Tag Archives: Charles Murray

Ancient Chinese Secret: Why Asian Students Excel Academically

by Christopher Paslay

Despite institutional racism and discriminatory affirmative action policies, Asian students find ways to succeed.  

In the 1970s there was a commercial for Calgon laundry detergent where a middle-aged housewife asks an Asian owner of a dry cleaner how he got his shirts so clean:

Housewife: How do you get shirts so clean, Mr. Lee?

Mr. Lee: Ancient Chinese secret.

At the end of the commercial Mr. Lee’s secret is spoiled by his wife when she shouts out from the back of the shop, We need more Calgon!

A similar question could be asked of Asian American students regarding their academic excellence:  Is there some ancient cultural secret?   How is it that Asian American students dominate their White, Hispanic and Black peers in nearly every subject at every grade level from the start of kindergarten to graduate school?  And the word dominate is not an overstatement.  Consider the results of the following tests:

2002 Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (Conducted at the start of Kindergarten):

  • Math: Asian 22.2; White 21; Hispanic 17.1; Black 16.5
  • Reading: Asian 25.7; White 23.2; Black 19.9; Hispanic 19.5

2011 NAEP National Results Grade 4:

  • Math: Asian 256; White 249; Hispanic 229; Black 224
  • Reading: Asian 235; White 231; Hispanic 206; Black 205
  • Geography: Asian 224; White 224; Hispanic 197; Black 192

2011 NAEP National Results Grade 8:

  • Math: Asian 303; White 293; Hispanic 270; Black 262
  • Reading: Asian 275; White 274; Hispanic 252; Black 249
  • Geography: Asian 224; White 224; Hispanic 197; Black 192
  • Writing: Asian 165; White 158; Hispanic 136; Black 132

2011 SAT:

  • Math: Asian 595; White 535; Hispanic 462; Black 427
  • Reading: White 528; Asian 517; Hispanic 451; Black 428
  • Writing: Asian 528; White 516; Hispanic 444; Black 417

2011 ACT (National Average Composite Score):

  • Asian 23.6; White 22.4; Hispanic 18.7; Black 17

2010 Graduate Record Exam (GRE) General Test Score:

  • Quantitative Reasoning: Asian 622; White 569; Hispanic 509; Black 431
  • Verbal Reasoning: White 493; Asian 486; Hispanic 446; Black 398
  • Analytical Writing: White 4; Asian 3.9; Hispanic 3.7; Black 3.4

2010 Law School Admissions Test (LSAT):

  • White 152.88; Asian 152.03; Hispanic 146.57; Black 142.25

What’s interesting about the academic success of Asian Americans is that this success has been achieved in the face of some pretty serious racial discrimination.  Ronald Takaki, an Asian American emeritus professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote in his critically acclaimed book A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America:

Asian Americans began arriving in America long before many European immigrants. . . .  As “strangers” coming from a “different shore,” they were stereotyped as “heathen” and unassimilable.  Wanted as sojourning laborers, the Chinese were not welcomed as settlers.  During an economic depression, Congress passed the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act—the first law that prohibited the entry of immigrants on the basis of nationality.  The Chinese condemned this restriction as racist and tyrannical.  “They call us ‘Chink,’” complained a Chinese immigrant, cursing the “white demons.”  “They think we no good!  America cut us off.  No more come now, too bad!”  The Japanese also painfully discovered that their accomplishments in America did not lead to acceptance.  During World War II, the government interned a hundred twenty thousand Japanese Americans, two-thirds of them citizens by birth.  “How could I as a sixth-month-old child born in this country,” asked Congressman Robert Matsui years later, “be declared by my own Government to be an enemy alien?”

Discrimination of Asian Americans by the U.S. government continues even to this day.  Affirmative action policies are particularly harsh against Asian Americans, policies which ultimately keep many deserving Asian American students out of the nation’s top universities simply because too many of them are highly qualified.  According to an article in the New York Times headlined “Asian Americans in the Argument”:

“Admission to the nation’s top universities and colleges is a zero-sum proposition,” asserts the brief from the 80-20 National Asian American Educational Foundation, one of the groups opposed to affirmative action. . . . Particularly hard-hit are Asian-American students, who demonstrate academic excellence at disproportionately high rates but often find the value of their work discounted on account of either their race, or nebulous criteria alluding to it.” . . .

“If you look at the Ivy League, you will find that Asian-Americans never get to 20 percent of the class,” said Daniel Golden, author of “The Price of Admission” and editor at large for Bloomberg News. “The schools semiconsciously say to themselves, ‘We can’t have all Asians.’ ” Mr. Golden says it is helpful to think of Asians as the new Jews because some rules of college admissions, like geographic diversity, were originally aimed at preventing the number of Jews from growing too high.

So how, despite institutional racism and systematic government discrimination via affirmative action, do Asian American students manage to succeed in school?  How do they not only dominate their Black and Hispanic counterparts but also out-perform the dominant White establishment?  Again, is there some (to refer to the Calgon commercial) “ancient Chinese secret”?

