Talk:Third culture kid

Is this just an American English term? I'm in the UK and have never heard of it. If it is specifically AmE, we should say so. If I'm just clueless, we don't need to say that. :P 86.143.53.52 12:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

From the article: "The term third culture kid was coined by Ruth Hill Useem in the early 1960s." There are also a number of scholarly references. It seems to be an academic term, not in common use in any particular dialect, but well defined. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 17:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

No. This is not (just) an American English term. I am a TCK and not from the US. My classmates and I have been called this our whole lives.--Thorwald 02:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I've read this book and being a TCK-turned-ATCK, I am willing to stand for this article with every fibre. Whether or not it is an academic term, what I've learnt in my Teacher's Education programme is that it usually takes around 20-30 years (sometimes even more) for a term/phrase to be accepted in the general public. This book by social anthropologists Pollock and Van Reken is legitimate, and I have a copy of it where there are scholarly references. So the term is legitimate and the information resembles what is said in the book as well. 65.249.163.82 12:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC) dr. 08:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Stereotypes About Military Brats

This article incorrectly stated (until recently corrected) that a majority of military brats tend to be very insulated from the overseas cultures in which they live. In fact, a slight majority of overseas American military kids have historically lived off-base in local villages or cities and were consequently very immersed in their host cultures. Lack of sufficent base housing, especially for familes, has always been an issue, forcing many married personel with children to live off base.

Reasons for this stereotype are tied to host culture hosility (and at times, reactions to American foreign policy)--

Cultural disinheritance as a repudiation of occupation. Military kids are often punished by host cultures. This 'disinheritance stereotype' tends to come from host cultures themselves (Germany Japan and the Philippines for example) where there is decades old anti-military (and at times anti-American foreign policy) resentment and even anger. In countries like Germany Japan and the Phillipines, where a majority of American military kids live or lived off-base and immersed in the host culture and not insulated from the host nation by the U.S. military, there can often be resentful, and even occasionally hostile, reactions against these kids by the native populations. A common expression of this resentment is a tendency to negatively and aggressively stereotype American military children as outsiders (partly true, but not completely true): Part of this anger at occupation is often directed at current or former military children and the message is: "You never belonged here, your parents were occupiers, therefore we will reject or downplay your experience of assimilation into our culture."

So knowledge about the true extent of the military brat TCK experience becomes a casualty of international tensions-- and to a lesser degree, a handful of very agenda-driven academics who have their own reasons for wanting to stereotype military personel and their children.

(Not all academics who look at these issues do this, but some do, which proliferates even more military brat stereotypes). The fact ramains-- a majority of overseas military kids have lived off-base (immersed in the host culture).

This hidden fact about majority off-base-living is unfortunate because many former military children posess a facility for international and intercultural understanding (including multi-lingual facility) that is quite rich and of value to a nation learning how to relate more effectively to the outside world.

One last note-- I personally was a military brat and lived the majority of my childhood in Europe and the majority of that time was spent living off-base. The majority of military kids whose parents were working at say, Ramstein Air Base lived off-base, for example.

Our true experiences as overseas military kids have been invisible for too long.

Sean7phil (talk) 14:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Another misrepresentation in the article-- the fact stated that 41% of military brats live overseas 5 years or less (used in the article to support the assumption that military brats have little overseas assimilation experience) fails to make this point for the following reasons--

A) That leaves 59% of military brats (if these statistics are accurate) who have lived overseas longer than 5 years.

B) Childhood years are the most formative years-- so if a military brat even lives off-base and only 3 (three) years overseas after say, age three -- that is during the most profoundly formative time of their lives.

C) Children are extremely rapid assimilators. Children learn languages much faster than adults do-- For example, studies show that children learn two languages almost as quickly as they learn a single language. So downplaying the significance of living even a few years overseas as a child is very innacurate. Children are actually like sponges and they absorb new cultures and words very quickly.

Sean7phil (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Anglo-centric bias

This term (and the research it describes) seems to have an anglo-centric bias. What about the experiences of second generation (or more accurately, 1.5 generation) migrant children who accompany their parents to another country? It seems that these children's experiences mirror the TCK experience except in reverse - they are usually going from a non-English-speaking country to an English speaking one.

