Does anyone have solid stats and/or links to such data on Vietnamese academic achievement in the US, Canada, Australia and even Europe?

From my (mostly web research), it seems quite impressive. In the future, I'll post url's, studies, etc., on the subject matter.

I'm quite familiar with general 2000 census data type stuff found at asian-nation.org and the like.

I'm also interested in historical stuff like how Vietnamese scholars compared to Chinese scholars during the imperial eras, i.e. civil service exams, literatii, etc. I have almost no knowledge of this stuff. Vietnam's current success/dominance in the math, phsyics, chemistry, Robocon, IT olympiads, etc. is very likely related to this part of Vietnamese history.

It seems to me that these are the most competitive groups in America is, in descending order:

1. Jews
2. Chinese (Chinese may even tie Jewish Americans)
3. Koreans (Koreans are very close to Chinese)
4. Asian Indians, Japanese (a notch or two below Chinese & Koreans)
5. Vietnamese (It is possible that Vietnamese are just a competitive as Asian Indians and Japanese)
6. Middle Easterners --Iranians, Arabs, etc. (But their competitiveness is similar to S. Asians Indians, they are the "cream of the crop" of their countries.)
7. White Protestants ---That's right, we beat whites. Confucianism beats the "Protestant Work Ethic."
8. White Catholics, Filipinos
9. Latinos, Native Americans, Other S.E. Asians.
10. African Americans
11. Samoans --odd, but this S.E. Asian group does worst than African Americans.

The point is: We lose to only richer and more educated Jews, Chinese, Koreans, S. Asian Indians, and Japanese. These groups, minus native Jews, but including more recent Russian Jewish immigrants, come to the US with college degree in hand, for all practical considerations. So they are to a good extent the cream of the crop of their countries. This is true 10 times over for S. Asian Indians. Vietnamese for the most part come to the US dirt poor, and yet beat the native white population, which is the natural bench mark for any immigrant group.

Note, though I do take pride in the educational stats I've seen, my purpose here is more scientific (educational, cultural, sociological, etc.), than mere Viet pride...

Also, if a Viet academic achievement thread already exists, please let me know.

I don't have any stats to back what you are saying. But from everyday life, I would say your list seems right around that area. I thought Samoans were PAcific Islander. Not considered S.E. Asian.

Census data groups all Asians, S.E. Asians, S. Asians (Indians and Pakistanis), and Pac Islanders together. But you're right, Samoans are Pacific Islanders.

because in both jew and chinese culture,education is the key to succes....chinese parents would send thiey childrens to sunday school if its needed....and when comes to chose major in college chinese tend to chose,engineering,medical,and business.....even alot of chinese FOBs dont go to college but they came to america with money in hand,so they tend to open thier own business whether is big or small.....but eventurely it will grow big............take look at flushing NY it was an korean town about 6-7 years ago,and now the majority are chinese...they buys land,buildings for business....thats how flushing grows so fast...and now is a major business area

A lot of Koreans came in the 70s are the one that graduate from colleges, and because of the shortages in some industries in America, a lot of them came to USA.

Same to Asian Indians now.

On other hand, most vietnamese came here as refugees or as refugee's relatives.

All Chinese people need to do is open up Chinese carry-outs and they'll become wealthy.

Your ranking is dubious. Income Census data shows fors Asian are as follow:

1)Indians
2)Japanese and Chinese
3) Vietnamese and Koreans
4) other South East Asiasns

income is connected to education --> what is the basis of your data or is it just based on personal opinion and cultural perceptions

ScanSoul,

I agree with almost to a "T", but... It is not all Jews, nor all Chinese. It is the European Ashkenazi Jews and Cantonese and Fujianese Chinese. I've read on other forums where even Chinese have claimed that during times of the imperial civil service exams, the Cantonese and Fujianese tended to disproportionately outperform the rest of the Chinese provinces. The Sephardic Jews of Spain, and the Oriental Jews of the Mideast aren't anywhere near as competitive as the "white" Jews of Europe. The Sephardic Jews were more aesthetic than scholarly. Isreal is run by the Ashknazi immigrants from Europe and America--not the local Jews. Well over 90% of America's Jews are Ashkenazi. Most of America's Chinese are either Cantonese or Fujianese, be they from the mainland, Tawain, Phillipines, Thailand, Vietnam, Singapore, etc.

And you need to take into account the SES (social economic status) of the competitive groups. It is well known that Vietnamese break the SES rule: Prior to the arrival of the Vietnamese in America, educational researchers thought that family wealth had a lot to do with how a student performed in school, i.e. richer kids got better grades. Their parents were more educated and so on. But Vietnamese violated this general rule. SES was not a good predictor of student achievement. Poor Viets did just as well as wealthy whites. However, SES still does apply between Confucianist Asians. That is, between Protestant Work Ethic and Confucianism, Viets broke the mold when SES was concerned. But between fellow confucianists, it still holds. Richer asians actually do do better than poorer asians. This is why Chinese, Koreans and possibly Japanese beat Viets.

I have seen a study where Chinese Vietnamese, i.e. ethnic Chinese from Vietnam, don't do as well as ethnic Vietnamese. Chinese from Vietnam are virtually all Cantonese. But the study also revealed that the Vietnamese parents of the children involved in the study were slightly more educated than the Chinese parents.

I'm not sure but I suspect that all those Vietnamese geek olympiad champs (math, physics, IT, etc.) are all northern Viets. Vietnam typically comes in at 4 or 5 in the International Math Olypiads, beating S. Korea, Japan, UK, Germany, France, India, etc. Vietnam typically only looses to the US, Russia, and China, which almost always wins. But all of these countries are much bigger than Vietnam in population, and much wealthier than Vietnam. Further, with a population of 1.3 billion, China has to win or it would be a joke--like India. Vietnam has been doing well in the math olmpiads since 1977. Vietnamese computer geeks even beat India's despite India's much vaunted reputation for turning out IT workers that take outsourced jobs from Americans.

My theory as to why the Cantonese and the Fujianese are more competitive than the rest of the Chinese is because Hong Kong, which is in Canton, was a booming port of trade for about 2000 years. The Cantonese are extremely capitalistic people. The Fujianese must have copied their neighbor to the south. By the way, both Cantonese and Fujianese descendants of the Bai Yueh--just like the Viets (Lac Yuehs).

Yueh's are smart man! Especially me. Heh, heh.

It is well known that the Cantonese (and Fujianese) are the "Jews of Asia." They run the economies of every country in Asia and S.E. Asian, but for Korea and Japan. But then again, the Japanese, and probably the Koreans to, won't let non-natives free access to higher education. Japanese force their 1 million strong Korean minority to jump thru hoops before they can get into Japanese higher eduction: Koreans have to take an addtional test that Japanese don't have to--which is a waste of resources (time, energy, exam prep courses, etc.). My theory is that if you took an island, like the size of Singapore or Malyasia, and put a 100,000 Cantonese vs 100,000 Japanese or Koreans, or Viets, the Chinese would come out on top--academically, financially, etc. (But in sword fights, the Japanese would come out on top.) Chinese diasporas throughout the world control far more money both in real dollars and per capita than Japanese diasporas. And this despite Japan's economic dominance.

100,000 Cantonese vs 100,000 Ashkenazi? That would be interesting.

Ashkenazi, Cantonese, Fujianese don't just emphasize family and education, they emphasize capitalism. What is the stereotype of Jews? Bankers!!!! It's more than just family and education that these three groups emphasize, they also unapologetically emphasize pure unadulterated, wicked, cold-blooded captialism. Confucianism alone only emphasizes family and education, not capitalism. I think that it was sometime in the 1200's that Hong Kong was sacked by angry Arab and Persian traders because of, in the words of the Arabs and Persians, the Cantonese's "blood-sucking ways." Funny. Wow, they really are the "Jews of Asia!" This emphasis on capitalism puts them at an edge over other Confucianist Asians, including other Chinese. The Jews have an edge still over Cantonese and Fujianese: They also emphasize high intellectual pursuits, which is why they win a absurdly disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, Fields Medals, etc.

Here are some useful formulas:

Protestant Work Ethic = Christianity + Capitalism
Confucianism = Family + Education (This includes Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese)
Cantonese/Fujianese Confucianism = Family + Education + Capitalism
Ashkenazi Judaism = Family + Education + Capitalism + High Intellectual Pursuits

My theory as to why the Japanese have lost their edge compared to Koreans and Chinese is 3-fold. Let me back track: Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese are the original four Confucian kingdoms. China invented Confucianism so the Chinese should naturally be best at it. (But within in China, the Cantonese and Fujianese are even more Confucian than the original Confucians, i.e. Northern Han.) Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese & Jews have the roughly same SES and educational level, etc.--far higher than Viets. But Japanese don't do as well as Chinese and Koreans. Why?

