On "Chinese Parenting"

Seems like everyone was writing about Amy Chua this week. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. I dare you to go ahead and google her. You’ll be overwhelmed.

Her latest book, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother” was published this week. Roughly speaking, it is part memoir and part how-to-guide for those interested in employing so-called, Chinese methods to raise Western children. She is a Professor of Law at Yale Law School, holding two degrees from Harvard. She is the author of two books on globalization and the law.

But it was this essay in the Wall Street Journal that started the controversy – Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior. And yes, the title says it all.  In it, there is something for everyone.

For those of you who like facts and figures, there is this:

Despite our squeamishness about cultural stereotypes, there are tons of studies out there showing marked and quantifiable differences between Chinese and Westerners when it comes to parenting. In one study of 50 Western American mothers and 48 Chinese immigrant mothers, almost 70% of the Western mothers said either that "stressing academic success is not good for children" or that "parents need to foster the idea that learning is fun." By contrast, roughly 0% of the Chinese mothers felt the same way. Instead, the vast majority of the Chinese mothers said that they believe their children can be "the best" students, that "academic achievement reflects successful parenting," and that if children did not excel at school then there was "a problem" and parents "were not doing their job." Other studies indicate that compared to Western parents, Chinese parents spend approximately 10 times as long every day drilling academic activities with their children. By contrast, Western kids are more likely to participate in sports teams.

For the arm-chair anthropologist, this:

What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences. This often requires fortitude on the part of the parents because the child will resist; things are always hardest at the beginning, which is where Western parents tend to give up. But if done properly, the Chinese strategy produces a virtuous circle. Tenacious practice, practice, practice is crucial for excellence; rote repetition is underrated in America. Once a child starts to excel at something—whether it's math, piano, pitching or ballet—he or she gets praise, admiration and satisfaction. This builds confidence and makes the once not-fun activity fun. This in turn makes it easier for the parent to get the child to work even more.

And for the voyeurs among us, this:

A lot of people wonder how Chinese parents raise such stereotypically successful kids. They wonder what these parents do to produce so many math whizzes and music prodigies, what it's like inside the family, and whether they could do it too. Well, I can tell them, because I've done it. Here are some things my daughters, Sophia and Louisa, were never allowed to do:

• attend a sleepover
• have a playdate
• be in a school play
• complain about not being in a school play
• watch TV or play computer games
• choose their own extracurricular activities
• get any grade less than an A
• not be the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama
• play any instrument other than the piano or violin
• not play the piano or violin.

I actually have a great interest in this topic. I worked for a number of years in a management-level position for Head Start in San Francisco’s Chinatown. For those of you not in the know, Head Start is a federally-funded pre-school program for low-income children and their families. In addition to early education services, programs are mandated to provide health, social services and parent involvement components as well.
While some would disagree with me, I believe Head Start to be a quintessentially American, Western-style program in its execution. The early childhood philosophy squarely positions the individual child as the center of his/her educational experience, with great emphasis put on such concepts as developing good self-esteem and social-emotional health. Curriculum implementation must be “developmentally appropriate,” roughly meaning play is central to optimizing the manner in which 3-5 year olds learn. Parents are taught they are their child’s first and most important teacher, which can be taken by some as an uncomfortable call to altering the power balance between home, and the all-knowing-and-powerful-always-to-be-respected-at-all-costs, teachers. And, parents must be given a say in how programs are run.

While perhaps somewhat stereotypical, it is fair to say that for better or worse, not the way everyone in the entire world views best practices in education. And unfortunately, too many people in our early childhood education world believe our way to be the BEST AND ONLY way to educate children, rather than a simple reflection and extension of our culture. The way that is perhaps best to educate children in our country, given the qualities we believe are important for adults to have and maintain in order to be successful in a capitalist, Western-style democracy. In my experience, very little real understanding that many immigrants come to this country having been educated – sometimes very well, at that – under a system with very different philosophical underpinnings, and that the type of arrogance we often display as know-it-all educators does little to try to build the parent-teacher relationships we speak of as being of such great importance. This was all true of my experience in San Francisco’s Chinatown.

Some of my best memories of those years are the many, many direct conversations (through a translator, of course) I had with the wonderful parents enrolled in our program. True, many of them did not understand why their children brought home art work every day, if it was already evident they were not going to grow up to be Picasso. And many considered the amount of time spent singing in circle time a waste, if their own child could not carry a tune. And never mind the endless explanations of why 3 year olds do not need homework, and mimeographed dittos were a no-no.

But, they did quickly understand that American culture, and therefore as a reflection – education, was different than what they had experienced in China. And out of respect for their experiences – especially their educational successes – I never alluded to our system being better, only different. Perhaps more appropriate to time and place, given cultural precepts and the belief in the qualities necessary to achieve what we define as “success.”

They quickly came to understand that such qualities as independence, creativity, and good problem-solving abilities are not only highly valued in our culture, but come with a deep belief that without them, one cannot succeed. No, you don’t have to be a master at art to do it, but the creativity one learns by simply letting go with the paint brush, is the same type of freeing-up necessary to envision a successful business. And no, you don’t have to be Mozart to learn just enough discipline in music class to help you make it through a bad business climate, when others just pack it in. And yes, the skills learned on the play yard are the same ones a good manager needs in order to size up a situation quickly and fairly act upon it.  No, many parents didn’t like it, but it would be a mistake to say they didn’t understand it. But that doesn’t mean they were not constantly asking how long they needed to endure this type of outlook on education. “Do they do artwork in kindergarten?” “Will they have to take a musical instrument in school, even if they are not good at it?” “Can they take something else during gym period, if I ask?” Yes. Yes. No.

Now, back to Amy Chua. I really have come to believe she is simply trying to piss people off. The review of her book in last weekend’s San Francisco Chronicle certainly left me scratching my head:

With two gifted daughters, Chua is determined to reverse the predictable "family decline" she sees as a "remarkably common pattern among Chinese immigrants fortunate enough to come to the United States as graduate students or skilled workers over the last fifty years": The immigrant first generation sacrifices all (never scrimping on strictness) for the children's education and expected future success; the second generation will "typically be high-achieving" but less draconian with the children; the privileged third generation "will feel that they have individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution," leading to disrespect and disobedience ... and guaranteed generational decline.

"Well, not on my watch," Chua decides.

A professor of law at Yale University, desperately afraid her children and grandchildren might feel they have individual rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution? She sure managed to piss me off. If I were a student at Yale Law School right now I would not be too happy.

Not.Reading.This.Book. No.Way. But I do love the title.  Battle Hymn.  Tiger Mother.  A great, cultural juxtaposition. 

And not reading anything she ever writes about the law, either.