Why is there no mention of this in the article? Surely the experiences of non-English-background migrant children merits some research.

I think that's answered by the line under Intercultural Experiences: "TCKs are distinguished from other immigrants by the fact that TCKs do not expect to settle down permanently in the places where they live." While there would be multiple cultures in effect for those migrant children, the fact that they have migrated to a new country would lead them to adopt the culture of that new country, rather than forming the blend of cultures which earmarks the TCK. The direction of English to non-English or vice versa is irrelevant...more to the point is having continued mobility, which forms the "global" perspective. MFC21 16:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)ATCK

Exactly, TCK expliticly includes the return to the persons passport country. People who have immigrated to another country are explicitly NOT included as TCKs based upon the definition. THere is some research on non-american experiences in the article---including the notion that one of the major criticisms of TCK research is that it has been done via projecting expectations upon the results.Balloonman 22:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that the term 'international TCK' is either American-centric or redundant. Naturally, more studies are needed to confirm that the conclusions drawn so far (that TCKs have more in common with each other than locals regardless of where we've lived exactly) are in fact generally correct and to address the possible problems with the studies, but as it stands the data support this conclusion, which posits the unique-to-TCKs relative irrelevance of coutry of origin. Per definition, TCKs are international. Using such language suggests a country bias, in this case toward America. If this research has any transformative value at all, surely it is that TCKs transcend the nation-state concept. In order to keep the focus on the key aspects of the research, I suggest we consciously write the article in such a way that it does not use any one country as a point of reference. If the data change later, of course the article will have to be changed to reflect that at that point. Globalistgirl 16:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Military Brat Online Community

This is a new online service for all military brats (former and current). I just added this to the "external links" section of the article--

• Military Brats Online Community A free facebook-style interactive online community for all former and current millitary brats. Created recently by one of the founders of the original Military Brat websites (Vann Baker). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.106.182 (talk) 00:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Career Decisions section issues

Does anybody else have no idea what the charts in the "career decisions" section is trying to portray? Hku04 01:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It is listing the typical career choices made by TCKs...MFC21 17:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

It does need a lead/intro, but basically it is in part concerned with the higher levels of education that TCK's typically receive and the career paths that TCKs typically take. It is an area of significant research.Balloonman 22:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Other uses

Can someone provide a source for the following:

The term "third culture kid" is sometimes used in an unrelated sense to describe autistic children and people with Asperger syndrome who grow up in their childhood in considerable isolation and without much social relationship, largely in a conceptual world.

I have never heard of this and I have done a lot of reading on TCKs. It doesn't even make sense in this context. I suggest we remove it, unless someone can provide a reputable source.--Thorwald 20:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of it either, but before getting rid of it let's ask on the Autism and Asperger's syndrome pages for insight. I've made a post on both Autism and Asperger's Syndrom to come here to respond if it needs to stay.Balloonman 20:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I have never heard this term relating to people with Asperger's Syndrome/Asperger syndrome, and I have the condition myself. That said, I had never actually heard the term at all before seeing the link on the AS talk page. Though this may have something to do with me being from the UK, where some anon above also seems to be from. ;) --Dreaded Walrus 20:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any relation whatsoever. Just because we (people on the autism spectrum) grow up in our own world doesn't make it a seperate culture. That, and the fact that the quote can't seem to be cited means it should be deleted. --James Duggan 04:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Unless someone objects, I will removed the references to Asperger's syndrome tomorrow.--Thorwald 07:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Adult Third Culture Kids (ATCKs)

I added a "citation needed" stamp to this phrase/term and abbreviation as I have never seen this used in literature. I also view it as a dichotomy of sorts (i.e. "Adult ... Kid"). I understand what the term is attempting to convey: These TCKs are now adults. I am an adult and a TCK. I view "Kid" as simply part of the term, TCK, and continue to refer to myself as a TCK. If you can provide a source for "ATCKs" I will agree to keep it in the article. Otherwise, I think it should be removed (it really adds nothing to the article and sounds forced).--Thorwald 22:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Do a google search on "ATCK" and "Third Culture Kids" and you'll come up with almost 200 references[1] ("Adult Third Culture Kids" came up with over 200 hits.[2]) Ruth Unseem, who coined the term TCK, uses ATCK in many of her writings. I'm very surprised you haven't seen it. From my experience it is a very common term used in a lot of literature and doesn't need a specific citation because it is in accepted parlance. Remember since the Kid in TCK is describing a cultural heritage, it does not necessarily reference person who is currently a kid.Balloonman 00:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

