J. L.
Ed, this goes back to all the pseudo-sciences of the 19th century, like phrenology – the study of intelligence based on cranial capacity. When they filled Albert Einstein’s skull with bits of lead, they found that his cranium was of unexceptional size. A good book to consult about all the pseudo- intelligence-measuring sciences in the past is Stephen Jay Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man. According to his book, there doen’t seem to be any correlation between cranial capacity and IQ. The question of ‘Emotional Intelligence’ (EI) also comes up. I am not well-read in psych literature, but EI seems to be a better indicator of performance than IQ. Also, drawing on something that I had read recently, Max Weber’s theory that religion fuels social change may have some bearing on the question of ‘why do Asians do well academically?’ The Protestant work ethic, argued Weber, made Americans determined to work hard and succeed. Though he argued against other religions as being too steeped in ‘magic’ (including Confucianism) to pave the way to social rationalization, I think he still says something very important. It seem to me that the religious or philosophical beliefs of a group provide the impetus for social/financial/academic achievement. I think educators are well aware of the greater emphasis East and South Asian cultures place on academic achievement, and they encourage Americans to change their attitudes toward education.
Now, if you combine the cultural belief in academic achievement with individual emotional IQ (drive, determination, focus), you WILL get a group of people who are determined to academically achieve at all costs! (As a side note, I want to point out that the ethnic groups with the highest academic achievement are from ancient cultures – China, India, Japan, etc. Do the lessons of history teach people a thing or two about success and failure? Do very old cultures possess some kind of flexibility that withstands the tests of time and endows its members with unique tools for success?).