1. Japan is on top. Being on top they've lost that edge, the need to prove themselves. (Unlike the Koreans. Look into the building of the Petronis Towers in Kuala Lampur. One tower was built by a Japanese firm, and one by a Korean firm. Despite having a month edge over the Koreans--a sneaky trick intentionally done by the Malyasian government to get the two groups competing, the Japanese lost to the Koreans, by a few hours. The two groups just hated each other during the erection process. They'd barely cooperate, if at all. Also look into the fact that Hyundai now has surpassed Toyota in the JD Power Report on initial qualtity.
Japan has a healthy counter-culture amongst it's youth now, a sure sign of massive surplus production.) Prior to being on top, I suspect that the Japanese were just like the Koreans (and Viets) and they had a chip on their shoulders where they had to prove that they were just as good or better than others, including whites.

BTW, I'vs seen a study on Vietnamese academic achievement that actually addressed this issue of "having a chip on their shoulders" and the subsequent need the prove themselves. However, the authors put it in more intellectual, genteel, and politically correct terminology.

2. The Japanese Internment Camps of WWII. Prior to WWII, there were thriving communities of Little Tokyo's in the US. After the war, fearing discrimination, most Japanese America communities dispersed. Now there are tons of studies that show that new immigrants with their old fashion values do better in school than native born. And generally, the stronger the ties to the old culture, the better they do in school. Asians who hang out with other asians do better in school than Asians who hang out with whites. And so on. (I'll post these studies in the future.)

3. The Bomb--yes, that BOMB. During the hey-day of Japanese imperialism, the Japanese were pretty uppity, to say the least. They thought they were soooooooo superior to every other Asian group. There is nothing that would make you less aggressive than to have a bomb drop on you. An atomic bomb will mellow you out real quick. Now I'm being really flippant here, not to mention crude and insensitive, but Japan and Japanese Americans tend to be very progressive and very anti-war now, just the opposite of what they were like in the past. This is my impression from talking to an astute Japanese friend.

This combination of being on top and dispersing after WWII has taken the edge away from Japanese, otherwise they'd be right up there with the Koreans, Chinese and Jews.

I suspect the same for (Confucianist) Vietnamese if you take into account SES: Adjusting for SES, Viets too would be right up there. Vietnamese immigrants still come to the US quite poor and with low levels of formal education, yet they children still go to college.

I can't believe I just read that whole thing

Any single-year set of census data is a poor measure of competitiveness, academic and otherwise. Because if you go by the 1980 census, then Viets are a bunch of uneducated, lazy welfare bums. But put it together with 1990 and 2000 census data, then you'll instant see really impressive upward trajectory.

In particular, the 2000 census is corrupted by the constant insourcing of "hightech coolies" from India, and Tawain, Singapore, the Phillipines, etc. It is said ( I think I read it on goldsea.com) that the Chinese, Koreans, and possibly Japanese immigrants to America are the top 1% of their country--I find this partly true and partly "dubious." This is true in SES but not in general, for instance since many Japanese who can't get into university in Japan can easily get into college in the US. So the Japanese, Chinese, Koreans who make it to the US are the technically the creme of the crop in SES, but the entire population is pretty competitive to begin with.

Now this "cream of the crop" phenomena is more applicable in the case with highly educated immigrants from India, the Phillipines and so on.

Everywhere I've looked, the Chinese always come out on top academically. And as anyone would surely agree, academic success is the best predictor of income. In the UK, S. Asian Indians come in second. The UK does not do anywhere near, if at all, the amount of insourcing of S. Asian Indian computer programmers, etc., that the US does. So the competitiveness of Indians in the UK is more accurately reflects the competitiveness of Indian culture than that of S. Asian Indians in the US.

I've seen a 1980's study on Canada college enrollment where Chinese came in first, then Viets. It's the same in Australia. Asian Indians aren't anywhere near as competitive in Australia. Again, America imports so much cheap talent from India, Taiwain, Singapore, etc. as to create a "brain drain" from these countries while simultameously creating a supercompetitive, but significantly unrepresentative, subpopulation within the US.

If you go by income and college degree attainment, then yes, S. Asian Indians are on top. I believe that the 2000 census had them with the highest median family income with $65K/annum. Japanese had the highest per capita income with about $29K/annum. Asian Indians had the highest college degree attainment at around 57%. Japanese, Chinese, Koreans & Filipinos were each about in the mid 40%; Viets at a paltry 20%; whites at about 29%. (This is all from memory...) But look below at the data on Viet college enrollment and UC Berkeley enrollment in particular.

But if you want to understand the "upward trajectory" of Viets that the 1980 census could never fortell, then check this out:

http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/percent2/ch4.htm --2000 figures, undergraduate population

"Enrollment also varies within racial and ethnic groups. For example, among Hispanic students, more than half (55 percent) reported being Mexican American or Chicano, 15 percent reported being Puerto Rican, 4 percent Cuban, and the remaining 27 percent of other Hispanic ethnic identity. Among Asian American students, the breakdown is as follows: 25.1 percent Chinese, 13.1 percent Korean, 12.8 percent Vietnamese, 11.2 percent Japanese, 11.0 percent Asian Indian, 10.5 percent Filipino, 2.9 percent Thai, and 13.1 percent of other ethnicity.[2] This distinction reflects the need for targeted outreach and recruitment, and illustrates that the notion of the “overrepresented” Asian American student is not true for all subgroups."

----This is nation wide, but I think it may include 2 year community college enrollment, which is very important but 4-year college enrollment stats are the most important indicator of competitiveness. I'm still looking for clear cut data separating out 2 from 4 year college enrollment. College completion rate is important too.


Summerizing for Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders Only (AAPI):

Ethnicity_______Population____% of AAPI Pop___% of AAPI
_________________________________________Undergrads

Chinese_________2,432,585_____23.7%________25.1 %
Filipino__________1,850,314_____18.1%________10.5 %
Asian Indian/
South Asian______1,678,767_____16.4%________11.0 %
Vietnamese______1,122,528_____11.0%________12.8 %
Korean__________1,076,872_____10.5%________13.1 %
Japanese__________796,700______8 %_________11.2 %

----This table shows that Viets are just as competitive as Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans in college enrollment rate. But I've also seen some data, less important, but still relevant on students of poorer Vietnamese enclaves in California where the 2-year college enrollment was pretty high. (I'll post this later.) The reason why it is less important is simply because many/most Viets have succeeded and moved out of these poor enclaves, and the study didn't examine what obstensibly must be their significantly greater college enrollment rates. Moreover, amongst these poorer Viets, most intended to transfer to a 4 year college. Lastly, because of the presence of an large Asian subpopulation in California, 12% of the total pop. vs 4.2 nation wide, which intensely over-achieves, i.e. beats the general white population, and this includes Viets, the competition to get into college in California, especially the UC system, is significantly higher than that of university systems in other states. That is, many Viets and other Asians who go to community college in LA, etc., could get into state school in Florida, George, Iowa, etc., but don't do so because of expense. This was mention by the aforementioned, but yet to be posted, study.

Note: This table is a summary of the above passage, but the left and middle column is from an entirely different US census source. I also suspect that the right column most likely includes mixed raced Asians, which the first two columns don't. In particular, the Japanese population should probably include mixed race individuals which would put them at 1,148,932, instead of 796,700 (see below). The reason being is that their college degree attainment rate (which I've yet to include for all Americans) is no different than that of Chinese or Koreans.

Note: The number for S. Asian Indians I find to be astonishing, they are at least 16.4% of the Asian-American Pac-Islander (AAPI) population, yet comprise only 11% of those Asians that enroll in college. I wonder if it is a TYPO at this URL?!? Asian Indians, by virtual of the "cream of the crop" phenomena are a super competitive group. The similar numbers for Filipinos does make sense on the other hand. India has a population of 1 BILLION whereas the Philipines has a population of only 86 million, which invariably means that their cream of the crop can't match India's. But look at how Viets compare to Filipinos. Viets come to the US very poor. Filipinos come to the US very educated. Their educational attainment and median family income is no different than that of Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. (I have yet to post a comparison of 2000 census data on income and educational attainment.) Also keep in the back of your mind that Filipinos are Asian Catholics, and Asian Indians have that crazy caste system where the few benefit and the many suffer, in particular, they are not Confucian.

http://www.apiahf.org/apidvinstitute/Gende.../statistics.htm --some census data on Asians, mixed race and otherwise. This is a different source for census 2000 data from that seen in the left and middle columns of the table above.

1,678,765 single race and 1,899,599 multi-race Asian Indians
41,280 single race and 57,412 multi-race Bangladeshis
171,937 single race and 206,052 multi-race Cambodians
2,314,537 single race and 2,734,841 multi-race Chinese
1,850,314 single race and 2,364,815 Filipinos
169,428 single race and 186,310 multi-race Hmong
796,700 single race and 1,148,932 multi-race Japanese
1,076,872 single race and 1,228,427 multi-race Koreans
168,707 single race and 198,203 multi-race Laotians
153,533 single race and 204,309 multi-race Pakistanis
118,048 single race and 144,795 multi-race Taiwanese
1,122,528 single race and 1,223,736 multi-race Vietnamese

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://goldsea.com/AAU/berkeley_2000.html
"Persons of Chinese ancestry easily make up the most numerous Asian nationality among Berkeley undergraduates, with 4,544, followed by Coreans with 1,399, East Indian/Pakistanis with 789, Filipinos with 617, Japanese with 419, Pacific Islanders with 67 and other Asians (mostly Vietnamese and those choosing to designate themselves Taiwanese) with 1,132. In addition to the above-named categories, there are 850 international students in the UG division, of which about 70% are from Asia. Another 2,012 students chose not to classify themselves by ethnicity."