First of all, a Google search does not return a list of "references"; they are occurrences of the keyword on websites. These should not, in my opinion, be used as references in an encyclopaedia (other than to note the popularity of a phrase/term). Secondly, I have seen ATCK many times over the years. I wrote that I hadn't seen the term "used in literature". This is very different. Abbreviations are introduced all the time in literature (e.g. scientific papers), however, the vast majority of these are limited to use within the article and there alone. The few that are accepted by the general scientific community eventually enter the parlance and may later become actual defined terms/phrases. TCK has been defined; I am not presently satisfied that "ATCK" has likewise, thus my request for a citation. You wrote, "since the Kid in TCK is describing a cultural heritage, it does not necessarily reference person who is currently a kid". This was my point exactly. This is exactly what I am debating and promoting here. A TCK should not be used solely to describe TCKs as children; adult TCKs should also be simply referred to as "TCKs". This, in my opinion, negates the need for "ATCK" as a defined term.--Thorwald 01:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't understand the distinction that you were looking for. It is a very commonly used term, as demonstrated by the numberous web hits. But you are looking for something other than common parlance. A quick scan through the hits will reveal that many of the hits are of a scientific/authoritative nature. For example Third Culture Kids: Focus of Major Study by Ruth Useem, or “Educational and Occupational Choices of American Adult Third culture Kids” Pgs. 229-253 in Morten G. Ender (Ed) Military Brats and Other Global Nomads, or Ruth Hill Useem and Ann Baker Cottrell “Adult Third culture Kids” (1996) in Carolyn Smith (Ed) Strangers at Home, or TCKs AND OTHER CROSS-CULTURAL KIDS. The list can go on. On Amazon, I found Footsteps around the world, Raising Global Nomads, The Bamboo Chest, Overseas Americans, etc.Balloonman 03:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Just for the record, I have no problem with Awiseman's changing the ATCK's to TCK's... I would, however, have a problem with getting rid of the note that Adult TCK's are known as ATCK's. I think the two terms are more or less interchangeable, with ATCK explicitly discussin adults, while TCK's describe both the adult and the actual youth who is currently living said lifestyle.Balloonman 16:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually I thought ATCK stood for "A Third Culture Kid" which I realize is wrong. If you want to fix that please do. My mistake. --AW 09:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not something I'm married to. I do think it is important to point out that ATCK is an acronymn that is used, but it is somewhat interchangeable with TCK. The only distinction, in my mind, is that ATCK explicitly refers to the adult and thereby implies the long term effects of being a TCK, while TCK is more encompassing. Every ATCK is a TCK, but not every TCK is an ATCK ;-)Balloonman 09:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I changed the ATCK part to "have been called Adult Third Culture Kids (ATCKs) as a distinction", but someone changed it back. Here's the thing: I am a TCK and have been my entire life. I have never been called an ATCK (as an adult) nor have any of my friends. Dr. Useem may like the term, but I still don't think it has entered the parlance of the general community (sociological or otherwise). I still find the term forced and unnecessary. Simply stating "adult TCK" should suffice without the extra abbreviation (you don't need to abbreviate everything). I believe my change to "have been called . . . as a distinction" is a good compromise and shall change it back unless someone provides a good argument against it.--Thorwald 17:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with that... I do think it's entered the lexicon, thus I think we need to mention it, but we don't have to use it. I suspect that your change occurred when we had to revert some changes below?Balloonman 18:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Time for the Tongue in Cheeck comment. You said, (you don't need to abbreviate everything). I'll respond, "you're obviously not a military brat... we have to abbreviate everything ;-)"

Good call. I am not a military brat. I am more of on the diplomatic side. ;-) --Thorwald 07:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

"Global cultural rainbow?" Who in the world wrote that?

Blog style creeping in?

