Macleans suggests Canadian universities are " 'Too Asian'? "

theboxman wrote:

A recent article  in Maclean's suggests that top Canadian universities are "Too Asian."

I didn't read the article that way.

Jane Jacobs, in her portentous Dark Age Ahead, claims that universities are all about "credentialing" (something that 60s students rebelled against, and lost).  Now that that's a fait accompli, and if credentials are in any way meaningful, who would you want performing your quadruple bypass?

Can't their daddies just buy them a degree so they can get on with their privileged lives? Why should they have to spend part of their lives trying to achieve.  Once they get into the boardroom it will be meetings on the golf links at 2:00.

American discrimination is hardly new, and it will likely get worse rather than better in the next few years. I hear rumblings about repealing pretty much every piece of socially progressive legislation since 1960. But so what? Is it so terrible if we get the academic cream they can't cope with?

Have you ever read the honour roll in the foyer of a Toronto high school? You can tell by the names what group was the latest wave of immigrants in any given year. New kids try harder - their kids slack off.

The article's main problem seems to be that students choose schools where they think they'll fit in. Astonishing! The ones who want to study hard will go to one school; the ones who want to party will go to another. There are plenty of schools to choose from. So the class photo won't look like a gov.ca advertisement, with a carefully-selected colour-mix.... This year, lots of bright-eyed Chinese graduates. In 2020, maybe lots of beautiful Tamil faces.  What's the fuss?

It is insane to address this by race-- it is not race. There is a question of different cultural values. You can sort those who know what they are talking about from those who don't by how they address the differences in part by considering this.

It is a fact that culturally Chinese parents are likely to push their kids hard towards academics and insist on good study habits early. Many Chinese kids will do a tremendous amount of homework without complaint because they have been trained to do so.This is a cultural value-- the academics are emphasized over the social.

And it is important to note this is not just about "Asians" -- it is something many first generation immigrant families will share where parents want their children to succeed and push them harder than the average Canadian to do so.

The idea that this is racial is deeply offensive. Of course the persistence that the idea of race exists in reality is itself offensive.

Race presumes physical attributes/differences are a play. Culture acknowledges that these are all cultural constructs nothing to do with what you look like but the cultural context you have been socialized in.

The use of names for example underscores this problem. A Chinese name does not tell you anything about the person's background or culture.

On the bright side, you're never too young to start learning about things like "work/life balance".  Whether "Asian" or not, we're talking about those students who are the equivalent of the young, single employee at the office who begs for work to take home on the weekend and thinks a 70 hour week is a vacation.  Those of us who don't want to have to keep up with that are likely to try to push back a little.  Why should university be different?

Or perhaps the Asian culture has already solved the work/life balance problem in a more efficient way than western society. I don't see Asians complaining about life/work balance.

sanizadeh wrote:

Or perhaps the Asian culture has already solved the work/life balance problem in a more efficient way than western society. I don't see Asians complaining about life/work balance.

I know there are some people who have a better work ethic and know how to apply themselves better than others. I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it is strictly cultural, or that anyone has the problem "solved". Aside from the fact that out-of-province and non-Canadians have to pay a lot more for their education than our citizens do, some people grow up in an environment that makes them realize that hard work is necessary for their survival and that of their families.

On the other side of things, South Korea and Japan have among the highest suicide rates in the world. And although the official suicide rate in China is half of ours in Canada there are areas of that country (the Yangtse Basin) where the rate is higher,  and if some reports are at least in part true, things are evidently not all roses:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/5907368/Wave-of-sui...

Plus (assuming I take your point, which I don't entirely), not everyone sees the need to complain and burden others with their problems, especially since complaining alone doesn't change much.

But isn't it generally easier to learn to read and write a second language than to learn to speak it if you are not learning it at a fairly young age, especially when the sound set of Chinese languages is so different from English?  I can translate scholarly articles that are written in French but it would be harder for me to give a lecture in French.

I think the average student could stand to shift his or her work/life balance slightly in the direction of "work", though, while still having time for socializing etc.

CYS wrote:

This, IMO, is also why so many Chinese immigrants can read and write English, but can't converse intelligibly in the language. Conversational language is not as esteemed in Confucian doctrine as the written word.

Is there a source available for this nonsense?