(My Summary)

Ethnicity___Berkeley Pop___California Pop__% of California Pop*

Filipino______617_________918,678______2.7
Chinese____4,544________980,642______2.9
Asian Indian
/Pakistanis___789________314,819_______0.9
Japanese____419_________288,854______0.9
Korean_____1,399________345,882______1.0
Vietnamese**_1,132_______447,032______1.3


* The California census data is from a different source/url.
** The number of 1,132 includes Viets, Tawianese, etc. But in a previous year, when the Asian population was was only 40%, the Viet population was already 687 undergrads:

http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/as...ect/gralow.html

The above table is for the year 2000 with an increased Asian population of 45% of the total Berkley population; it had to do with an anti-Affirmative Action measure. It is safe to assume that the corresponding number of Viet students was at least about 700-725 for year 2000.

---So most competitive is Chinese by far, then closely followed by Koreans, then Indians, then Japanese or Vietnamese, then Filipinos. Berkeley enrollment is a good proxy measure--in fact, I suspect a far better measure of competitiveness than census data. (Later, I'll discuss how census data is an inaccurate reflection of Chinese, Asian Indian, Japanese, Korean and Viet competitiveness.) The overall 4-year college enrollement rate is the best indicator of competitiveness.

Okay, Viet Guy7, I would like to see where you're coming from but so far you have given me a lot stats but not a coherent argument for your ranking.

Concerning my own ranking, I used income data to judge "competitiveness" because for me it is very material: wealth, quality of life, social status in society --> such attainment usually can only come with education unless one is very, very lucky. This is 2000 census data; it tells me the competitiveness currently --> I will agree that it might not predict long term trend--> but neither does your data it seems.

Now concerning your own ranking -->
1) you've failed to define the criteria on which you judge competitiveness
2) you've failed to cohesively argue how all the numbers you thrown out support or meet these criterias--> ie how does college enrollment, population size in america all fit together
3) you've failed to define vague term likes upward trajectory in regards to what you're arguing (this is just one example of ambiguity; engfish)
4) Thus, you've failed to build an effective and convincing case to defend your rankings

Forgive me, but people who throw out stats might intimidate some people into accepting just whatever the hell they're asserting, but cohesivenss and clarity of the presentation of these stats is of utmost importance. Remember that correlation is not causuality and hence stats can be misleading. That's why stats should be placed within historical context. Thus, I will agree with you that it's important to take into consideration the 1980 census data. Going beyond that, it's important to take into context 200 years of US history.

Chinese and Japanese have a much longer history in the US than Koreans or Vietnamese. Hence more time to get established. Vietnamese came in 1975 and from war ravaged country fleeing for our lives from the communists --> very heavy historical burden. What we've accomplished so far is amazing --> still, there's a great deal more to do --> there are a lot of ignorant Vietnamese thugs out there who's existence shame our people.

Sidenote: While your "brain drain" theory is valid, and I happen to believe in it; it is not relevant within this argument. The central question is which ethnic groups is more competive; the reason for that competivenss (ie brain drain) is important for historical context, but it must be viewed as historical context and not necessarily validation of your points.

Whoa, take it easy there big fella... This forum was so busy that I couldn't even get thru to edit my tables in may last post, much less further my argument. One thing at a time. But the thing is, my "ranking" is a guestimate based on a lot of stuff I come across online and offline. Be sure to check my last post because I'll edit it first. Then I'll answer you point for point. Also there is no need to hurry, this blog will be here for a long time. We're all busy people.

Actually I invite and appreciate your skepticism. It'll make my argument stronger. This is an independent research project of mine, unrelated to my day job. The reason why I'm here is to find more evidence to support my "ranking." ("Ranking" people is so vulgar, that is why I put the word in quotes.) Since, I'm not an educational researcher per se, this is really beyond my expertise. Yes, I might be wrong! That's why I'm here at a layman's forum. However, you'll find that I have some interesting insights.

(You brought up the gang issue. Which country are you in, US, Canada, Australia, some European country? You must be from the US since you are citing 2000 census data. I know that in the US and Canada, the gang problem has subsided significantly. I have a brother in LA, when he first moved out there in the early 1990's it was pretty bad, e.g. night time shootings in Little Saigon were not uncommon. Now he tells me that it is practically unheard of. I know that in Australia it's pretty bad now.)

http://www.thatliberalmedia.com/archives/002174.html ---for the 2003-2004 in the Seattle school district

Mean High School GPA
Rank_____Score_____Group
1________3.40______Chinese
2________3.36______Japanese
3________3.29______Korean
4________3.18______Vietnamese
5________3.04______White


http://www.arthurhu.com/99/17/seadata.prn ---1993-94 school year for Seatle school district.

Detailed Ethnic Groups Rank by GPA p. 75 93-4

______________HS GPA__Diff

Chinese_______3.23_____0.43
Vietnamese____3.10_____0.30 ---note Viets come in second!
Japanese______3.07_____0.27
Gypsy________3.07_____0.27
Asian_________2.88_____0.08
EastIndian____2.86______0.06
Korean_______2.84______0.04
LatinoAsian____2.81______0.01
White________2.80______0.00
Total_________2.62_____-0.18
Filipino________2.57_____-0.23
Other SEAsian__2.55_____-0.25
LatinoWhite____2.51_____-0.29
OtherAsian_____2.48_____-0.32
AmIndian______2.38_____-0.42
Latino_________2.38_____-0.42
AlaskaNat______2.30_____-0.50
AmIndianAll____2.27_____-0.53
LatinoBlack_____2.26_____-0.54
LatinoIndian____2.24______-0.56
NatAmerican____2.18______-0.62
Black__________2.05______-0.75
Samoan________1.98______-0.82

GPA W2.44 B1.72 A2.77(Chinese) 1.65(Samoan)
Index Seattle W1.00 B-1.41 A1.13


http://www.arthurhu.com/index/aeduc.htm

Asian Students in Bay Area Score B+ Asian Week Oct 9, 1987

Hours homework per week

13.3 Vietnamese
12.5 Chinese
12.1 Japanese
12.0 Asian
10.7 Korean
9.5 Filipino
8.6 Pac Islander
8.3 White
7.9 Black
7.1 Hispanic

Note: A word about Arthur Hu. Hu is a Chinese American racist jerk--a LOSER! He's sort of a pan-Confucianist Asian supremacist. He's married to a Chinese Vietnamese woman--just a side note. However, he's an MIT trained computer scientist of some talent. His judgement is not to be trusted, but his data collection and compilation are reliable. His website contains all kinds of facts and tidbits on race comparisons. He has tons of stuff of Asians. Again, trust his numbers, but NOT how he interprets them.

Here's a study of Chinese vs Japanese vs whites, grades 1-5: Chinese on top, then Japanese, then whites. Note: This study may have been done on 1st-5th graders, but this pattern holds into adulthood, i.e. college.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...5&dopt=Abstract

Journal: Child Dev. 1985 Jun;56(3):718-34.

Title: "Cognitive performance and academic achievement of Japanese, Chinese, and American children"

Authors: Stevenson HW, Stigler JW, Lee SY, Lucker GW, Kitamura S, Hsu CC.

Abstract: "Chinese, Japanese, and American children at grades 1 and 5 were given a battery of 10 cognitive tasks and tests of achievement in reading and mathematics... Chinese children surpassed Japanese and American children in reading scores; both Chinese and Japanese children obtained higher scores in mathematics than the American children. Prediction of achievement scores from the cognitive tasks showed few differential effects among children of the 3 cultures. The results suggest that the high achievement of Chinese and Japanese children cannot be attributed to higher intellectual abilities, but must be related to their experiences at home and at school."

---------------------------------------------------------
Below is a typical study on Chinese parental expectations. It is also typical of other Confucianist Asians.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=9706324

Journal: Adolescence. 1998 Summer;33(130):385-90.

Title: "Adolescents' perceptions of their parents' academic expectations: comparison of American, Chinese-American, and Chinese high school students."

Authors: Chen H, Lan W.

Abstract: "Cultural background not only influences family beliefs about the value of education, but may affect how academic expectations are communicated by parents and perceived by their children. This study examined differences in willingness to conform to parents' expectations of academic achievement as perceived by American, Chinese-American, and Chinese high school students. Findings indicated that Chinese students were more willing to accept their parents' advice and cared more about fulfilling academic expectations than did American students.