I am not sure I like the new "Question" additions. They don't seem to be set in an encyclopaedia style. Also, the new references are not complete. For an example, "Brown, 1993" is not a reference. Where was it published? What is the title of the journal? Etc.--Thorwald 07:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree and fixed the questions. However, while there are plenty of soruces listed, the article sort of seems like it's a lot of original research, like an essay or something. --AW 08:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't look at the changes made yesterday, except to note that some of the characteristics were the exact opposite of what I've seen/read in other sources (which is why I went through and tried to document them.) I didn't read the actual changes, but when I did I recognized it immediately. The questions and answers came verbatum from Third Culture Kids: Returning to their Passport Country so I reverted it back to the last changes made by Awiseman but kept the Characteristics with individual citations. I do think the article needs a lot of help, but cutting and pasting it from another website is not the help it needs.Balloonman 09:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Note, the last question and paragraphs that followed were not from the US State department website... but it looks familiar to me none-the-less and I suspect it was probably cut and pasted from somewhere.Balloonman 09:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Good call on the revert, Balloonman. Thanks. --AW 09:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Found the missing question by typing it into Google. It came verbatum from THIRD CULTURE KIDSBalloonman 09:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The last three paragraphs are taken straight from What is a TCK?Balloonman 15:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I definitely agree that a non-encyclopedic tone pervades this article. Contractions and rhetoric are openly used. I'm going to style-tag it. -Fsotrain⁰⁹ 20:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Schaetti

What are your guys feeling on Barbara Schaetti has proposed a developmental model for third culture kid identity development based on earlier identity literature, primarily on nigrescence, in which a number of different mechanisms are explained for the wide range of identity outcomes that third culture kids may have. Nigrescence literally means "the process of becoming black." I've found some questionable resources that define it loosely as the "Negro to Black Conversion Experience." I looked up Barbara and most things dealing with her relate to public speaking engagements/coaching on intercultural subjects. When I combined the two terms (Negrescene and Barbara Schaetti) the only thing that I could find were a few second hand sources that I don't consider to be authoritative mentioning her PhD dissertation. Most of the things I found for her were links that referenced Wikipedia as its source. Personally, the sources that I can find seem pretty weak and the fact that I can't find anything on Negrescene makes me question if this should be in here.Balloonman 15:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I am in favour of removing it, as it adds nothing to the article and is questionable.--Thorwald 17:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It's been five days, and it's easy enough to revert this section if somebody wants to keep it, so I deleted it.Balloonman 17:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I was the one that added that information. I didn't have a registered account at the time. The nigrescence information is all in her thesis: Schaetti, B. F. (2001). Global Nomad Identity: Hypothesizing a Developmental Model (Doctoral dissertation, The Union Institute, 2001.) Dissertation Abstracts, 9992721. Very little of that thesis can be found on the web for free, unfortunately. My university ordered it for me when I was writing a study on TCKs. I think members of the public can order it, but you'll have to pay for it. I'll add it back in if no one has further objections, as it's an academic reference and as such far more authoritative than any web page. Globalistgirl 16:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Likely v Unlikely

To the person who keeps changing, * TCKs are unlikely to work for big business, government, or follow their parents' career choices to likely. Please provide a reference to your assertation that TCK's are likely to do it. You wrote International School Service 8(4) on your response, but that isn't a recognizable reference. ISS, does however have Ruth Useem and Ann Cotrell's research article wherein they state, "One won't find many TCKs in large corporations. Nor are there many in government."[3] If you have a reference that is contrary to that, then let us know. But until you can cite something authoritative, I'm going with the major study's conclusion performed by Ruth Useem and Ann Cottrell.Balloonman 17:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The above research also states, Although they may have been influenced by their parents' work overseas, they have not followed in parental footsteps. Twenty percent of this sample were MKs, but only 2 percent have a career in the church. Likewise, 25 percent were military dependents, but only 6 percent are in the armed forces.Balloonman 17:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Major Revamp

Well, with the concern about blog style creeping in, I'm going to undertake the task of getting this article up to FA status. I think this article would make a great FAC... and I would love the assistance of those of you who are regular contributors here. Thus, I'll be making my changes directly to the actual article.Balloonman 09:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