Hi CYS, your post at #20 is highly problematic and largely based on North American myths and prejudices about Asian culture. To be specific, it is not based on concrete evidence or true in any universe but imaginary ones. Please keep in mind when posting on issues of race and colour that Canada operates in the throes of white privilege, and most of our assumptions about marginalized cultures are as firm as vapour.

absentia wrote:

I don't know about the Cunfucian connection, but there was a complaint in an early (maybe the first, even?) response to that article by a Canadian who went to Waterloo with high-achieving Chinese students, that the TA's were unhelpful, because their spoken English was unintelligible. I have experienced a little of this problem myself, with foreign students. Perhaps a little more socializing would develop better communication skills.

This doesn't really have much to do with lifestyle or social skills. Most TAs are graduate students, and an absolute majority of graduate students in science and engineering are international students who have been in this country for 1-2 years max (I typically don't have more than 1-2 Canadian students out of 20-30 in my graduate classes). I can assure you that if you move to another non-English speaking country, you will be  hardly intelligible in the first couple of years.

Alternatively, we can encourage the "Canadian" students to do a little less partying and drinking and "socializing", and instead get better marks that would allow them into the graduate school. But that's probably too much to ask.

From Jezebel: Yes, Calling A School "Too Asian" Is Racist

Quote:

Stephanie Findlay and Nicholas Kohler of Macleans don't come out and say that Canadian colleges have too many Asian students. They let a group of anonymous white kids do that...

Lest you think these kids are racist or something, Findlay and Kohler helpfully explain that, "'too Asian' is not about racism, say students like Alexandra: many white students simply believe that competing with Asians — both Asian Canadians and international students — requires a sacrifice of time and freedom they're not willing to make." From there, the piece — which was briefly removed from Maclean's website but is now back up (albeit in edited form; you can read the original here) — becomes a weird mashup of stereotypes and concern-trolling. Asian students "work harder" and "tend to be strivers, high achievers and single-minded in their approach to university." They have pushy parents, are anti-social, and when they do socialize they do so with — horrors — other Asians. Universities need to do something about this terrible problem before they become "places of many solitudes, deserts of non-communication."

It's kind of unclear what this even means, but Findlay and Kohler go on to say that the real problem isn't that colleges are "too Asian" but that they're too segregated — they're "at risk of being increasingly fractured along ethnic lines." Of course, blaming racial segregation on the idea that immigrant groups "keep to themselves" is an age-old way of dodging the real discrimination these groups face — but okay, having friends of all different backgrounds is an important part of becoming a thoughtful and sociopolitically aware person, and it's reasonable for colleges to do what they can to foster such friendships. But if that's what Findlay and Kohler cared about, why didn't they call their article "Too Segregated?" Why didn't they talk about all groups, including white students, rather than focusing in on (a stereotyped and oversimplified version of) Asian students? Why did they base a whole thesis of anti-Asian resentment on a few quotes by white kids who wouldn't go on the record? Whatever the reason, "students like Alexandra" are here to assure you that it's not about racism.

The Maclean's article said:

Quote:

After California passed Proposition 209 in 1996 forbidding affirmative action in the state’s public dealings, Asians soared to 40 per cent of the population at public universities, even though they make up just 13 per cent of state residents.

Assuming those statistics are correct, why is that a bad thing?

Aside from the probability that it is not the university grads, but the plumbers, framers, electricians and tradespeople who will probably have their pick of work iin upcoming years....

The quote about students not being racist but just wanting to not have to compete reminds me of something I heard at a Reform Party meeting back in the mid-90s

Upset about the government's plan to include sexual orientation under hate crimes protection, and extend benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees, one of the speakers said:

"We can't give equal rights to gays. Studies show that they are better trained and better educated than normal people, so they will get all the jobs."

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

It is a fact that culturally Chinese parents are likely to push their kids hard towards academics and insist on good study habits early. Many Chinese kids will do a tremendous amount of homework without complaint because they have been trained to do so.This is a cultural value-- the academics are emphasized over the social.

While I agree with the rest of your post this is just more stereotyping. IMO Class and immigrant status of the parents are the main characteristics. I live in a city where about 50% of the population is "asian."  Saying Chinese culture is a really large generalization.  I know pre-confederation "chinese" and people who immigrated only a few years ago.  There is no one culture it is like saying native culture with no reference to any specific First Nations history or culture. 

Well I don't think this is-- I see it myself first hand.

And there are reasons for it-- it is definitely widespread enough to be real.

Our son is Chinese and lived in China till he was 10. His approach to homework is like night and day to Canadian students. We have met many other Chinese kids in his school and they all have a very different work ethic. His mother, pushes hard and this is also very typical. Many attend Chinese school on the weekend going to school as habit 6 days a week. This is cultural-- it is a sense of what works and their approach to this kind of work is different.

