Living up to Expectations: The Strengths and Challenges Experienced by Chinese Canadian Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reviews qualitative and quantitative studies related to the academic achievement of youth from immigrant Chinese families. Overall, the literature suggests that Chinese Canadian students demonstrate high levels of achievement and that this academic success is associated with factors such as stronger feelings of ethnic identity, better English language skills in the family, Chinese cultural values, parental emphasis on schooling, and access to social networks that support achievement. Barriers to high achievement are created by stress in the home, experiences of peer discrimination, cultural differences in school-related expectations, and obstacles to parental involvement in schooling. Importantly, despite high average levels of achievement, the reviewed literature also highlights the psychological and social struggles that many Chinese youth experience. High achievement for some Chinese Canadian adolescents comes at a cost of other aspects of their well-being. In particular, intense parental expectations for these youth, as well as the extremely high standard set by the “model minority” stereotype of Chinese youth, contribute to students’ psychological distress and alienation from parents and peers. Furthermore, the almost exclusive attention to high achievement among Chinese youth ignores those Chinese youth who are not high achievers. Implications are discussed for educational policy and practice related to the schooling of Chinese Canadian youth specifically, as well as youth from families with diverse ethnic backgrounds more generally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".