References needing to be cleaned up--self acknoledgment

I've made some changes last night. I'm still working on it, but if you need to know where the references are (which I haven't added yet) check the Military brat (U.S. subculture) page. Many of the references here are there as well... but there are a number that won't be there either. It is something I will add ASAP---I just didn't have the time to add it last night while working on the article.Balloonman 18:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The direction of the article

As a TCK, I have first-hand knowledge of what it "means to be a TCK" . . . however, because of this, I can be biased of/on my input. My "peers" (other TCKs) can back up my contributions. My concern is that this article is being written by those who only have "academic" knowledge of this phenomenon. There is too much more to the story than what very little the academics have studied. We are a very under-studied group of individuals and this article does not do justice to what we are really all about. It has been my experience that it is very much not the case that the majority of TCKs are "military brats" (as the article suggests). The vast majority of us are from diplomatic families (as I am; my father is a third-generation diplomat) and/or from philanthropic backgrounds (again; the case with my family). That is, there is a very concerted effort by certain families/groups who intentionally live in an international environment and who are, by the very definition, TCK-families . . . this article does not represent this group. I have purposefully abstained from contributing my very personal experience because I feel it could interfere with the "objectivity" of the article. However, I must challenge those contributing to this article to back up their contributions with very creditable information from the very sparse academic input; not just hearsay! I can, and will, summon my TCK-peers for pertinent information for this article.--Thorwald 10:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

You are incorrect in your assertations... I too am a tck. The vast majority are NOT diplomatic kids. The vast majority in your circle of TCKs may be from diplomatic families; but the largest group is military brats, followed by non-military government. The US Department of Defense Dependent Schools serves over 100,000 brat TCKs every year and that is a constantly changing group with high turnover. How many diplomatic brats are there? But since I am the one who has been adding to this article, you are obviously referring to me. The article was relatively uncited and POV (and thus earned an improper tone label---that was appropriate.) I am using very credible sources---from recognized scholars in the field (Useem, Cotrell, Ender, Reken, etc.)---not websites, but researched articles from bonifide scholars... NOT personal opinion/research. You've made an allegation, please point to something that I have added that is "hearsay." I have been meticulous not to use non-authoritative sources, but rather researched published works that are supported by scientific/published studies.Balloonman 19:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I think I just realized why you don't accept the notion that military brats are the largest group of TCK's and believe that diplomatic kids are the vast majority. It's because you are not from the US. As indicated in one of my additions, military brats are the largest group of TCKs, but only because of the U.S. If you only look at non-U.S. TCKs, then non-military government and bussiness becomes the two largest categories of TCKs. Non-U.S. military TCKs are almost unheard of---most countries do not send families of their military personell overseas. But the U.S. does so in such numbers that the U.S. armed forces single handedly propels military brats to the number one position overall.(Cotrell (2002) p 230 and Pearce (2002) p 168.) Why is this important? Because U.S. military brats distort non-US/non-military stats. For example, according to Karen Williams "Military Brats:Issues and Associations in Adulthood," 60% of military brats earn an undergraduate degree and 24% earn an advanced degree. That's pretty impressive, unless you compare it to TCK population as a whole where, depending on the study, 84-90% earn an undergraduate degree and 40% earn an advanced degree. If those numbers are accurate, then the next logical question is what are the percentages for non-military TCKs? If the overall average is 84-90% and military dependents are at 60%, then the non-military TCK population must be greater than 84-90%! Another example, TCKs largely come from highly educated families. For example, Missionary Kids and "Other" kids have at least an 83% probability of having at least one parent with a graduate degree. The U.S. military sends people overseas to fill military roles and is thus less likely to have somebody with an advanced degree. In fact, only 36% of military TCKs have a parent with a graduate degree. That is still impressive, but not quite as impressive as TCKs as a whole. It also has a bearing on the few comparisons that I've seen that compare U.S. TCKs with non-U.S. TCKs. On these comparisons, Non-U.S. TCKs are generally "better" off in most categories---but if the military brat population is the largest and almost exclusively U.S. are these comparisons accurate? Or are they essentially comparing "Non-U.S. non-Military Sponsored TCKs" with "U.S. military TCKs?" Finally, what impact do U.S. military brats have on ANY broad study of TCKs? If over a third of TCKs are military and they are predominantly from the U.S. then that will have a significant impact on various studies. What percentage of TCKs are from the US, if a third are US military? How does this bias the results of TCKs as a whole?Balloonman 18:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

