Dec.
11, 2013 — The degree to which students' exam scores differ owes more to their
genes than to their teachers, schools or family environments, according to new
research from King's College London published today in PLOS ONE. The study,
which took place in the UK, looked at students' scores for their GCSE's
(General Certificate of Secondary Education), a UK-wide examination at the end
of compulsory education at 16 years old.
The
authors explain that the findings do not imply that educational achievement is
genetically pre-determined, or that environmental interventions are not
important, but rather that recognising the importance of children's natural
predispositions may help improve learning.
Researchers
compared the GCSE exam scores of over 11,000 identical and non-identical 16
year old twins from the Medical Research Council (MRC) funded Twins Early
Development Study (TEDS). Identical twins share 100% of their genes, whereas
fraternal (non-identical) twins share on average only half of the genes that
vary between people. Therefore, if identical twins' exam scores are more alike
than those of non-identical twins, the difference in exam scores between the
two sets of twins is due to genetics, rather than environment.
The
researchers found that for compulsory core subjects (English, Mathematics and
Science), genetic differences between students explain on average 58% of the
differences between GCSE scores. In contrast, 29% of the differences in core
subject grades are due to shared environment -- such as schools, neighbourhoods
or families which twins share. The remaining differences in GCSE scores were
explained by non-shared environment, unique to each individual.
Overall,
science grades (such as Biology, Chemistry, Physics) were found to be more
heritable than Humanities grades (such as Media Studies, Art, Music) -- 58% vs
42%, respectively.
Nicholas
Shakeshaft, PhD student at the Institute of Psychiatry at King's College London
and lead author of the paper says: "Children differ in how easily they
learn at school. Our research shows that differences in students' educational
achievement owe more to nature than nurture. Since we are studying whole
populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's
performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between
individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment. This means that
heritability is not fixed -- if environmental influences change, then the influence
of genetics on educational achievement may change too."
Professor
Robert Plomin, senior author at the Institute of Psychiatry at King's College
London and Director of the TEDS study, says: "Whilst these findings have
no necessary or specific implications for educational policies, it's important
to recognise the major role that genetics plays in children's educational
achievement. It means that educational systems which are sensitive to
children's individual abilities and needs, which are derived in part from their
genetic predispositions, might improve educational achievement."
Professor
Michael O'Donovan, from the Neurosciences and Mental Health board at the
Medical Research Council (MRC), said "The findings from this substantial
cohort add to a convincing body of evidence that genes influence
characteristics that are ultimately reflected in educational performance. But
it is equally important to stress that the researchers found that environments
for students are also important and that the study does not imply that
improvements in education will not have important benefits. For individuals
living in the best and worst environments, this exposure is likely to make more
of a difference to their educational prospects than their genes. Further
research is needed to assess the implications of the findings for educational
strategies. The MRC-funded TEDS cohort highlights the importance of long-term
investment and how this can help improve our understanding of how genes and
environment interact over the course of our lives."
No comments:
Post a Comment