Do you think children ‘inherit’ academic talents?

[Thesefourwhitewalls]

Probably the worst title in the world but I suppose it wouldn’t be a shock if (say) Marcus Rashford had a child who was very sporty, or if Adele’s child showed some talent for singing.

Does this extend to traditional areas of the curriculum? DH is brilliant at maths and earns really well as a result. I am utterly shit at maths and I can barely add up. Just wondering if DS will take after DH or me! Or if it’s not something you inherit?

@MangshorJhol

I feel like OP is asking almost a different question. OP feels that not being good at maths has excluded a world of possibility for herself and fears the same as her son. I disagree with the view that mathematical ability is a marker of either intelligence or a barometer of future success.

Yes, I think this is implicitly what she’s asking. I also think the A- level system breeds some odd ideas about Maths because you specialise so early. In Ireland, where I did my schooling, maths is compulsory till your final exams on leaving school at 18 ish, so there isn’t this idea it’s specially difficult or niche (and I say that as someone who wasn’t good at it.)

There's lots of research showing academically inclination is strongly inherited but of course it's going to be affected by environment.

Dh and I are first to get to university in our families - but we are not the first with the ability we were the first with the ability and the opportunity.

With maths - I do think you have to be very careful not to limit a child. DC first primary said they all lack maths brains - DH is extremely good at maths - I'm competent ( though mental arthmatic is poor due to poor working memory linked to my dsylexia) . School was below average for maths acheivement. So we used mathsfactor - on-line maths app. They are all considered strong in maths now all secondary age - I think some basics weren't taught well and extra work and home helped them.

I have found it less than helpful wen family have said we are all poor spellers and handwriters - and teahcers have told the kids not to worry because it's made it much harder for me to get them to work on their issues - they may not vanish entirely but they can certainly improve and have done so.

One of the few things I prefer with the welsh education system - having come over from English one - is they have AS levels.

It meant DD1 was able to try AS maths - she not enjoying as much as she hoped where as two year course may have seemed more daunting.

It took me two attempts to scrape a C at GCSE level - no way could I have done AS! And that was the ‘old’ system!

@Thesefourwhitewalls

I’ve already clarified I don’t think it’s necessarily a marker of intelligence, but I do think lack of ability to do much beyond basic maths cuts off opportunities - just as only having the reading age of an eleven year old would.

It’s an interesting discussion anyway!

It is true that many people, including myself, will happily profess to not understanding the most basic scientific/mathematical principles, (I struggle with Sudoko) but would be aghast at someone not having read, I dont know, any Jane Austen novels or similar.

There's definitely a discrepancy between how levels of knowledge in humanities/arts and science/maths is perceived.

I disagree that it has any effect at all on potential career paths unless you want to specialise in a STEM leaning industry/ profession, though.

But a lot of jobs (I accept not all) that are highly paid are linked to STEM in some way.

@Thesefourwhitewalls

It took me two attempts to scrape a C at GCSE level - no way could I have done AS! And that was the ‘old’ system!

Wales currently two maths GCSE -GCSE Mathematics and GCSE Mathematics - Numeracy I think both are normally taken.

Though not sure if they plan to keep those long term as they have a big review coming up - but Numeracy is more the everyday sort of maths. I don't think they'd let you go on do AS level maths with Numeracy but it is a GCSE in maths area.

I do wonder about how we teach maths as so many adults are quick to say they don't get maths.

I know two families where the parents aren’t at all academically bright and seem to be of average intelligence when you speak to them. Their DC have done incredibly well getting all A stars at A levels and going to top unis and now have really good jobs and have received promotions.

@Thesefourwhitewalls Sure, and an equivalent number of careers aren't linked.

I think it's just more important that children are exposed to and encouraged in all subjects, including STEM, so they can confidently self-select when it comes to deciding what's of most interest to them later on.

@bananafish, I do think that the discrepancy in attitudes to maths literacy vs literacy in the more usual sense is in part a cultural thing partly fostered by the way A-levels work. I certainly don’t think ‘Oh, I can’t do maths’ is anywhere near as much of a thing in countries where everyone has to take maths right to the end of their schooldays as a mandatory core subject, and be examined in it — even if, as in my case, they have no aptitude for it and are headed to university to do something that doesn’t require it. It’s seen as a normal aspect of a core education.