An important consideration is that Wikipedia policy is to allow only verifiable information, and never original research. Your personal experience as a diplomatic TCK would, unfortunately, be considered original research (that is, "unpublished arguments, ideas, data"), rather than verifiable information ("material that has been published by reliable sources"). To be blunt, Wikipedia is not concerned with providing all information that is true, just verifiable. --Ginkgo100^talk 20:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record, it is my desire to see this article reach FA status. In order to do so, the article needs to be better written and better referenced. There may be limited research out there, but there is plenty to have multiple independent sources and references. I would love for your assistance in getting it there---but it needs to be more than personal anecdotes. Trust me, when writing an article like this, you WILL be challenged on every sentence or fact--thus you have to have plenty of citations.Balloonman 06:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

A Vote for The International Business TCK Block

I am a TCK and an ATCK and the father of three TCK's. We live in communities in the middle east and in particular Saudi Aramco communities. We don't generate the numbers like the diplomatic and military folks but I think we have something to contribute.

Most expatriates with Aramco are long term employees and consequently, Aramco brats tend to stay their entire childhood, many are born here. Most view their peers as family and kids rarely date for that same reason. They progress up until ninth grade and then as a right of passage are sent to often elite boarding schools (education assistance is an employee benefit). Children who fail in boarding school and forced into other circumstances are often unfairly viewed as failing by their peers. Being a brat is so important to these kids that many keep in touch for years and years. As the film trailer link below indicates;

http://www.aramcobratmedia.com/site/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=8

Like recidivism in institutionalized people, many employees that leave, also tend to return after only a few years and stay until mandatory retirement age. In addition, like myself, there are also several second and third generation employees that can trace their memory almost to the days of the camel.

Those of us that have had the privilege to have a multigenerational view of such dramatic change in the Saudi culture and indigenous people feel very proud of our history here. We maintain the connection to the early Americans who arrived in a most inhospitable environment and built the largest integrated oil company in the world.

In either case Military, Diplamatic or Aramco, I suppose we all share a unique prospectives

Children of God Category

If the Category is added again, I will delete it again and call it Vandalism at that point. Children of God <> Missionary Kids. Missionary Kids is a sociological term that has specific connotations that "children of God" does not fit. Please provide sources before making this claim again. Right now I'm assuming good faith, but this is not a content dispute. Provide sources that indicate that you understand the term and that it is used to describe COG, and I will accept it. But right now, it is nothing short of OR that is unrelated to the subject and in my opinion inflamatory to TCKs/MKs.Balloonman 05:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

May have acted in too much haste, will have discussion on Talk:Missionary Kids. Balloonman 06:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

i'm a tck

as tck american, living in germany and going to an international school where the language we learn in is english, i found this article very intersting. for most of the points it made, i found its hypothesis correct, but some points also completely contradicted what i have experienced as a tck. for instance, the point that stated most tck's don't have a feeling of belonging to any one country, is quite the opposite. there are a few students (such as myself) who no longer feel they can call any one country home, but for the most part, being displaced from their home country has made my fellow tck's connection to it even stronger, not weaker. another point made that i found inncorrect was 'a desire to remain in close contact with friends from their adopted country as well as other TCKs that they have grown up with." because you make friends, and then lose them again so quickly, i know from observing and personal experience, that you purposly distance yourself. you never allow yourself to get too close, only on a superficial level. and once your fellow tck friends are gone, you often leave it at that, they are gone, the end, you knew it would happen so you didn't let yourself care as much. its the sad part of being a tck, you meet many people from different cultures, and learn from it, you are more worldly because of it, but also because of it you don't develop in the way that having a long lasting commited friendship could allow you to. as a tck, i am very lucky, and am introduced to so many experiences that most kids never get to imagine, but after all there is a downside to every good thing.