Students in all three groups had similar feelings of independence. The views of Chinese-American students reflected the influence of both their Chinese heritage and the American culture in which they resided."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2816369.stm --2003 UK results for GCSE

Five or more good GCSE exam scores

Chinese 73%
Indian 64%
White 51%
Bangladeshi 45%
Black African 45%
Pakistani 40%
Black Other 40%
Black Caribbean 30%
National Average 51%

Here is a study of Chinese vs Viets vs white Australians. I have this article; Chinese beat Viets beat whites. Chinese beat Viets by a little, but are from more affluent families. The $64,000 question: Would Chinese beat Viets if both sets of students were of the same social economic status (SES)? Whites were wealthier than Viets, but lost to them. The "SES rule" holds between Confucianist Asians, but not between them and whites.

*** Translation: Confucianism > Prostestant Work Ethic ***

http://www.flinders.edu.au/research/Reports/2000/SSPsy00.htm

Journal: Educational Psychology, 2002, 22, 267-275.

Title: IQ and academic achievement among Chinese, Vietnamese and Anglo-Celtic Australian school children"

Authors: Dandy, J K; Nettelbeck, T

Absract: "Flynn (1991) proposed that students from Asian cultural backgrounds typically achieve at higher levels than non-Asian students with the same IQs. This study investigated relationships between IQ, study time, educational and occupational aspirations and academic achievement among Australian school children (N = 160) from Chinese, Vietnamese and Anglo-Celtic backgrounds. Mathematics grades for Chinese and Vietnamese Australian children were higher. They spent more time studying and were more likely to desire an occupation requiring tertiary qualifications than Anglo-Celtic Australian peers. Consistent with Flynn's hypothesis, students from Asian backgrounds obtained higher mathematics grades than their Anglo-Celic Australian peers with the same IQ. However, study and occupational aspirations formed only part of a more complex socio-cultural package that contributed to group achievement differences; parents' support for studying and aspirations may interact with these factors to produce high achievement."

vietguy7
ever thought of being somekind of analyst???

heres a good article talking about viet chinese and indians

Limited Networking within the Vietnamese High-Technology Community in Silicon Valley



Tam Bui

Faculty Mentor: Professor AnnaLee Saxenian
Graduate Student Mentor: Jonathan Marshall




Ethnic Entrepreneurship in Silicon Valley
Scholars and journalists have written extensively about the role of highly skilled immigrant entrepreneurs in the Silicon Valley region, particularly about their roles in job and wealth creation. Most of this research, however, has focused on the two largest groups, Indians and Chinese. There has been very little attention to smaller, yet still sizable, immigrant groups in Silicon Valley such as Vietnamese, Koreans, and Filipinos. The literature on Vietnamese entrepreneurs, for example, focuses exclusively on their role as owners of small restaurants, jewelry stores, and nail shops. While very successful, these businesses are marginal to the high-technology industries of Silicon Valley. The composition of the Vietnamese population in the Silicon Valley, however, has changed dramatically in recent years to include highly skilled and educated scientists and engineers as well as owners of low risk and low barriers to entry establishments. Within this highly skilled labor force is a growing core group of Vietnamese-American entrepreneurs in high-technology businesses. This research project examines the extent to which Vietnamese high-technology entrepreneurs are networking and mobilizing ethnic resources to create business opportunities and advantages.

In Silicon Valley’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, University of California at Berkeley Professor AnnaLee Saxenian focuses on the region’s Chinese and Indian computer scientists and engineers to show how highly skilled immigrants are creating jobs and generating wealth for California’s economy. Saxenian’s study reveals the crucial role that Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs played in generating business in Silicon Valley, there is a need to do a similar study for other groups such as the Vietnamese. It is important to understand why the Vietnamese are not networking because their experience has implications for studying the trajectory of collective action within immigrant communities.

Methods
This research project relies on phone and in-person interviews conducted with highly skilled Vietnamese professionals in the Silicon Valley area during the summer of 2001. Twenty-nine subjects agreed to be interviewed: eighteen senior executives, two venture capitalists, three lawyers, four community leaders, one engineer, and one engineering professor. Ten subjects had been cited in newspaper articles about the Vietnamese community in the Silicon Valley. Another eight are listed on web pages. These interviewees referred another eleven contacts. Five agreed to be interviewed over the phone.

The New Vietnamese Entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley
Silicon Valley is the home to one of the largest concentrations of Vietnamese people outside of Vietnam. According to Census 2000 data, there are approximately 447,032 Vietnamese living in Silicon Valley. The Vietnamese business community in the San Francisco Bay Area is visible in terms of the number of Vietnamese restaurants and shops in cities like San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco. The Vietnamese American Chamber of Commerce of Santa Clara estimates that in 1999 alone there were about 10,000 business licenses granted to Vietnamese entrepreneurs. These establishments have added to the growth and economic vitality in a number of Bay Area communities, and the most visible of these areas is East San Jose, where most of the estimated 5,040 Vietnamese-owned businesses in San Jose are concentrated. While very successful, these establishments are often "characterized by low barriers to entry, minimal skill requirements, and limited technical change." The composition of the Vietnamese population in the Silicon Valley has changed dramatically in recent years to include highly skilled and educated scientists and engineers as well as owners of low risk and low barriers to entry establishments.


Within this highly skilled labor force is a growing core group of Vietnamese entrepreneurs in high-technology businesses. According to a September 2000 article from the Far East Economic Review, there are about "15 CEOs among the estimated 10,000 Vietnamese working in Silicon Valley." The time and manner in which Vietnamese high-technology entrepreneurs interviewed had come to Silicon Valley can be simplified to three main settlement patterns. Some entrepreneurs left Vietnam before 1975 to attend school at American and European universities. Smaller in number than subsequent waves of refugees, these emigrants tended to be educated, and wealthy enough to have the opportunity to go to high school in Vietnam. A second group of entrepreneurs settled in Silicon Valley after their arrival in the United States in 1975. These entrepreneurs attended Bay Area universities such as San Jose State University, San Francisco State University, the University of California at Berkeley, and the University of California at Davis before they settled in Silicon Valley. The vast majority of entrepreneurs came to America after 1975 but did not start their careers in Silicon Valley until the late 1990’s. Most of these entrepreneurs are between the ages of 30-35 and are generally younger than those who came directly to Silicon Valley. Additionally, a number of them have M.B.A.’s and law degrees, which distinguish them from the second category of entrepreneurs, who mainly have undergraduate degrees. Like most high-technology entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley, a majority of the Vietnamese entrepreneurs who participated in this project first worked to gain experience and operational skills before starting their own ventures. Their innovations usually sprouted from ideas they shared with friends and former colleagues from work and/or school. The Vietnamese high-technology entrepreneurs who participated in this project raised capital to start their companies in three ways. One method was by "bootstrapping" or using money from personal savings as well as borrowing money from friends and family. Many of the earliest Vietnamese high-technology entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley started their company by bootstrapping, and they worked for a number of years at various companies before saving enough money to venture into their own businesses. Of the eighteen entrepreneurs interviewed, four started their companies by bootstrapping. Most of their companies were started in the early 1990’s. When asked whether or not they looked towards the Vietnamese community for investment, these entrepreneurs explained that they did not know of any other Vietnamese entrepreneurs who started companies. As one pioneer who founded an Emeryville start-up in 1990 explains:

I didn’t think about contacting the Vietnamese community because I was one of the earliest Vietnamese people starting a company… there was no group for me to ask or go to for funding.
Early Vietnamese high-technology entrepreneurs succeeded without community support or investments from financial institutions and venture capitalists. In recent years, the availability of capital has dramatically increased, allowing most entrepreneurs to raise capital through more formal sources of finance. Venture capitalists play a critical role in entrepreneurial activity, especially in Silicon Valley. Not only do venture capitalists provide money to help companies get started, they also bring operating experience, networks, and technical skills to the ventures they invest in. A second group of Vietnamese entrepreneurs in this study sought funding from mainstream financial institutions and venture capitalists because they sought the non-financial assistance and resources that venture capitalists provide. One Vietnamese entrepreneur emphasizes the importance of such assistance

When you look for investments, you not only look for cash but you look for people and institutions that can provide resources for your company… So when I was looking for investments, I also was looking for people to give me value added other than cash. Venture capitalists provide things like industry credibility, ongoing contacts, and potential customers.
Other Vietnamese entrepreneurs concur, explaining that venture capitalists provide a broad range of services that are critical to building companies such as marketing, recruitment, management, and relationship building. While venture capitalists can provide critical resources and opportunities, getting access to the venture capitalist community can be quite difficult. A Vietnamese attorney for a prominent Palo Alto law firm describes challenges of receiving funding from venture capitalists:

