Following the Why Asians Are Good At Math post I wrote back in February, a few comments came up that I feel are necessary to clarify.
After reading Malcolm Gladwell’s position and possible explanation to the Asian-Americans are good at math phenomenon,
David had this to say:
So following his argument, he is insinuating Asian Americans who aren’t fluent in their native language would struggle with math like every other American whose primary language is English.
While Mr. “Not_An_Asian” followed up with:
Exactly. Something is terribly wrong with this theory. And there are other languages with similar number systems.
As David and company bring up valid arguments and points, the arguments rely on faulty logic.
The intricacies in a few Asian languages MAY present an advantage. With that said, an argument dictating that one characteristic may give a person an advantage fails to imply, without that advantage, that a same person will struggle.
For instance:
Being tall may give you an advantage at basketball. But not being tall doesn’t mean you will struggle, nor does it preclude you from other traits that would give you an advantage (i.e., speed, agility, endurance, etc…)
With that said, the theory attempts to explain why a larger percentage of Asian-Americans (and we know it’s a percentage since the SAT is scored in percentiles), succeed at math.
Language is a clearly identifiable trait you can associate to specific subsets of people and, to a degree, isolate as a factor that contributes to mathematical prowess.
And sure, there are plenty of mathematical genius’ around that are not Asian (Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Steve Nash, etc…). But we are not looking at the outliers, instead we are looking to explain why Asians as a group score higher in math than other groups.
I’m not saying the theory is true, for the pure fact that theories are unproven assertions, my contention is Malcolm Gladwell’s theory presents a new and refreshed theory to explain some American social phenomenon.
Related posts:
Hey, I’m just a kid, but ever hear of Tiger Moms. Asian parents are sometimes very strick with their children. And though some are not, the expectations of their children doing well in school is already ingrained in their culture. DO WELL. Some hard-core countries. DO WELL OR GET KICKED OUT OF SCHOOL BY 8TH GRADE. I’ve even heard of parents being shamed by their schools; if their child is not doing well then they will let their bosses and neighbors know. HIGH STANDARDS AYE.
I bet if their were a law that said to all African American (I am black) and Latino children (High school aged) that they were not allowed to go to school unless their grades went up, they, we, would all be fighting the power along with 1000′s of white teachers lol.
That is soooooo true. I agree with you so much.
I would like to say that Malcolm Gladwell comes to a lot of specious conclusions and his Asian Math Ability schtick is one of them. This maybe why I and many others such as Robb Willer (lecturer in social Psychology at Berkeley) really dislike his work. His reasoning says that, firstly there is a linguistic advantage, secondly a cultural emphasis on education (esp. in maths and science) and he also seems to say that working in paddy fields is dull and repetitive … just like maths…..
ACTUAL experts in the Asia-West divide on math scores come to different conclusions: While Gladwell is 100% correct that there is an enormous cultural component to self-cultivation in mathematical understanding, he fails to notice the glaringly obvious fact that A.K.R. doubts: Chinese children do indeed rack up more maths hours both in and out of the classroom (doing maths puzzle books). But this is not the critical factor, nor is IQ; even though one of the ways that IQ can be roughly measured is with the repetition of a string of numbers, this is not why Asain-Americans have marginally higher IQ scores and that subject is a whole other story. I will quote from
Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 42(3), 2005
PERCEPTIONS OF MATHEMATICS CURRICULA AND TEACHING IN CHINA by ROBERT MOY and STEPHEN T. PEVERLY
“Some aspects of math instruction, such as strict adherence to textbooks and large class instruction, may appear to be less progressive than the practices followed in U.S. schools. On the other hand, China has begun to focus less on teacher-dominated classes and more on teacher-guided math communities that provide children with an atmosphere that encourages exploration, creation, and challenge. Whatever the method, the real backbone of mathematics instruction in China is the preparation that China’s math teachers engage in individually and with colleagues, and the profound understanding of fundamental mathematics they have and continually work to develop.
Yet, it is not methods or teacher knowledge/preparation alone which characterizes China’s math education. Jiang (1995) reported that most Chinese students study hard and hold positive attitudes toward math. In addition, there is the cultural belief that hard work results in high achievement. Although some students in China do not respond positively to math, they are told that math is a requirement and that there are no exemptions. With teacher help (and the consistent pressure of future exams), they manage to make enough progress to solve basic textbook problems. Chinese students also spend more time studying mathematics in school and in the home than their U.S. peers (with students of low achievement receiving even more homework than their more able peers).”
The paper also explains that Chinese method of teaching maths involves mastery of fundamental principles using concrete examples (the abacus and real-world computational problems) and using state experts who issue teacher guides with each order of the Chinese curriculum textbooks.
In short, the factors Language, IQ and Farming Habits probably take a massive backseat to Culture, Quality Of Teaching and the inevitable Stereotyping that has been robustly demonstrated to put girls at a severe maths disadvantage until you tell them “on this test, girls and boys score equally well”.
One thing, I believe, is wrong with this theory: Why don’t Egyptian children excel in Mathematics? I mean, the Hindi-Arab numeral system [not the Hindu-Arab] used in North African countries is very well similar to the Asian system, Once you go through numbers from 1-10; Over 10 you would have ihda-ashar [One and 10] ethna-ashar [Two and 10] and on and on… 20 would be [Eshron], Wahd-wa-Eshron [20 and 1] and you go on.
For fractions, You pretty much say the same thing: thaltha men ‘rb’a [3 from 4] and so on…
Why don’t these children excel at Mathematics, too, If that theory is correct?
“Heredity really” That feels like alot of “Genius-is-inherited” nonsense to me.
I demand 3 things from you:
(1) A proof of Asians having a history of “lots of hours in school in asia”
(2) A proof that such thing [if existent] is inherited genetically.
(3) that you read, for example: “The Talent Code”
Thanks for your time.
Asians are good at math because they have a history of lots of hours in school in asia and coming home and studying over in asia so it’s heredity really.
This still doesn’t explain why Asian Americans are better at math. /:
Its John Nash. Steve Nash is a genius with a basketball.