@mott-the-hoople saidYes, and don't we think that their study habits has a lot to do with their high IQ?
do you think their IQ has anything to do with it?
It's all about values for various ethnic groups.
@earl-of-trumps saidA positive racist stereotype for them.
Yes, and don't we think that their study habits has a lot to do with their high IQ?
It's all about values for various ethnic groups.
A negative racist stereotype for others.
"In contrast to their relative standing in today's labor market, in 1960 U.S.-born men in all Asian groups earned substantially less than comparable whites. We explore explanations for the wage gap and find that all of the variables that might plausibly account for it, such as Asian/white differences in schooling, labor force participation, entrepreneurial and agricultural employment, English proficiency, enclave activity, and foreign-born parentage, have either no effect or only modest effects on the 1960 wage gap and its subsequent reduction. Our findings suggest that anti-Asian labor market discrimination was the predominate cause of the 1960 wage gap and that most of the 1960 to 1980 improvement in the relative wages of U.S.-born Asian men stemmed from a decline in anti-Asian discrimination."
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2089668
So no, their "values" didn't get better.
"The myth continues to be used as evidence against institutional racism. If Asians can do well, it says, any minority group can, if they just apply themselves. But research suggests that the upward mobility of Asian Americans over the past century is actually a result of post-war declines in labor market discrimination against them as compared to other minorities. Meanwhile, restrictive immigration policies since 1965 have favored and attracted highly educated Asians to the United States. In contrast, most African Americans can trace their family history back to generations of slavery, followed by a century and a half of systematic racism.
Even as labor market discrimination against Asian Americans has declined, studies show that institutional discrimination never disappeared. Asian job applicants with “whitened” first names received a 7 percent higher callback rate than those with “ethnically Asian” first names. Asian renters and home buyers are told about and shown fewer units than whites with the same economic background, and Asian home buyers are offered less financial help."
https://civilrights.org/edfund/resource/stop-pointing-asian-americans-downplay-racism-universities/
@earl-of-trumps saidIQ has little to do with study habits. The higher the IQ the less you need to study.
Yes, and don't we think that their study habits has a lot to do with their high IQ?
It's all about values for various ethnic groups.
@mott-the-hoople saidBeing hyper-selected could theoretically imply that they are from wealthy enough families to come over, and their wealth has guaranteed a modicum of success for them over blacks and other immigrant groups... But I do not think that actually bears out over the long run since many of the Asian immigrants are small business owners, often struggling in the lower middle class, but have children who go on to become very successful.
do you think their IQ has anything to do with it?
It could also imply that those who make it, while not necessarily wealthy, are hyper-selected as being ambitious enough to move over or at least sacrifice to acquire the means.
But IDK.
Would be quite a topic for testing the bounds of the new moderation system then, wouldn't it?
@philokalia saidChinese immigrants to the US are 15 times more likely to graduate college than Chinese in China:
Being hyper-selected could theoretically imply that they are from wealthy enough families to come over, and their wealth has guaranteed a modicum of success for them over blacks and other immigrant groups... But I do not think that actually bears out over the long run since many of the Asian immigrants are small business owners, often struggling in the lower middle ...[text shortened]... K.
Would be quite a topic for testing the bounds of the new moderation system then, wouldn't it?
"For example, 3.6 percent of Chinese non-migrants report having a college education whereas 52.7 percent of Chinese immigrants in the U.S. report having a college degree. Put differently, Chinese migrants in the U.S. are 15 times more likely than their non-migrant counterparts in China to have a college degree.
This hyper-selectivity drives the perception that all Chinese are educated, smart, hard-working, and deserving. Among the Chinese second generation, the proportion of college graduates is 61.2 percent, compared to only 32.2 percent among non-Hispanic whites of native parentage."
http://www.wipsociology.org/2018/06/20/hyper-selectivity-and-the-asian-second-generation-advantage/
The author points out that Nigerian immigrants have similar educational achievements but:
"Facilitating the racial mobility of Asian Americans is the group size of Chinese as the largest Asian ethnic group, accounting for 18.1 percent of the Asian population in the U.S. In contrast, in spite of the hyper-selectivity of Nigerian immigrants and the equally high level of education attained by the second generation, Nigerians comprise less than 1 percent of the Black population in the U.S. This fraction is not enough to change the cognitive construction of blackness, which was born out of the legacy of slavery, entrenched by Jim Crow laws, and embedded through the de jure and now de facto practice of the one-drop rule of hypo-descent.
While Asians originate from more than 20 countries, the largest five Asian groups —Chinese, Indians, Filipinos, Vietnamese and Koreans—account for 83 percent of the Asian population in the U.S. With the exception of Vietnamese, four of these five groups are also hyper-selected. Due to racialization, perceptions of Chinese also extend to other Asian immigrant groups such as Vietnamese, even though the latter group is not hyper-selected. We refer to this process as the “spill-over effects” of hyper-selectivity."
Here's an interesting interview with Jennifer Lee, a professor of sociology at the University of California at Irvine, and Min Zhou, a professor of sociology at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore and the University of California at Los Angeles regarding their book The Asian American Achievement Paradox:
"There is a popular misconception that Asian Americans attain high levels of education and achieve success because they hold the “right” cultural traits and values, but this argument is as misguided as attributing poverty among the poor to their “wrong” traits and values. This line of reasoning also fails to acknowledge important structural and institutional factors and, in the case of Asian Americans, fails to acknowledge the pivotal role of U.S. immigration law. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 gave preferences to highly-educated, highly-skilled applicants from Asia, which, in turn, ushered in a new stream of Asian immigrants of diverse skills and socioeconomic backgrounds. Some Asian immigrant groups are hyper-selected, meaning they are doubly positively selected; they are not only more highly educated than their compatriots from their countries of origin who did not immigrate, but also more highly educated than the U.S. average…
Hyper-selectivity has consequences for immigrant and second-generation mobility. First, the children (the 1.5 and second generation) of the hyper-selected groups begin their lives from more advantaged “starting points” than the children of other immigrant groups, like Mexicans, or native-born minorities. Second, because Chinese and other Asian immigrants are disproportionately highly educated, the host society perceives that all Asian Americans are highly educated and high achieving, and then attributes their success to their culture, values, and grit. But this is fallacious reasoning; it is akin to making generalizations about Americans based on only those who graduate from prestigious universities..."
"In our research, we learned about the hidden ways in which Asian Americans benefit from racial stereotypes in schools. Asian American students are positively stereotyped by teachers, guidance counselors, school administrators, and their peers as smart, high-achieving, and hard-working. As a result, they are more likely to be placed in competitive academic tracks, and are also more likely to be offered help with their college applications. These opportunities were not accorded to the Mexican, white, or black students in our study."
"There is third consequence of hyper-selectivity among immigrant groups: when they settle in the United States, they build “ethnic capital” by relying on their “human capital.” Ethnic capital includes ethnic institutions—such as after-school tutoring programs and SAT preparatory classes—which highly educated immigrants have the resources and know-how to import from their countries of origin and recreate in the U.S. via ethnic entrepreneurship to benefit themselves and their children. The benefits of these programs cross class lines and reach working-class coethnics.
Ethnic capital also translates into knowledge via social networks. In ethnic organizations such as churches and community centers, immigrant parents circulate invaluable information about which neighborhoods have the best public schools, the importance of being in AP classes, and navigating the college admissions process...This, in turn, helps the children whose immigrant parents toil in factories and restaurants attain educational outcomes that defy expectations."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/08/04/authors-discuss-reasoning-behind-high-levels-asian-american-achievement