It’s very hard to get the attention of venture capitalists when you need to fundraise and finance your company. They get hundreds upon thousands of business plans every day. And they just read through them, toss them out, read through them, toss them out. Without a contact in there, it is very hard to prove your case.
Without the right contacts, it can be very difficult to obtain funding with venture capitalists. In the fall of 1999, a third group of Vietnamese entrepreneurs, unsuccessful with mainstream venture capitalists, began looking towards the Vietnamese community for investment. One such entrepreneur was Bao Nguyen, a 27-year-old Vietnamese engineer from San Jose. Bao wanted to venture out on his own and start a company with a software program that he developed in college. He approached 20 mainstream venture capitalists but failed to get funding because of his youth and lack of experience. After no success with mainstream venture capitalists, Bao began looking towards the Vietnamese community for investment. Bao eventually raised nearly a million dollars in initial funding from a number of Vietnamese angel investors. "Angel investors provide the crucial seed money for fledgling start-ups to turn an idea into an actual product, taking a large risk on new companies." In all, about 13 investors raised approximately $2 million dollars for Bao’s company. Many of these first-time angel investors did not have much exposure to the high-technology industry but supported Bao because they wanted to see Vietnamese entrepreneurs succeed. Several investments also came from Vietnamese high-technology senior executives. Investments from those who had knowledge about the technology into Bao’s company played a critical role in the amount of Vietnamese community investment. Bao attributes much of the community’s backing to the support that Tien Ho gave him:

It was good that Tien Ho was there. He understood the technology. He worked at Sun Microsystems, and he worked at other technology companies before that… Tien was a key person because he knew where I was going. And his investment was very important, because if he invested in me, then other people would invest in me too.
Tien was one of the earliest Vietnamese high-technology entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley who started a networking company in 1989 by bootstrapping from personal savings. Understanding how challenging it is to start one’s own business, Tien served as a mentor to about 10 Vietnamese-founded companies. He provided some companies with seed money and served as an advisor or sat on the board of directors of most of these companies. Through these fundraising activities, a number of Vietnamese professionals were subsequently introduced to other Vietnamese professionals, and an informal network of Vietnamese professionals in high-technology emerged. There have been efforts within this network of Vietnamese professionals to create an association that fosters entrepreneurship within the Vietnamese high-technology community. Several formal dinners brought together Vietnamese professionals in the high-technology industry. One dinner organized in June of 2000 at the Mayflower Restaurant in Milpitas assembled a number of established Vietnamese businessmen, venture capitalists, lawyers, and professionals in the technology sector. In September of 2000, Tien and a Vietnamese attorney from the Palo Alto law firm organized a second, more lavish event at Spago’s in Palo Alto that included a number of non-Vietnamese venture capitalists, investment bankers, and lawyers. As within all immigrant communities, there are those who choose not to participate in community activities. Some Vietnamese entrepreneurs declined invitations to these dinners, explaining that they did not believe in ethnically based events. Others heard about the dinners but did not receive an invitation and criticized those organizing the events for not opening the dinners to a larger group. A significant number of people have heard nothing about these dinners or the people organizing them and remain outside of the Vietnamese technology community that emerged out of the fundraising activities. Of the twenty-nine participating in this research project, only seven attended the dinner at the Mayflower Restaurant, and nine attended the Spago’s dinner. Thus, while there are a small number of Vietnamese entrepreneurs and professionals who have developed informal friendships with each other, the vast majority of entrepreneurs remain outside the network formed by the fundraising activities. This is not to suggest that networking within the Vietnamese technology community is only limited to the group involved in the fundraising activities. A number of other of sub-groups of various Vietnamese professionals in high-technology get together informally, and there have also been attempts to form these groups into an association for Vietnamese professionals in the technology community. Yet, while there are some Vietnamese entrepreneurs that know one another on a social and informal basis, the overall Vietnamese technology community remains loose and isolated. Vietnamese entrepreneurs do not rely on ethnic resources to support their entrepreneurial activities like their Chinese and Indian counterparts do, and they have little or no contact with each other. In the words of one Vietnamese senior executive,

I only know of a few other entrepreneurs… It doesn’t seem like there is that much activity going on…I haven’t seen the Vietnamese entrepreneurial community nearly as active as the Indian or Chinese community. And I actually am curious as to why.

Limited Networking Within the Vietnamese High-technology Community: Contrasting the Vietnamese, Chinese, and Indian Experiences
The starkest contrast between highly skilled Chinese, Indian, and Vietnamese immigrants is that the Chinese and Indians came to the United States as immigrants, whereas the Vietnamese came to the United States as refugees. The difference between immigrants and refugees is that "immigrants deliberately choose to leave their homelands and carefully plan to resettle [whereas] refugees are usually driven from their homes for political or military reasons. They do not voluntarily choose to leave but are forced to do so in order to protect themselves." A majority of highly skilled Chinese and Indians in Silicon Valley came to the United States for graduate school or under H1-B visas. In contrast, most of the Vietnamese in Silicon Valley fled Vietnam as refugees to escape political and religious persecution. When they left Vietnam, they did not have any real preparation for migrating and did not even know where they were going to settle. This difference in the manner in which Indians, Chinese, and Vietnamese settled in Silicon Valley has several implications. First, the Indian and Taiwanese governments play an active role in mobilizing the technology community in Silicon Valley. Since the 1970’s, policy makers in Taiwan have sought out overseas Chinese in Silicon Valley for advice and investments to help develop Taiwan’s emerging technology industry. The Taiwanese government frequently organizes meetings and conferences to encourage overseas Chinese engineers in the United States to work together and send their knowledge and capital back to Taiwan. In doing so, the Taiwanese government supports the network of highly skilled Chinese immigrants in Silicon Valley. Likewise, delegations of representatives from the Indian government frequently visit Silicon Valley, and, since the 1990’s, the Indian government has worked to increase ties between the businesses in Silicon Valley and India. The overseas Vietnamese community in Silicon Valley, in contrast, does not have a close relationship with the Vietnamese government. The Vietnamese government persecuted many refugees and their families because of their ethnic, religious, or political affiliations. A large number of Vietnamese immigrants had also been victims of random violence, and some overseas Vietnamese still suffer emotionally and physically because of the action of the Vietnamese government. Thus, the Vietnamese government has a very limited role in overseas Vietnamese communities, let alone any role in mobilizing the technology community in Silicon Valley. As a Vietnamese senior executive in Silicon Valley describes, "We don’t have the influence from our mother country…we are totally disconnected, isolated." Secondly, most highly skilled Chinese and Indian immigrants entered Silicon Valley as graduates of elite engineering schools in their countries of origin. Thousands of Taiwanese students came to the United States during the 1970’s and 1980’s after graduating from Taiwan’s most prestigious engineering universities. Among these schools were National Taiwan University, National Chiaotung University, and Tsinghua University. These engineers typically continued their graduate education in the United States, or they went on to work in Silicon Valley and eventually started up their own companies. Similarly, a considerable number of highly skilled Indian immigrants went to The Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), India’s most prestigious engineering school, before coming to the United States. These common educational and professional backgrounds helped highly skilled Chinese and Indian immigrants form a collective identity that became an important basis for their group cohesion. Chinese and Indian immigrants built on pre-existing social and professional ties from their countries of origin to create ethnic associations that fostered the advancement of their members. Vietnamese immigrants in Silicon Valley do not have common professional and educational backgrounds like their Chinese and Indian counterparts. Almost all received their higher education in the United States. Their undergraduate education experience seems to have heavily influenced their mode of assimilation to doing business, as they do not rely on co-ethnic networks like their counterparts. A number of Vietnamese entrepreneurs say they relied heavily on the network of friends and acquaintances they made through college as potential contacts for future investors, customers, and employees. One entrepreneur noted, "Introductions are made through school ties, so I don’t see today the compelling benefits of being involved with any Vietnamese associations." Additionally, a number of other Vietnamese entrepreneurs started their companies with business partners they met from college. Third, the Chinese, Indian, and Vietnamese communities have been in the United States for different amounts of time. Most Chinese and Indians flocked to Silicon Valley in 1965 with the passage of the Hart-Cellar Act. This act allowed the number of immigrants who possessed scarce skills or who had family ties to United States citizens to increase significantly. While some Vietnamese entrepreneurs settled in Silicon Valley after 1975, a majority of entrepreneurs did not come to the area until the mid 1990’s, more than 20 years after their counterparts. With differing resettlement patterns and demographic backgrounds, the young Vietnamese community in Silicon Valley does not have the resources needed to collectively organize like the Chinese and Indian communities. There is not a critical mass of prominent Vietnamese engineers, venture capitalists, and senior executives who have the knowledge, capital, and information to provide Vietnamese professionals with enough incentives to mobilize collectively. A Vietnamese venture capitalist from a prominent American mainstream venture firm explains that he also does not know of any other Vietnamese venture capitalists. Additionally, he adds,

I remember talking to a venture capitalist a few years ago, a big name venture capitalist from a prestigious firm, and he said to me ‘I know a lot of Indian entrepreneurs, but I don’t know any Vietnamese entrepreneurs.’ And this guy has been in the industry for years.
Most Vietnamese senior executives concur and explain that they do not come across many Vietnamese senior executives in their day-to-day business operations. One Vietnamese co-founder and vice-president of development in a Sunnyvale networking company describes the importance of having a critical mass of venture capitalists and senior executives in order to network:


As entrepreneurs, we are short on time, and we network for two main reasons. One is to find money to invest in your company, and the second is to find customers…As far as finding money, we don’t have many Vietnamese people in the venture capitalists community or in the commercial banking community that we can tap for initial advice or perhaps even investment…
And as far as finding customers. I deal with a lot of management as VP of business development for my company…I can’t recall a single person I’ve met, in all the big companies out there, that would be in a position that would make a purchase of our technology. Didn’t meet a single Vietnamese person. I must have gone through three hundred or so companies, met hundreds and hundreds of people, and attended dozens and dozens of meetings. Thus, it doesn’t appear that there could be a viable network that can help Vietnamese entrepreneurs.

