Slashdot Mirror
Why Are Indian Kids So Good At Spelling?
theodp writes "Slate's Ben Paynter looks into why Indian kids dominate the Scripps National Spelling Bee, and concludes it's because they have their own minor-league spelling bee circuit (having the discipline to spell 7,000 to 8,000 words a day probably helps too!). Indian-Americans make up about 1% of the US population, notes Paynter, but this year an estimated 11% of the competitors at Scripps will hail from regional contests run by the North South Foundation. The NSF competitions function as a kind of nerd Olympiad for Indian-Americans — there are separate divisions for math, science, vocabulary, geography, essay writing, and even public speaking — and a way to raise money for college scholarships for underprivileged students in India. BTW, Strollerderby has the scoop on Whatever Happened to the Spellbound Kids? (RIP, Ted Brigham)."
It's probably because parents in many other countries are way more interested in driving their kids or excel in social activities or in sports than in intellectual pursuits (or not driving them to excel in anything at all). If my parents and community had supported my academic interests as much as they supported my little league career, I'm sure I would have won a lot more spelling bees too. Much as I think Asians often push their kids *too* hard, it would be nice to be able to spell "necessary" consistently today without needing a spell checker.
Ah screw it, spell checkers have made spelling obsolete anyway. And I can still throw a pretty mean curve ball.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I saw a statistics, saying that 90% of Indian immigrants have a degree- the highest rate of any immigrant or native group.
What's wrong with sports? Sports teach leadership and teamwork, which are arguably just as important as being able to spell "necessary" without a spell checker. Some parents might need to find a better balance with regards to sports vs. the rest of the curriculum but that doesn't mean that sports don't have their place.
There's also the fact that 1/3 of this country is obese to argue in favor of expanded sports/PE instruction.....
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Not just parents, peer group. I'm sure plenty of /.ers are more than familiar with the general anti-intellectual sentiment found in many schools, especially among the 'cool kids' and young-ish age groups.
However hard one tries, it's difficult to remain motivated when having a wide vocabulary or advanced mathematical skills singles you out as 'weird'. A competitive academic environment, on the other hand, not only keeps motivation up but if anything pushes kids to spend extra time on their work, to help them 'win'.
In either case, though, a balance is needed. Overly pushy parents and excess competition seem to lead to social problems and feelings of inadequacy.
It's probably because parents in many other countries are way more interested in driving their kids or excel in social activities or in sports than in intellectual pursuits (or not driving them to excel in anything at all).
It's weird, I read the article and came up with a completely different reason than the summary. And that reason is right in this text:
Just as Kavya Shivashankar has inspired the next wave of Indian spellers, Kavya found her bee mojo during the post-Spellbound boom. Before Spellbound, the 2002 documentary that featured Indian-American Nupur Lala's run to the 1999 Scripps title, many first-generation South Asian parents saw NSF as a way for their children to assimilate—the best way to understand a culture, after all, is to learn its language. They used the North South Foundation events as a sort of SAT prep, teaching their children to use phonetics, etymology, and word roots to suss out answers. "Our focus is not on competition," says Chitturi. "Winning becomes an outcome of you focusing on learning. You are competing against yourself, not these other people."
It seems like it's about assimilation and success to Indian-Americans as well as a great competition against yourself instead of another human -- minor league circuit or no minor league circuit. Then introduce a documentary outlining how one Indian kid succeeded by doing this and parents start picking up on it on a large scale.
If my parents and community had supported my academic interests as much as they supported my little league career, I'm sure I would have won a lot more spelling bees too.
But it's not like you had to be good at only one thing. My parents encouraged me to just be well rounded but it turned out I was terrible at sports and I loved playing trombone, reading and participating in math league. I'm sure the Indian kids get pushed to excel in sports as well but it is obvious that the cultural assimilation is very important to their parents because they most likely consider that as necessary on the path to success.
My work here is dung.
