When "nature vs nurture" is invoked, it is often casually heard as a linear function of sorts -- an "either/or" scenario. I think it is important to point out the recursive relationship between nature and nurture. If a young child is denied opportunity, it not only impacts his development in real time, but also the biological *potential* for his future development. On average, such a child will have difficulty catching up to his peers despite external intervention or even his own propensity for hard work. Measuring group differences in adults is therefore an entirely different exercise than attempting to evaluate them in children. And while observed group differences are likely to be especially pronounced on the right tail of the distribution, and stir controversy as such, focusing on university demographics does very little to lead us to factors of causation.
1. David Shenk argued in his book, "The Genius in All of Us," that it's the interaction between nature and nurture that determines measured ability. Books by Malcolm Gladwell ("Outliers"), Geoff Colvin ("Talent is Overrated"), and Daniel Coyle ("The Talent Code") suggest that people of middling ability can learn to do exceptional things with the right coaching and training.
2. The gaps we see in children seem to persist into adulthood. The differences in NAEP scores for K-12 children don't vary much from differences in SAT and ACT scores or differences in MCAT and LSAT scores.
When "nature vs nurture" is invoked, it is often casually heard as a linear function of sorts -- an "either/or" scenario. I think it is important to point out the recursive relationship between nature and nurture. If a young child is denied opportunity, it not only impacts his development in real time, but also the biological *potential* for his future development. On average, such a child will have difficulty catching up to his peers despite external intervention or even his own propensity for hard work. Measuring group differences in adults is therefore an entirely different exercise than attempting to evaluate them in children. And while observed group differences are likely to be especially pronounced on the right tail of the distribution, and stir controversy as such, focusing on university demographics does very little to lead us to factors of causation.
Thanks for your comment. Two quick responses:
1. David Shenk argued in his book, "The Genius in All of Us," that it's the interaction between nature and nurture that determines measured ability. Books by Malcolm Gladwell ("Outliers"), Geoff Colvin ("Talent is Overrated"), and Daniel Coyle ("The Talent Code") suggest that people of middling ability can learn to do exceptional things with the right coaching and training.
2. The gaps we see in children seem to persist into adulthood. The differences in NAEP scores for K-12 children don't vary much from differences in SAT and ACT scores or differences in MCAT and LSAT scores.