Successful senior executives founded Chinese and Indian high-technology associations. They had the time and money to create ethnic associations that fostered the advancement of their members. The Vietnamese professionals I spoke to explained that most Vietnamese senior executives have not reached a point in their career where they could effectively mobilize the community. Many Vietnamese entrepreneurs recognize the need to have respected business leaders who can bring the community together and are optimistic about the prospect of collectively organizing in the ways the Chinese and Indian communities have.

What does it take? It takes good business leaders, people willing to put in their time and money to organize and bring people together. It’s a big challenge…I hope some day we will find a leader that can have a voice and get everyone together …someday we will organize and work together just like the ways the Indians and Chinese have. They have organizations, because they have business leaders to help organize everyone. They have associations that help others become successful…we don’t have the time and the resources yet.

Conclusion
As a young community of mostly political refugees, the Vietnamese in Silicon Valley faced different circumstances than their Chinese and Indian counterparts. The Chinese and Indians have strong relationships with their motherlands. They entered Silicon Valley as graduates of elite engineering schools. Feeling like outsiders to the mainstream technology community, they built on pre-existing social and professional ties from their countries of origin to form ethnic associations. The entry of highly skilled Vietnamese immigrants into Silicon Valley was drastically different, as they did not settle into the region until more than 20 years after their counterparts. Their undergraduate educational experience in the United States seems to have heavily influenced their mode of assimilation to doing business in the United States, as they currently do not rely on co-ethnic networks to advance like their counterparts. Rather, they have built social and professional networks through school, financial investors, and other non-ethnic organizations. The different ways Chinese, Indian, and Vietnamese immigrants have collectively organized show that ethnic networking is contingent on factors other than ethnicity. The historic and economic conditions under which Vietnamese immigrants arrived in Silicon Valley heavily influence their involvement with each other. The Vietnamese experience underscores how historical circumstances can influence future outcomes. Thus, it is crucial to recognize past conditions when looking at the trajectory of collective action within ethnic communities. My findings show that when looking at networking within highly skilled immigrant communities, it is important to look at variables other than ethnicity. It is important to consider timing and manner of immigration, maturity of community, education background, and relationship with country of origin.

WORKS CITED

Biers, D. (2000). Return of the Prodigal Sons. Far Eastern Economic Review.

Ha, O. K. (2000). Investors Boost Tech Start-Ups for Fellow Vietnamese. The San Jose Mercury News. San Jose.

Leba, J. K. (1985). The Vietnamese Entrepreneurs in the U.S.A. The First Decade (1975-1985). Houston, Texas, Zieleks Company.

Pimentel, B. (2000). Vietnam Revisited; A Generation Arrives; 25 Years after refugees' flight, Vietnamese Americans prosper. The San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco: A1.

Rutledge, P. (1987). The Vietnamese in America. Minneapolis, Lerner Publications Co.

Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional Advantage Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, First Harvard University Press.

Saxenian, A. (1999). Silicon Valley's New Immigrant Entrepreneurs. San Francisco, Public Policy Institute of California.

Saxenian, A. a. H., Jinn-Yuh (August 2000). "The Silicon Valley-Hsinchu Connection: Technical Communities and Industrial Upgrading."




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Download a PDF version of this article
Return to the 2001 McNair Journal

Ranking people can be wrong and controversial . An American professor many years ago ranked the races and ranked 1) Asian 2) Whites 3) Hispanics 4) Africans. It pissed off lots of Blacks, and he's been heckled as racists. The man said he has empirical evidence for his proposition, but no one listens because no one wants to be labled a racist with him.

Ranking subgroup within race is only less slightly controversial. Still, I am glad you admit that your own ranking is not quite on the level of scientific; As an acadmic paper it would be indefensible with what you have presented. I am still at the movement unconvince of your justification for them. For example, your data is very specific to certain area rather than as aggregate compliation such as the 2000 census. Such selective (possibly bias data gathering; not your fault but because it happens you only have access to them) can distort perceptions of competitiveness. Indians for example might not be concentrated in community where many Oriental Asians are concentrated so that ranking for people in that particular community is misleading because it fails to take into account racial demographic.

Until, you prove underwise, the most reliable and encompassing way to rank subgroups is based on income data as I mentioned already. I still get the feeling you ranked people based on your hunch.

But valiant attempt. I am a university student residing in the great US of A. Yourself?

chinese are genius..........i have to say i am smarter than those vietnamese in my school...
my GPA is 4.25 and their GPA only like 3.6

^hahaha....a bit arrogant there are you? I have to say that I have beaten plenty of Chinese in my time but does that make me smarter than "Chinese." That would be unrealistic. There's always going to be someone smarter than you.

And read the above article. Chinese are not genius. In fact their IQ are about the same as white, Vietnamese and other asians--> some chinese work very hard and having a student academic culture helps; this goes for vietnamese.

I see you are still young; but please grow up and mature a little. In terms of race who has the most nobel prizes: Jews. Who made some of the most significant discoveries of this century: German scientists. Who currently dominates high tech industry in Asia: Japan.

Your extremely childish statement just proved that "Chinese" are not genius, just some of you are quite arrogant and delusional.

Didn't knoe there's such thing as GPA 4.25 ... 2.25 I've heard of but 4.25



Actually Seattle, or greater WA state is not just Oriental Asians concentrated, WA state probably have larger amount of Native America than majority of other states in the US ... Seattle itself we was named after Chief Seattle who was the leader of the Suquamish and Duwamish tribes .

-bncat

Hey, who let the kid in here?

Hey kid, get some manners. Your grammar and punctuation betray how smart you really are. Your braggadocio betrays your maturity level.

Besides, no mattter how smart you are you'll meet people smarter than you in college. You'll meet Vietnamese kids smarter than you. Vietnamese valedictorians are hardly uncommon. High school in America is easy. High school in Europe and Asia is much more difficult. Moreover, what is the collective GPA comparison of Chinese vs Viets in your school? It's probably more like 3.4 vs 3.25 in favor of Chinese. And what about Jewish GPA's?

Stick around, later I'll put up Inter. Math Olypiad stuff. Vietnamese kids kick but in that stuff. China always wins, but China's population is 1.3 BILLION, whereas the Vietnam's population is a mere 86 million. You're smart, do the math. Vietnamese consistently beat the pants of Japanese, Koreans, Germans, French, Brits. They really lose only to both bigger and richer countries.

Also, look into the my SES (social economic status) arguments. After which, do the math. You must have overlooked the part where I mentioned that ethnic Viets beat ethnic Chinese Viets in school. They're Chinese, just like you.

As for myself, I went well beyond "AP" classes when I was your age--far, far beyond. You'd be shell-shocked upon seeing how far a clever high school kid can go. There were plenty of smart Jews & Chinese in my high school. None came close to me. Not even close. Lets just leave it at that.

You're welcome to make serious comments, but no sophomoric antics, please. You'll just start a flame war.

Note to others: If he doesn't mind his manners, lets collectively ignore him.

bncat,

You're showing your age. For a few years now it has been possible to get over a 4.00 GPA. A kid with a 3.8 GPA can take advanced placement (AP) classes, which are equivalent to BASIC college level classes and can actually raise his GPA above 4.00. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that an "A" in an AP class is worth 5 instead of 4, a "B" is worth 4 instead of 3, and so on.

Also, the reference to Indians is to S. Asian Indians, not Native American.

Since I'm on the point about S. Asian Indians, I should add that: Isn't the Seattle area a hotbed for software firms? In which case, there should be plenty of S. Asian Indians due to all the insourcing of high-tech coolies from India. (There's actually a PDF provided by the Seattle School District. I'll check it when I have time.)

Cantonese are the smartest? HAHA well I'd be lying to you if I were to tell you that I'm not flattered by that piece of info since I'm a Canto myself but I always thought there was the whole stereotype that northern Chinese were smarter since they do usually come more well to do (This of course is a stereotype in and of itself) but based on what I've seen, almost all overseas Chinese FOB students are northerners from Beijing or Tianjin.

You didn't see Jews above Chinese? Do pay attention to SES arguments too.

