be about 200 students. But Yale offers something like 40 different sports, so it comes out to only about 5 spots per sport on average. That doesn’t make sports look like a very easy way “in.”

Iglooo · February 13, 2011, 4:23pm

I think it’s telling that there’s a term true athletic stars but not true musical or artistic stars. I am sure it’s not because there’s no such talent in the application pool. Just not recognized as special enough to assign a guranteed spot or two.

Bay · February 13, 2011, 4:45pm

If musical and artistic people would get together and form a governing body like the NCAA and compete against other colleges in leagues like collegiate sports do, I’m sure there would be serious recruiting of musicians and artists.

wjb · February 13, 2011, 4:53pm

This is in part an issue of money. Generous alumni and other supporters don’t open their wallets for a great chamber music concert. They do for a great football team.

Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother - new book about Chinese parenting

CONNECT WITH US