A possible answer lies in family, work ethic and the priorities of the Asian culture itself.  According to the New York Times Article “For Asians, School Tests Are Vital Steppingstones”:

Almost universally, the Asian students described themselves on one edge of a deep cultural chasm.

They cited their parents’ observance of ancient belief systems like Confucianism, a set of moral principles that emphasizes scholarship and reverence for elders, as well as their rejection of child-rearing philosophies more common in the United States that emphasize confidence and general well-being.

Several students said their parents did not shy away from corporal punishment as a means of motivating them. And they said that rigorous testing was generally an accepted practice in their home countries, with the tests viewed not so much as measures of intelligence, but of industriousness.

“Most of our parents don’t believe in ‘gifted,’ ” said Riyan Iqbal, 15, the son of Bangladeshi immigrants, as he and his friends — of Bengali, Korean and Indian descent — meandered toward the subway from the Bronx High School of Science one recent afternoon. “It’s all about hard work.”

Moral principles.  Scholarship.  Reverence for elders.  Hard work.

Another possible factor of Asian success: Home environment.  Consider these findings from the Educational Testing Service’s 2007 policy information report, The Family: America’s Smallest School:

Percentage of Out-of-Wedlock Births to Women Under Age 30, by Racial/Ethnic Group, 2003-2004:

  • Asian 16; White 34; Hispanic 46; Black 77

Percentage of Children in Families Where No Parent Has Full-Time, Year-Round Employment, by Racial/Ethnic Group, 2005:

  • White 27; Asian 32; Hispanic 39; Black 50

Percentage of Children Ages 3 to 5 Who Were Read to Every Day in the Past Week by a Family Member, 2005:

  • White 68; Asian 66; Black 50; Hispanic 45

Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Who Reported Missing Three or More Days of School in the Previous Month, 2005:

  • Asian 12; White 19; Hispanic 23; Black 24

According to the ETS report, Asian American students also watched far less television, played far less video games, and had higher parental involvement in school than did their White, Hispanic and Black counterparts.

Although the late Harvard professor Richard J. Herrnstein and American Enterprise Institute Bradley Fellow Charles Murray used 70 years worth of cognitive tests to conclude that Asians have an average IQ of 105 (which they claimed was 5 points higher than Whites, 15 points higher than Hispanics, and 20 points higher than Blacks), the fact that Asian Americans dominate their peers academically clearly has more to do with nurture rather than with nature.

In other words, the Asian American culture is very academically oriented.  This, above all else, could be the “ancient Chinese secret.”

1 Comment

Filed under Achievement Gap

Florida Board of Education Holds Minorities to Lower Standards

by Christopher Paslay

By 2018 in Florida, 74 percent of black students, 81 percent of Hispanics, 88 percent of white students and 90 percent of Asians should be reading at grade level.

In their controversial book The Bell Curve, the late Harvard professor Richard J. Herrnstein and American Enterprise Institute Bradley Fellow Charles Murray wrote about the ethnic differences in cognitive ability:

In discussing IQ tests, for example, the black mean is commonly given as 85, the white mean as 100, and the standard deviation as 15.  But the differences observed in any given study seldom conform exactly to one standard deviation. . . . A total of 156 studies are represented in the plot, and the mean B/W difference is 1.08 standard deviations, or about 16 IQ points.

In a nutshell, Herrnstein and Murray used 70 years worth of cognitive tests to conclude that Asians have an average IQ of 105, that whites have an average IQ of 100, that Latinos have an average IQ of 90, and that blacks have an average IQ of 85; these findings led many to accuse Herrnstein and Murray of practicing scientific racism.

It appears, at least at first glance, that the Florida Board of Education is embracing such racism by holding minority students to lower standards in reading than Asians and whites.

According to The New York Times:

In Florida, halving the achievement gap means that by 2018, 72 percent of low-income children, 74 percent of black students, 81 percent of Hispanics, 88 percent of white students and 90 percent of Asians should be reading at grade level. The projected gains would be larger for those on the lower end of the scale.

“This is a snapshot of roughly halfway through that 10-year mark,” said the Florida education commissioner, Pam Stewart. “The 100 percent is the ultimate goal, and that is stated within the strategic plan.”

But parent advocacy groups, and some school board presidents and superintendents, said establishing lower goals for black and Hispanic students sends a disturbing message that those students are not as capable as others.

“Setting goals on skin color implies it somehow affects what is being measured,” said Melissa J. Erickson, president of Fund Education Now, a parent-driven advocacy organization in a letter sent Wednesday to the federal Department of Education. “I believe our nation long ago abandoned this type of view.”

Superintendents also say there is an element of uncertainty in the targets because the state will introduce a new national assessment in two years.

“We have no idea how students will perform or how individual subgroups will differ in their performance,” said the Miami-Dade County schools superintendent, Alberto M. Carvalho, calling it “unthinkable” that the state would set these goals at this time.

But Florida is not alone in setting interim goals by race and other categories. An analysis this week by Education Week found that of the 34 states with new accountability plans, only 8 set the same targets for all students.

So much for the motto “high expectations for all.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Achievement Gap

Obsession with Race is Killing Academic Excellence

by Christopher Paslay

Policies aimed at making all students the same are crippling achievement. 