Don't get too cheeky & smug. I've yet to post stuff about how the past Vietnamese gang problem (which has for the most part subsided in the US and Canada, but not in Australia) was disproportionately Chinese Vietnamese, i.e. Cantonese, and Amerasian Vietnamese. I believe that Cholon, or the Chinese district in Saigon, was the center of organized crime in Vietnam. I'm talking about the Hong Kong Triads and their suborganizations around the world.

100,000 Chinese illegals sneak into the U.S. each year now. The triads are very active in the US. Another topic which I will expand upon later.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyhow, here are two related links from another forum, gnxp.com.

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/002435.html ---Chinese & Jews

"A similar point could be made about an academic conference held in California in 1994, the papers read at which were published last year by the University of Washington Press under the title "Essential Outsiders: Chinese and Jews in the Modern Transformation of Southeast Asia and Central Europe." Here too an attempt was made to analogize Jews to Chinese, this time on the basis of both being a mercantile people with a far-flung diaspora whose remarkable successes have led to varying degrees of appreciation, practical alliances, envy, hatred and murderous violence on the part of their less economically developed host populations. The analogy itself is not a new one; already three-quarters of a century ago the Thai King Vajiravudh unflatteringly called the Chinese "the Jews of the Orient"; but it is incomplete unless one also brings into it the Armenians, the Greeks, the Lebanese and the Indians, who have performed similar economic functions and met with some or all of the same responses in different parts of the Ottoman Empire, the Middle East, Africa, South America and the Caribbean.

Update from Razib: More accurately, it should be the Fujianese & other South Chinese and the Jews. Chinese emigrants tend to be selected from a few regions of China. Traditionally, those who came to the United States were Cantonese, though new waves of immigrants from other parts of China are changing the general mix. The "Taiwanese" are actually migrants from Fujian province on the coast of China opposite who have settled the island in large numbers since the 16th century. Similarly, most of the Southeast Asian Diaspora derives from various Fujian clans, eg, the Teoichu are dominant in Thailand. And of course, there are ever present "Hakka." In other words, using the term "Chinese" to refer to the Diaspora has some (though not nearly to the same extent) similarity to terming American Jews "Polish" and "Russian" and so characterizing those two nationalities as "market dominant" (also a far smaller percentage, but at least an order of magnitude, have left the Chinese homeland as compared to Ashkenazi Jews who emigrated from their "traditional" Eastern European lands. So selection bias in the case of the Chinese is more plausible).

I will leave it to Chinese readers to note the stereotypes that distinguish the North Chinese from the South Chinese, and the Fujianese and Hakka from the other South Chinese. These distinctions would be crucial to the appropriateness of an analogy to the Jews. For South Asians a good analogy would be assuming that the numerical prominence of Gujaratis and Sikhs in the Diaspora could be back-projected to Soouth Asia.

Final Addendum from Razib: For those who want to bone up on the above topic from the Han angle, I suggest Lords of the Rim: The Invisible Empire of the Overseas Chinese. The book details the power of Chinese minorities in places like Thailand and Indonesia, where they have had a cozy relationship with the "native" elites for the past few decades (I put native in quotes because in Thailand the distinction between Chinese and Thai is blurrier than one might realize, the royal dynasty itself is part Chinese!)."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/raldanash/2435

"Just regarding Razib's point about the Chinese diaspora being predominately Southern or Fujianese, I have a Sinologist friend who specializes in the kingdoms of Wu and Yueh - commensurate with today's Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Fujian (I think). She tells me that throughout history, it was always these regions that produced the most brilliant candidates for the imperial competitive examinations - to the extent that limits were placed on the number of places that were granted to these provinces, for fear that the south would acquire undue political influence.
I also heard from an economics professor of mine from Beijing that Fujianese were renowned throughout China for being strong at mathematics (she told me this after she discovered my father is Fujianese, and a maths professor). She attributed it to diet - the Fujianese are coastal people so eat plenty of fish."

kilroy ---"kilroy" is some guy who posted this at the forum.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A word on gnxp.com. It's run by a bunch of racist losers who buy into all that IQ & racial superiority crap. The site owners are actually a Banglideshi (Razib), and a S. Asian Indian. It's also run by East Asians, Jews, and whites. It's pretty racist stuff. But you can get a lot of "frank" talk there. They over-interpret the on going psychometric, i.e. IQ, research to justify that racist views.

The above passages are anecdoctal, but considering how dominant the Cantonese and Fujianese are throughout the world, it may contain a lot of truth to it.

As for Northern Chinese FOB's, well they are exchange students. China has a population of 1.3 Billion, there's got to be at least a few million geniuses. Do the math.

China's two most brilliant mathematicians, Shiing-shen Chern and Shing-Tung Yau, both Fields Medalists, are southern Chinese. Yau definitely is. Chern is from Zhejiang, so I guess he should be. Northern Chinese are full of themselves. They are not the ones who run the Chinese "economic tigers" in Asia: Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. The Southern Chinese do.

However, as another member has already noted, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, etc. are pathetic underachievers when it comes to winning Nobel Prizes--and Fields Medals compared to the Western countries, and especially to the Ashkenazi Jews.

Chinese literature is pretty pathetic too. Not a Shakespeare or James Joyce in sight, despite 5,000 years of history and culture--as the Chinese always brag. Asians have a lot of catching up to do. The Cantonese are hardly exempt.

Ha ha, very funny.

Actually, I've got a lot more stuff to post, especially to all of herosword protests. He is one tough customer:



Gosh, I didn't know that I was such a miserable failure. Pardon me as I crawl into a hole and die. Man, I'm such a loser.

But I still have a lot more scholarly studies, links, data, tables, etc., to put up to make my case for him. My hard drive is filled to the brim with relevant stuff. I wonder if I should just Fedex my whole hard drive to the guy.

Wow you post quite alot of info, as for my comment, I meant Cantonese out of the whole Asian group. Either way I acknowledge that these are all stereotypes in the first place and do not speak about individual merits. One thing that's definitely true though is the comment about how Asians do not innovate as well as Jews. It seems as though every major breakthrough in science in the Nobel prize has been a westerner, not too many Asians have competed against them in that field.

Don't you worry 'bout me Kimosabe, Tonto has his plans. We'll leave at that.

Thanks for the article. I've seen this kind of stuff on goldsea.com, but never a scholarly article on it. It give some nuts & bolts view of things that goldsea doesn't for obvious reasons.

I've posted scant and anecdotal stuff about the Chinese diaspora and how business-minded they are, including here in the US. Nevertheless, it's very telling if you read between the lines. Later on I'll address article more directly. I still have a lot of setting-up to do--lay the ground work for my argument.

BTW, I'm your garbage collector. I pick your trash on Wednesdays at noon, and I like to admonish you to recycle those damn aluminum cans like you're supposed to. SOME PEOPLE!

Actually, I've just started. I got more. I got more. I got more... Be patient sir. I'm in the US too. I just wondered why you brought up the gang issue. I thought that was for the most part gone. I've read as much on the web. The Viet gang problem is only active in Australia, and maybe in Germany and Eastern Europe, where Viets still face a lot of discrimination--which feeds the gang problem further.



Well if you're referring to that whole "Bell Curve" excrement, I totally agree. You see my whole goal here is to refute--no, dispell--no DESTROY that racist crap. I started looking into this whole subject of Viet academics because of that. We Viets are unique in that we broke the "SES rule," if you will: SES determines grades. This is not true with Vietnamese. It's not true with Chinese, Japanese and Koreans either. But educational researchers never saw it until few years after we got here in 1975, since all those East Asian immigrants that came before us were relatively affluent and educated when they got here, so that their academic achievement was attributed to their high SES. I'll comment more on this in the next posts.



The Berkeley enrollment data is an excellent measure. It is statewide, in the most populous state in the country. There was also a table on college enrollment which was of nation wide. This is totally representative.

Also, like I said, I've got more stuff. I've yet to post on it, but Viet enrollment at other UC campuses, and Berkeley too, is 2-5 times over-representation. We don't match the more competitive (but they are richer and more educated too, i.e. high SES) Chinese and Koreans, but pretty much match that of Asian Indians and Japanese--which is astonishing in itself. Our representation is twice that of Filipinos whose California pop. is twice ours (see Berkeley table above). Filipinos have SES practically identical to that of Chinese. And of course we beat whites, which is the natural bench mark for any immigrant group.

As a tell-tale indicator, Viets have been kicked off Affirmative Action for years now. This is a sure sign of competitiveness. (Chinese, Japanese, Asian Indians, Koreans, Filipinos, Iranians, Arabs, etc. have been taken off A.A. too, as it should be since they are competitive.)

Any single set of census data is a poor indicator of competitiveness of a group if that group is constantly growing with an influx of immigration. It only accurately measures the competitiveness of populations that are in "steady-state equlibrium" if you will. I'll tackle this in detail later. For now, I'll just say that Viet SES numbers are artificially deflated due to a constant stream of poor Viet Immigrants, while Asian Indian SES numbers are way over-inflated due to the never-ending influx of high-tech coolies, H1-B visas and what not. For Viets and anyone else for that matter, nation wide college enrollment is the best measure of competitiveness.