Whereas in England and Wales, from what I understand, only about a quarter of students take Maths A-level?

@CrimbleCrumble1

I know two families where the parents aren’t at all academically bright and seem to be of average intelligence when you speak to them. Their DC have done incredibly well getting all A stars at A levels and going to top unis and now have really good jobs and have received promotions.

That’s not unusual or unexpected. Heritability isn’t 100% for any characteristic.

My mum is very academic, has a Master's degree and a mid-senior level job. I am also very academic, currently doing a PhD and teach in a university.

My dad left school at 16 to do a trade apprenticeship. He has such an impressive, logical brain for problem solving, he can fix anything he turns his hand to. My younger brother hated school, I've never seen him read a book in his life, he did a trade apprenticeship and loves his job as a mechanic. He earns more than me too, so don't be fooled into thinking academia is the way forward

Weirdly, my mum and I look very similar (dark hair and eyes) and my dad and brother look very alike (fair with blue eyes). We just seem to have taken after each side of the family.

All 3 of my DC have been excellent readers. I taught them all from 3. They had reading ages of 7-8 when they started school. As adults they are all still avid readers. They are all 3 good at Maths too. Not a bit sporty though. My DFS is extremely sporty but struggles accademically.

That’s not unusual or unexpected. Heritability isn’t 100% for any characteristic
It surprised me as out of the other people I know I’ve been able to guess from when the DC were toddlers how well they would do academically based on their parents. I would have a 100% success rate if it wasn’t for these two families.
I am really interested in the nature V nurture debate.

I've always wondered this. I think that any type of artistic talent tends to almost always be hereditary. But is academic ability the same? I don't actually think so. I personally think it's a particular type of "wiring" if you want to call it that, that a person needs first and foremost. In order to process and store the information. Some people are simply not very good at this. Although I do think it's something you can train your brain to be able to do. Then after that, I believe it's simply a case of studying and working hard. But now after I've typed that out, that sounds exactly the same as any artistic skill such as singing or playing the piano, doesn't it? If you practice it enough, you become better and better at it. So maybe academic ability are hereditary/inherited. Really interesting reading everybody else's responses though.

It would be very odd if only physical traits were inherited.

Never thought of it like this but yes, I completely agree with this.

twin and adoption studies very clearly

Twin, adoption, and twins-reared-apart studies may seem straightforward and on solid ground, but closer scrutiny reveals problems with one thing in common -- underestimate role of environmental factors and exaggerate role of genes.

Twin studies are based on assumption that while identical and non-id twins share different proportions of genes, each pair of twins will share the same environment. It is known as the equal environment assumption.

However, experiences of identical and non-identical twins, in terms of shared environment, are very different. Identicals tend to experience more similar environments for no other reason than that they are seen as identical by others. They are treated as more similar to eachother by people around them, more likely to be dressed the same and share the same resources and opportunities etc.

This is important because some of the observed differences between identical and non-identical twins, in terms of IQ similarity, may not be due to a greater proportion of shared genes, they may be due to the fact that identical twins tend to undergo a much more similar experience environment-wise than non-identical twins.

Similar methodological problems found in twins-reared-apart studies. Assumption is that twins reared apart will be raised in different environments. They are assumed to share all the genes but none of the environment. Yet, a lot of the twins used in these studies shared quite a lot of their environment -- first they spent some of their childhood together. Twins rarely adopted at birth so have been together a number of years before separation, sometimes for as long as 11 years, so shared environment and experiences during key psychological development periods.
Also, some of the twins were not adopted through welfare orgs/social services but were simply raised in different branches of same family, family friend, neighbour. So, while they seemingly grew up "apart" in the studies, some of them grew up in the same community, neighbourhood, attended the same school, and even socialised together. It would seem the technical usage of "separated" used here is not the same as how the word is used in ordinary life.

Also there are issues in how "environment" is defined. Many aspects of environmental and cultural experience - such as parental involvement in learning, educational provision, supportive environment encouraging self-confidence and motivation - are important predictors of IQ scores.
However, when assessing relative importance of genes and environment heritability studies look only at limited range of environmental factors. One of these studies, as an example, considered things like the availability of household facilities such as an "unabridged dictionary" and a "telescope" and used these as a measure of "cultural and intellectual resources" in the home. These crude measures tell us nothing about his the resources were used and also it remains unclear why having a telescope, for example, would enhance the abilities measured in IQ tests.