The Handicapper General—AKA the current United States White House—has struck again.  President  Barack Obama recently signed an executive order to enact an educational initiative aimed at helping not all American children in public schools succeed but only those of certain races.  Called the “White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans,” the policy will dole out resources to children not based on merit or achievement, but by skin color.    

According to Education Week:

The new education initiative for African Americans joins similar White House efforts aimed at Hispanics, American Indian and Alaska Natives, and Asian-American and Pacific Islanders. President Obama, in 2010, set up a similar effort to bring attention to, and strengthen, the nation’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities, or HBCUs.

(Note: Current White House education policies designed specifically for white students, who are innocent of the crimes of their ancestors, do not exist.)  

The goals of the new White House education initiative are to close the racial achievement gap and give all children an equal opportunity at a quality education.  But it goes further than that.  The initiative also advocates for equal achievement.  Thus, if two groups of students are given the same educational opportunity and one group outperforms the other, such achievement must be equalized to ensure that everyone is the same (that there is no achievement gap).            

While these goals seem admirable on the surface, they are promoting a brand of educational socialism that is having a harmful overall effect on high achievers in American public schools.  Instead of pushing assimilation (encouraging struggling groups to adopt the culture and work habits of their more successful peers), initiatives like those enacted by the White House call for cultural pluralism (forcing the successful groups to compromise their culture and work habits to fit those of the struggling students).       

Take, for example, the White House’s goal of addressing the disproportionate use of suspensions and expulsions of African Americans in schools.  What this goal implies is that somehow black children are being unfairly expelled and suspended from school (civil rights organizations like to attribute this to racism and cultural insensitivity of white teachers), and that more needs to be done to keep such children in classrooms.  In other words, the perspective is that there is nothing inherently wrong with the behavior or actions of these children, but that the system is simply failing to accommodate their needs.  Put still another way, the children with discipline issues don’t need to change their behavior to suit the functionality of the group (assimilation), rather, the group as a whole must be compromised to accommodate the atypical behavior of the child (cultural pluralism).

Interestingly, with all the accusations of racism and discrimination being made by civil rights advocates and folks like Education Secretary Arne Duncan, actual documented cases of teachers discriminating against their students based on race are practically nonexistent.  However, the canard that black students are suspended and expelled at higher rates than their white peers primarily because of the cultural insensitivity of their white teachers (not because of genuine behavior issues that stem from environmental factors such as poverty or a high rate of out-of-wedlock-births) continues to be perpetuated.        

The result of this is that it is harder to suspend and expel violent and unruly students who happen to be African American; these dysfunctional children are forced to coexist with their functional hard working peers, and the integrity and quality of everyone’s education is compromised. 

In this system of cultural pluralism, it’s not that students are late for class, it’s just that being “on-time” is a matter of cultural perspective.  It’s not that students are violent or misbehaving, it’s just that they are frustrated with an oppressive dominant (white) establishment.  It’s not that certain students fail to do their work, it’s just that where these students come from, work ethic has a different definition.  It’s not that students can’t work independently and be responsible for their own grade, it’s just that these particular students come from a collectivist culture and must be allowed to work in a group and share answers. 

In this system of cultural pluralism, students are free to speak a broken, grammatically incorrect form of English known as Ebonics.  In this system, classes are no longer tracked by ability level but are rostered willy-nilly under the guise of having high expectations (but not expectations so high as to believe that these same students could acquire a government ID in order to vote).  In this system, dropouts—who consistently waste everybody’s time including their own—are renamed “pushouts.”  In this system, students are not required to respect the teacher, rather, teachers must respect the students. 

Those who refuse to admit cultural pluralism is harming American education need to understand that our obsession with skin color and closing achievement gaps—our obsession with making everyone the same—is taking a toll on America’s best and brightest. While the average achievement of students hasn’t changed significantly in the past 50 years, “the acquired verbal skills of gifted American students have declined dramatically, as illustrated by the trends in the SAT-Verbal test,” wrote noted education scholar Charles Murray.  “. . . this decline cannot be blamed on changes in the SAT pool.  It’s based on all seventeen-year-olds.  Some sort of failure to educate the gifted is to blame.”   

Scores on Advanced Placement tests have declined as well.  According to a 2010 article in USA Today:

The number of students taking Advanced Placement tests hit a record high last year, but the portion who fail the exams — particularly in the South — is rising as well.

…More than two in five students (41.5%) earned a failing score of 1 or 2, up from 36.5% in 1999. In the South, a Census-defined region that spans from Texas to Delaware, nearly half of all tests — 48.4% — earned a 1 or 2, a failure rate up 7 percentage points from a decade prior and a statistically significant difference from the rest of the country.

While the current White House complains that our education system is no longer producing leading engineers and scientists, this same administration enacts policies that serve to handicap high achievers, thus lowering the bar for all children in an effort to make everyone equal. 

Instead of pushing socialistic policies that prohibit America’s education system from being a genuine world leader, we must fight for freedom and true academic competition—a system based on merit and individual achievement and not on the suffocating basis of race.

6 Comments

Filed under Achievement Gap, Arne Duncan