The difference is the emphasis a particular culture places on an activity vs race. We notice these particular differences in sports and entertainment because it is in our faces most of the time, but academics, neighborhoods, food consumption, jobs, etc are all influenced by our culture. As a white male southerner, I'm introduced to gun use, Protestant church, pig based barbecue, college football, etc. That's what I do.
Why are African Americans so good at Sports? Why are Latin American kids so good at baseball?
Oh wait, those are politically incorrect, isn't it? We're not allowed to talk about that.
How is the article ANY different?
Sent from your iPad.
Stupid people worship jocks because it is easier to imagine being strong than being smart. This would be fine if it didn't have devastating consequences for society.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Indian here. By and large Indian society focuses on learning by rote and not on creativity.
What good does winning spelling contests achieve? Efficient secretaries?
Writing is better than talking. Thinking is better than writing. Deciding is better than thinking - William James
If you're already obese (and many kids are), sports like football, soccer or baseball are not really recommended.
Dilbert RSS feed
It was used in British and American English as early as last century.
From the Wiki:
"Do the needful" is an expression, now archaic or used humorously except in South Asian English (Pakistani, Indian and Sri Lankan), which means "do that which is requisite or necessary". Although sometimes parodied as a staple of contemporary South Asian English, the expression was current in both British[1] and American English[2] well into the early 20th century.
The Oxford English Dictionary lists examples of usage from 1709 (Richard Steele in the Tatler), 1771 (Samuel Foote in Maid of Bath), 1821 (Maria Edgeworth in a letter), 1831 (Walter Scott in his journal), 1929 (I. Colvin in his Life of Dyer), and 1992 (Jeff Torrington in Swing Hammer Swing!), the last likely used humorously.[1]
This space for rent.
Educated Indian immigrants are generally much better at English than educated North Americans.... probably becuase they actually learn the language in school, including the grammar. Also, almost all Indian post-secondary education is done in English. It doesn't surprise me that they insist that their kids speak - pronunciation aside - and write English to the same standard they do.
It is pitiful how many North Americans (Americans and Anglo Canadians, that is) have a degree but cannot write or speak their language to a standard that would pass overseas English language competency tests.
"Immaculate" spelling isn't necessary, but spelling well is useful. Language functions as more than simply a way to communicate ideas. The way we write and the correctness of our writing confers to readers the care with which we approach our endeavors. This is particularly important in business, where mispelling word can make one appear incompetent.
Kids who win spelling bees are better at spelling than will ever useful to them. However, even with spell-checking, being able to spell the entirety of your working vocabulary has real benefits and no disadvantages.
My other sig is clever.
Not just parents, peer group. I'm sure plenty of /.ers are more than familiar with the general anti-intellectual sentiment found in many schools, especially among the 'cool kids' and young-ish age groups.
However hard one tries, it's difficult to remain motivated when having a wide vocabulary or advanced mathematical skills singles you out as 'weird'. A competitive academic environment, on the other hand, not only keeps motivation up but if anything pushes kids to spend extra time on their work, to help them 'win'.
In either case, though, a balance is needed. Overly pushy parents and excess competition seem to lead to social problems and feelings of inadequacy.
There's a reason all my best friends are of Asian descent, they're the only ones who seem to compete against me for grades everyone else just shrugs.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
The Indian community does not go into spelling because there are many other successful Indian spellers as role models, nor because their parents value the exercise or because there is a supportive community of Indian spellers. It is Nature not Nurture at play here. this is not about the evolution of a culture through positive feedback, it is all about the Creator's wish. This is intelligent Spelling Design in action.
Nullius in verba
I'm Bengali (we're all apart of the same culture group), but born and raised in the U.S. You're intuiting the right answer here (though a quick Wikipedia search would have helped you even more).
My original guess was one of your two suggestions; either it's an old British phrase or the Indian-ization of the English words. A lot of phrases died out in contemporary British English that still survive in India. One of my favorite authors, P.G. Wodehouse, for example, isn't widely read in England anymore, but remains popular in India; a lot of British literature from the Victorian era to perhaps the 1920s or 30s remains popular in India and until recently was most educated Indians' English literature (the growth of American popular culture in India and of Indian literature being written in English is probably changing this).