This will change in a 20-30 years. Maybe 50 at the longest. Sociologist have long known that Confucianism has been both (Confucianist) Asia's strength and weakness. Asians are only beginning to admit this, and waking out of our intellectual slumber.

Of the Chinese & Japanese Nobel Prize winners and Field's Medalists--and there've been only a few, nearly all studied and worked in the West. The West is creative whereas the East imprisons itself in its rigidity, i.e. Confucianism.

A friend of mine once said that the lack of Nobels Prize winners, etc., amongst East Asians was due to bias, since the Nobel committee is made of of Westerners and hence they were more likely to overlook Easterner. No way can this account for the sheer magnitude of the respective discrepancy in Nobel Prize winners. Schools like the University of Chicago have nearly 90 Nobel Prize winners associated with them. Japan, a rich and perhaps the most high-tech country, or certainly the most tech savvy population on the planet, has but a handful.

I've read some pretty good online articles on Japanese higher education and research infrastructure. Intellectually, it extremely limiting. Students are encouraged to regurgitate and not innovate. Going over the prof's head is tantamount to career suicide.

A dozen or so years ago, shortly after the Western duo of Physicists that won the Nobel Prize for superconductivity (I forget the details--google it yourself), a prominent Japanese Physics Professor was on a television documentary subtlely kicking himself saying that his students wanted to try some green plastic-metallic alloys, but he over-ruled them. They obdiently obeyed. He would have won the Nobel Prize had he listened to his students. Apparently, green plastic wasn't supposed to conduct. He was wrong. He said that after that, "they no longer listen to me." Dumbass!

what grade am I then VietGuy7 ... back in my day , we have IP at our school and it's the equivalent of AB at other school ... students with 4.0 GPA in IP classes are still consider 4.0 ... no increament ... awww they change that now eh ?

I'm so behind in educational reading materials ... oy ...

-bncat

^Becareful here. It was the whites whose openness allowed us to come to their country. This white society in America is more open to immigrants than some Asian society: ie Japan (even though they desparately need younger people).

Also, Asians still have long way to go. We seems to do well on the test and academic competitions but when it comes to inventions and innovations, we're being left behind.



I've been b!tching about Viet not getting affirmative action, and how's it's reverse racial discrimination; but realistically I agree we don't need it.




Now you're sounding more coherence...more such clear analysis might help to build your case. As for my "toughness," I'm just using the standards my professors and academia expects of a scholar. If one were to attempt to rank something as controversial as subgroups, then one has to build a solid case. My criticisms are not meant to belittle, only to point out the weakness of your argument so that you can constructively convince me otherwise.

I'm guessing you're out of college and probably have job in finance or something to do with stats. If you're still in college, then you're probably a few years ahead of me...I haven't taken any high level stats course yet.



I never used the term gang. I used the word thugs. It's more encompassing. It not only include typical gang activities but also refer to a subculture among some vietnamese that value cheap cars, being stupid, and hooking up with hoes over pursuing academic excellence. I've seen to many of my intelligent Vietnamese friends fall into such traps.

One of my American friend made a really, funny, but damningly true comment. "I've met many Vietnamese. They're either really stupid or they're really smart!" The really stupid ones are giving Vietnamese a bad rep.



This is really a word ! Well, I'm suprised by the english language everyday.


braggadocios: A braggart.

a. Empty or pretentious bragging. b. A swaggering, cocky manner.

different school have their own GPA...
my GPA on 4.0 Scale is 3.9

don't you think this type of competitive comparing is sort of childish?

Einstein wouldn't even have qualified for the competition if it was held in his day, as he was supposedly a horrible student in school. what does that tell you?

in any case, your last statement is not true. Vietnam does very well in the Inter Math Olympiad, but hardly 'consistently beats the pants of' Korea.

Olympiad Math Results:

IMO link

from the listed data (2003-1995):

South Korea 6 (157) 6 (163) 4 (185) 4 (172) 7 (164) 12 (154) 11 (164) 8 (151) 7 (203)

Vietnam 4 (172) 5 (166) 10 (139) 5 (169) 3 (177) 9 (158) 10 (183) 7 (155) 4 (220)

Both countries have beaten each other in recent years. Overall, the edge goes to Vietnam, although the difference in rankings is almost non-existent.

btw, Vietnam has 2X the population of Korea.

Unfortunately, Korean students are not focusing on the sciences these days. As the country has become more affluent, more and more students want to become lawyers/doctors, rather than engineers/scientists.

2x of Korea..true, but Korea has 10x more in school and higher education compared to VN. The population of a country shouldn't be brought up anyways IMO. That's unfair because a majority of Vietnamese esp. in the countryside doesn't have that priveledge. And this includes China too. And S. Korea for sure has better opportunities for sparking the human mind for almost everyone.

I believe Vietnam placing more then 5th is weak. When Vietnam becomes better and more people are able to go to school, anything more then 5th place I'll be embarrassed.

2 times more --> Well, Vietnam is united both north and south. When you say Korea, do you also count North Korea's population, I'm assuming not . So if you want to count North Korea population as Korean, it should be about even.

South Korea participates by itself in the Math Olympiad, not together with the North.

So any comparison involving Korean results in the Math contest would have to be based on South Korea's population alone.

btw, the combined population of North and South Korea would be a little over 70 million, not 86 million.

anyways, these types of competitive/comparing threads seem a little... blah.

In terms of Asian American academics, I'm pretty sure Chinese, Indians, and Koreans do the best both at high school and collegiate levels.

you know some of this is true, academically viets and chinese are very adept....but those are numbers and academics...in my experience with Viets and Chinese alot of them are smart...but street smarts and other applicable smarts alot of them lack.

True..I'm just trying to make point. If the North participated do you think that would have helped S. Korea? The guy is like, we have less people than you...blah...blah...population size is not by itself a decisive factor unless you have an overwhelming number like the Chinese. Other factors include economics and the material wealth of the country; despite not having this, vietnamese students do suprisingly well; we are the underdogs but we are able to overcome our material circumstances; given the opportunity and the conditions, Vietnamese-Americans have proven themselves more than capable of the possibility to prosper. I truly believe if Vietnam had not fell to the banes of communism with all its courruption and vices, Vietnam could have counted itself among the "Asian Tiger" rather than the "Asian pussy cat." Just look at North Korea, and what communism has done for it. South Korea, was lucky...C'est la vie.

viet not street smart???
and wtf is applicable smart???

VietGuy7, are those statistics for only vietnamese living in the united states?

Most likely.

Did I say all Viets are not street smart? I said many of those 'smart' are usually just "book smart" but when it comes socially and living on their own not really.

yeah right

Street smarts will get you no where in a developed world unless you want to join the underground economy and sell drugs and do illegal $hit which is NOT a way to live life :P

well if your going to measure general intelligence than you shouldnt use GPA since that doesnt measure intelligence. Nor can you really compare asians living in America since they dont represent the general population. In some cases the asians who come to America are either

A. Rich successful ones
B. Refugees
C. Poor and looking for work
D. Just visiting but decided to stay
F. Has been living in America for years and years.

The Indians who come to the US are indians who possess college degrees and their services are bought by American companies for things like programming(because they are cheaper than other programmers, effective and can speak English unlike say the average Chinese programmer who wants to work for the US). Wheras a huge number of Mexicans(yes I know theyre not asians) comes to the US illegally without college degrees or a profession, nor can they speak the language.

The Japanese average the highest income amongst asian americans and thats because most of them are already third, fourth, fifth etc generation Japanese+only a small number of Japanese immigrants come to the US these days. Meaning that they already know English and have parents with college degrees and its easier for them to become rich. So its not fair to compare Americanized Japanese to recently arriving Hmong refugees who know nothing about America. A much more fair example would be to compare the countries they came from since thats where you can average their intelligence. IQ tests however come in any language and measures general intelligence and there is no such thing as racial bias in them. Heres the scores.

http://www.sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm

South Korea averages the highest IQ(Hong Kong isnt a country its a city). Its also not fair to compare cities vs an entire country since cities have better standards of living. A much more fair battle would be to compare Seoul vs Tokyo vs Hong Kong.

Korea, South 106 Japan 105 Taiwan 104 Singapore 104 China 100 .

And well the Japanese and Koreans create a lot of innovative technologies. If there was a Nobel prize for electronics, robotics and other handy dandy stuff im pretty sure theyd be winning them all. China has a large population so a big number of it is starving, if China were to fully mondernize than its IQ would be equal to Taiwan and Singapore who both contain Chinese populations(The Chinese in Taiwan are no different compared to the Chinese on mainland). North Korea if it were to become democratic and modernize will have an IQ of 106 equal to the South due to both of them being very homogenous. Im not sure what Vietnams IQ would be although I doubt its more than Taiwan and Singapores. Probally equal probally not.

a lot of Viet people around my area grad from NAIL tech and some work in the culinary field such as PHo resturant...... that is pretty high woahhhhh

Hey don't dis them Nail Techs ... I heard they're making pretty digits annually

-bncat