My guess is that you are a military brat? You sound like one, if so, then brats do have different experiences than non-brats. But not everything rings true to me either---but that is why it is important to have verifiable facts from independent sources. My experience will be different from yours. It will be different from non-American TCK's. Any study of a population will be on the trends that are true for all/most---not every member of said group.Balloonman 15:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I am a tck. I felt like this article was written by a bunch of tcks/atcks who feel that they themselves are "misunderstood." I get the sense that tcks are altogether the same as regular kids. I'm sure we've all met other tcks who love (and pretend to hate) that moment when people ask us where we're from because we get to show off our posh international upbringing and sound exotic and cultured as a way to impress. If anything, I'd say we're an overstudied social group, pored over by monolingual sociologists who want grant money to travel abroad but don't have the language skills to study anyone but "tcks"/expats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.15.240 (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

And to support your contention you offer what proof?Balloonman 09:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Because it is a huge article devoted to one minor demographic phenomena. The stay-at-home dad phenomenom is far more prevalent throughout the world and involves inverting the traditional family roles, but it's clear that their article is clear and not wracked by an inferiority complex (there's no "Studies have shown that stay at home Dads are more sensitive and smarter than dads who work").

There is no reason to include the cacaphony of statistics, particularly uncited ones like: Some studies show a desire to "settle down" others a "restlessness to move". I mean, how much more vague can you get? If you poll Americans as a whole, you'd probably get similar results. Statements like "Teenage TCKs are more mature than non-TCKs" are absurd and would never appear in a peer-published journal of sociology--and serve as obvious proof that the article was written by TCKs interpreting articles about themselves as they see fit. This applies to "More welcoming of others into their community." and "Lack a sense of "where home is" but often nationalistic." which doesn't even make grammatical sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.15.240 (talk) 17:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

With respect, commentators can't see discriminatory forest for euro-centric intellectual trees

I am not a TCK nor have I contributed to a Wikipedia talk page before. I apologize for any failings here (of the experimental sort) but when I did as suggested and went to the "sandbox" (whatever that is) I got -- no kidding -- "Goatse in Wikipedia table format."

Anyway, sorry, this article is genuinely awful. It is full of unsupported assertions, e.g "Third culture kids have incorporated different cultures on the deepest level, as to have several cultures incorporated into their thought processes." And that is only one example. An assertion I will make, although I can't really support it, either, is that this entire article is very deeply biased culturally. That is, it appears to me that the whole agglomeration of unsupported -- and when supported, slanted in terms of very (dominant-)culture-specific concepts and terms -- pseudo-facts really needs a major overhaul. (Well, consider the title: "Third Culture Kids." Sheesh.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.58.144 (talk) 04:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Link to globalistgirl.net

I'm unsure of why my link to http://www.globalistgirl.net is constantly being removed. I searched for COI and assume it means conflict of interest in this context, but I'm not sure of what SPA means. The website is a summary of cited academic research on third culture kids and globalization that in and of itself would be in line with Wikipedia guidelines on no original research. However, the material is synthesized by me but not published, so I am the legal copyright holder. I'm not sure what the problem with the link is - is it that I can't create a link to my own site? I would appreciate it if someone could clarify. Globalistgirl (talk) 02:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

About COI, see my reply at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page#Link removal policy? SPA refers to WP:SPA. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Alright, could one of you take a look at my site and consider adding it? It is a summary of academic research on TCKs, globalization and bilcultral people. Everything is properly referenced in APA style and I think it contributes something to this site to have a link to, for those who are more academically inclined. That way, this page can stay fairly informal, but access to more rigorous material is provided. Globalistgirl (talk) 04:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Why not just rename the article to "US-American expatriate children"

Let's be honest, that's pretty much what it seems to be about. The categorisation is uniquely based on US citizens, most assertions are unsupported (the whole Intercultural Experiences section needs citing or removing, so does the third paragraph of the next one)and just about everything needs "US-American" slapped on the front of it (especially the statistics!). Some references are broken (#2 and other refences to tckworld) and reference #13 is a fluff piece that provides no evidence for the quoted assertion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.45.22 (talk) 12:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Also half the references are, to put it mildly, crap. "Pearce (2002) p158" is _not_ enough - the ISBN would be nice but failing which the title is pretty essential.