I read a joke somewhere that the last Englishman will be an Indian; there's a large element of truth to that; English manners, social norms, and cultural ideas from the Raj remain entrenched in Indian culture, even though they are no longer a major force in contemporary English culture.
Anyway, do the needful was in common use in the U.S. and Britain until the 20th century.
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
No, actually pretty everyone in the world is better than native english speakers at spelling, because they learn English mostly by reading it, instead of learning it by listening and speaking it...
"spell checkers have made spelling obsolete anyway"
Your mistaken if you think that kid's spelling can be improved using there computers alone.
I hate printers.
I know two of the people who were in Spellbound as kids (Emily Stagg and Harry Altman), and I've a met a third. This makes me wonder if this is evidence the set of high-achievers in US society is a) much smaller than one might think and b) determined at a surprisingly early age. I know, tiny anecdotal evidence but still I wonder...
Why is it so surprising that kids from a culture that produces names like "Sivasubramaniam Raveendranath" and "Elamkulam Manakkal Sankaran Namboodiripad" are good at spelling?
Is it just me (and I am running a 102 degree fever, so it might be) or is the summary basically gibberish? It starts off talking about Indian kids being good at spelling, and ends with something about the "spellbound kids" (whatever the heck that is) and Ted Brigham who is apparently dead. I am very confused.
Spellbound was a spelling bee documentary. Ted Brigham was one of the kids in it. And he evidently killed himself in 2007. There's no cause of death listed, just a death notice, and families generally don't list the cause of death if it might be damaging to the person's reputation; suicide, death by erotic misadventure, really dumb accidents, etc.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
I hesitate to feed an AC troll but:
I was born and raised in the U.S. and consider myself "Indian-American." I live in the U.S. and am culturally, mostly American, but I speak my native language at home, eat that food, and often dress in that clothing.
I'm as American as imply you are, but I am also of my parents country.
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
The answer is simple. Asian parents constantly stress the importance of academics and hard work. On the other hand, American parents think it's important to have their kids do a million different activities unrelated to academics, and even worse, they value socializing too highly. Well, what they seem to value more than just socializing is being popular. It is important to socialize, but overdo it and it gets in the way of excelling in school. Then there's the entitlement mentality that keeps being pushed on kids, that they're special and deserve the world. Too many American children's cartoons are obsessed with the notion that it's important to be yourself. Everyone is taught that you're only living life if you're doing something perceived as exciting, be it something like skydiving or partying. So of course your average American kid isn't going to see the value in academics. So ultimately, it's a cultural issue.
There is a strong divide between (very generally) Western and Asian cultures. In the West we tend to believe that talent and ability is innate, and that your success in life will be down to the use of your gifts. Contrarily, Asian cultures believe that success is directly proportional to the effort the person puts into it. The psychological evidence is they are essentially correct.
[FUCK BETA]
You could of given us some examples there.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
If they can spell their own names, of course they will be a whiz at regular words. "Bill", "Joe", and "Mary" haven't a chance against "Dhananjay" "Jagannatha" or "Chandrakanta".
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
The racial stereotype is often that Asian Americans and Indian Americans are often more intelligent that others. I think this stems from the fact that typically that many of the best minds from Asia (which includes India) come to the United States for their higher education. When you've got billions of people, and you pick the cream of that crop, and send them over to the US, they're going to represent their race particularly well.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/04/magazine/a-patel-motel-cartel.html?pagewanted=all
you got a motel almost anywhere in the usa, and its likely to be run by an indian guy with the last name of patel
why?
basically, its a phenomenon of the immigrant experience: one random guy goes from country A to exotic foreign inscrutable country B. what should he do there? well, he tries career X, and he's successful at it. he writes home about it, and pretty soon a bunch of other guys, relatives usually, from country A are interested in pursuing career X in country B. its not because the patels are better at running hotels than the guptas and the ganeshes, or the chos or the mcneils, for that matter, but simply because people pursue what, and who, they know, that works
same goes with spelling bees and indian americans (but not american indians. i never understood why columbus made a silly mistake about where he thought he was, and we are STILL calling native residents of north america "indians". completely nonsensical)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
As a European, I never understood the big thing about the US spelling contests.