To clarify I am talking about Chinese culture with respect to education-- that is Chinese kids who went to school in China and were first socialized there. The others, they are Canadian of Chinese ancestry. This conversation is not about "pre-confederation" immigrants. Sure there is some culture you get but the bulk of your cultural experiences come from the environment you experience. Those with Chinese parents who went to school there expressing their values certainly have some Chinese cultural influences (although I don't know many personally) but the ones I know and am talking about are kids that actually went to school there and are now here. They definitely have a cultural approach to study that is different than that predominant here.

I am sure there is racism in the schools but that is not the only reason why the communities often don't spend time together.

Many of the Chinese students also want to spend time with each other-- and they also have more things in common. The approach to study priorities will always drive a wedge between people where the party kids hang out tgether while the working kids go to the library. I am nto sure why we would pretend this does nto happen or that there is anythign wrong with that.

As long as people get in to schools based on merit which apparently is common here and they are treated well once there then this is not a disaster.

There are some concerns however, about the social aspect-- this is not entirely unimportant and it is true that kids who focus exclusively on academics lose out in making social connections that do become important in later life-- including for careers.

Sven wrote:

The Maclean's article said:

Quote:

After California passed Proposition 209 in 1996 forbidding affirmative action in the state’s public dealings, Asians soared to 40 per cent of the population at public universities, even though they make up just 13 per cent of state residents.

Assuming those statistics are correct, why is that a bad thing?

As I read it, the bad part was the implication that prior to this, public universities in CA were actually discriminating against 'Asians'.

Catchfire wrote:

Hi CYS, your post at #20 is highly problematic and largely based on North American myths and prejudices about Asian culture. To be specific, it is not based on concrete evidence or true in any universe but imaginary ones. Please keep in mind when posting on issues of race and colour that Canada operates in the throes of white privilege, and most of our assumptions about marginalized cultures are as firm as vapour.

Cultural differences in learning methods are a reality. The bookish learning developed out of the existence of numerous Chinese dialects and one standard written language. The Confucian culture puts a great deal of emphasis on copying canonical works, both for content and calligraphy. There is nothing culturalist about recognizing this, any more than pointing out that European societies base their educational methods on Greco-Roman practice. And there is no "Asian" culture. Here, we're talking about Han Chinese society, though the Confucian influence spread to neighboring cultures, like Korea. And most Chinese and Chinese-Canadian students aren't "marginalized" any more than their European-Canadian peers--many of them are from very wealthy families, either as foreign students, or the children of Entrepreneur and Investor-class Immigrants. And it's ludicrous to refer to Han Chinese society as "marginalized." This is the culture of one of the world's wealthiest countries, with a huge trade surplus with the U.S. and a massive, nuclear-armed military that scares the crap out of its neighbors. And, if you want to look at "marginalized" Asian cultures, look no further than (Inner) Mongolia, East Turkestan and Tibet, which are struggling under the jackboot of Han colonialism and racism, and Communist brutality.

Quote:

But isn't it generally easier to learn to read and write a second language than to learn to speak it if you are not learning it at a fairly young age, especially when the sound set of Chinese languages is so different from English?

A prof I had was a Mormon missionary in Taiwan. He found Mandarin extremely easy to learn to speak, becoming fluent in about six months. The tones in Putonghua exist in English, but just get used for different things (intonation in questions, etc.) and many of the sounds are found in English. The writing system is a pain to learn, but this goes for native Chinese speakers, too, especially if they speak something like Min. Mandarin and English syntax and basic grammar are similar enough to pick up quickly. The nasty aspect of English is the complex phonetics. English has thousands of possible syllables and consonant-clusters, including voiced final consonants. Unlike English grammar, this is a major pain for Chinese speakers to learn, but ESL schools in China spend very little time on conversational skills, devoting most of the lessons to teaching the spoken word. Every language has its quirks. For instance, Slavic languages have very involved grammar for English speakers, while English tenses and articles drive Slavic ESL learners nuts. Phonotactics is the big headache for Chinese ESL students, but they don't get enough conversational practice. And the increasing tendancy of Chinese youth and their parents to only socialize amongst other Chinese-Canadians and use things like Chinese ATM options isn't helping. You ultimately learn to speak a language by actually speaking it, but too many Chinese-Canadians are continuing to converse exclusively in Mandarin, or Cantonese.