All of these examples of limitations of heritability studies result in some of the variability in IQ which could be due to environmental influence being apportioned to genes, inflating the estimates about heritability of intelligence.

Personally, I feel it's both, and it's incredibly hard to determine how much came from heritability and how much is environment.

I have a friend (retired secondary school teacher) who tutors Physics and Maths at GCSE and A levels. They are a popular tutor and turn away work (as I say they are retired and only want to work 2 days a week now).

Their first session is free and he always asks the student or directly asks the parent the following as he unpacks his bag:

Did parents go to uni?
What did they study?
And sometimes - What A levels did they take?

He asks this rather than what grades his tutee is getting. Almost always after one session drops the kids with parents with arts degrees and works with the maths/chemistry/physics/coding degrees.

His car was in the garage for a couple of hours and I took him to an appointment in my village so heard him ask the questions. I was stunned and shocked, talking to him about it later he said he does this all the time and it’s just logic. His students get great results.

+BethDutton*
I wonder how the teacher’s theory would work with my family. I have a Sociology degree, my DH a statistics and computer science degree. One DC a masters in modern history and the other a first class Economics bachelor of science.

I think this is a very interesting debate. DS is mathematically brilliant and probably inherits this from DH although DH studied a different STEM degree. He is also very musical which I assume is inherited from me as DH can't even keep time! But I think what sets DS apart and has helped him most is the ability to work hard and apply himself (a trait shared more with me than DH).
@lavender2022 your point about music is interesting - yes practice will make you a 'better' musician and there is the (old now) 10,000 hour theory that it takes 10,000 hours of practice of any skill to elevate from good to brilliant but somehow with music and art there is a 'something' that separates the very competent from the spine chilling.

CrimbleCrumble1 I imagine he would like to tutor your DH! I don’t like my friends methods BTW, I thought it was so rude at the time. I actually blushed when he asked the family the questions. I guess it’s his prerogative how he chooses students but he did go down in my estimation.

I don’t think anyone has mentioned languages or did I miss it? Lots of maths and music mentioned. My family are all weak at languages, both sides, the very hard workers and the lazy ones, doesn’t matter all struggle. I imagine this is an inherited strength too?

BethDutton I did well at school apart from languages, my DH didn’t get on with them either. My Economics son did really well with his German and French and also enjoyed Spanish at primary school. None of us are remotely musical or good at dancing so that’s definitely inherited.

@Thesefourwhitewalls

True re law actually, that’s a good example.

I suppose I am thinking of things like banking, investment, any STEM, medicine, engineering and so on.

Plenty of banking jobs don’t require maths - if your job is attracting and retaining clients, the main prerequisite is being posh and charming.

Obviously most modellers will have maths degrees (and PhDs), but the average investment banker won’t. The two I know well have history and English degrees. They aren’t stupid, obviously (or innumerate - I agree you need some head for figures). But you don’t need high level maths qualifications to work in finance.

@BethDutton sounds like he gets great results because he chooses clients who would have got great results regardless, and ditches anyone who might not?

Sounds like a bit of a swizz to me

Like other PPs, DH and I were the first in our families to go to uni, but doubt we were the first with the innate intellectual ability to do so. Neither of us grew up in academically inclined households with stimulating intellectual conversation though. We're both pretty bright Oxbridge types, with a mix of subjects.

Our kids are a total mixed bunch with neurodiversity running rampant, and therefore not always easy to work out what abilities they have. BUT our youngest has, from day one, been bright, sparky, creative, self-motivated and engaging. I don't feel either of us can claim any nurture credit for what has seemed to be her fully-formed self from the outset. She is still in KS1 but is constantly looking for ways to stretch herself, begging to do maths games, memory games, word games. She is utterly uninterested in reading, although she can, and the rest of the family reads compulsively. She finds it boring. She is also innately musical and trying to compose rather than learn in her piano lessons, egged on by her teacher who thinks she's great.

Her siblings have their strengths (and challenges - she is the only NT one of five although I do wonder about ADHD) but are unlikely to be top of their classes for things. Our youngest has been born with the confidence that she can DO things and wants to do MORE, and that doesn't feel like it came from either of us! I kind of don't feel bad saying how brilliant I think she is because the credit doesn't belong with me.