As a foreigner living in the US I am coming to the conclusion that society here prefers pageantry and spectacle over form and substance. It also embraces parochialism (not sure if that is the best word for it) at a low level so that there always has to be an "us vs. them" mentality (this also works IMHO at multiple levels of their society - city vs country, state vs state and country vs country). And throw in a dose of parents living vicariously through their children. So to me the spelling bees are just a manifestation of the pathological state of the society as a whole.
You're not completely wrong, but I think you overstate it. We appreciate someone who has put in the effort to be the absolute best at something, though it can often (Scripps bee as an example) get to a point where we celebrate expertise that has gone to a level far beyond usefulness and real utility.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Thats a myth. There can only be one leader in a team
Not true at all - teams often have multiple team captains, and individual team units often have their own leaders. Take football for example: you may have the offensive team leader (with the quarterback being the most visible) but there are typically leaders among the subgroups like offensive backs, defensive backs, O linemen, D linemen, receivers and linebackers.
When I was at school there was nothing worse than having some teacher take the sports too seriously as it just spoiled the fun.
This is all too often true, but that's not a failure of sports, but rather a failure of the school leadership.
Hey, that's not fair. I like the smell of AXE.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Its a fair balance that is needed. Pure excellence in examinable academics goes that far. Guess why India does not have a ...so economyand daily comfort is not the issue. Thinking outside the box
huge fraction of inventors...its middle class is as big if not bigger as the whole of US
or traditional way is an issue. Knowledge of spelling is good but thinking of how to make that home made rocket go higher in your back yard with your friends is good too !
If you depend on a spell checker, you'll rape what you sew.
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
What's wrong with sports? Sports teach leadership and teamwork,
This is crap parroted by sports to further their programs at the expense of programs that actually matter and require teaching. There are LOTS of ways to teach leadership and teamwork. In fact, in contrast, Japan and China excel at teaching both and generally without sports. Its part of their culture and "group think". Same is true for teamwork. Just like in America, the popular "group think" is, "sports teaches leadership and teamwork"; no matter how incorrect that may be.
Besides, social sciences CLEARLY shows leadership is an inherent part of being human which really does not require much teaching. And the areas which do require teaching are absolutely not taught in athletics. Time and time again, leadership is naturally asserted. Accordingly, a natural pecking order always falls out and leaders are naturally established. What follows are, well, the other people. The fact that roles in athletics are ASSIGNED actively defeats nature's role and other natural leadership capabilities.
Sports tend to elevate those capable of physical feats. Hundreds of years ago, and more likely, thousands of years ago, that made a lot of sense. It might even explain why their genes are still around today. These days, it makes little to no sense at all. These days if you want to get a head, its NOT by physical agility and strength. In short, not only does sports teach negative aspects of humanity (oppression by physics prowess), it emphasizes other aspects which are least likely to benefit humanity or themselves in the long run; as in, not brain power or higher learning.
What we can authoritatively say about athletics is, if you actually "learned" teamwork and leadership (which for most actually means shut up and follow), then you're dumber than a bag of hammers. If you learned teamwork in athletics, that means your parents, friends, and extended family all failed horribly, because that's where its actually learned.
To be clear, I don't have a problem with athletics. Everyone should enjoy competition, feel victory and defeat. Heck, the exercise alone is beyond rebuke. It absolutely does help with character building, social skills, learning reasonable expectations, even brain chemistry, so on and so on. There are lessons to be learned. Good lessons. Just the same, leadership and teamwork are not inherent qualities generally learned or taught by association. The fact this is commonly repeated means their brainwashing has been very successful - so their future funding won't be a concern.
Now if you want to argue sports can help improve social skills, I won't outright disagree. But then again, you'll find they are generally poor activities to do so. And if social skills were truly of concern, you'd see everyone following in the footsteps of the fairer sex as by all measure they appear to be experts as social skill development.