July 30, 2004

A SEMI-SENSIBLE EDUCATION PROF?:

GATTACA CALLING?: High achievement comes from hard work, not from our genetic make-up, says a professor of education. (Richard Bailey, 7/30/04, sp!ked)

Imagine the scene. It is the future, and scientists have learned how to 'read' human DNA with such accuracy that they are able to predict our future health, as well as the careers that will be most suited to our abilities. The genetically elite are identified early and groomed for lives of leadership and brilliance. The biologically impoverished are relegated to the performance of the most menial tasks.

This was the premise of a Hollywood movie, Gattaca, released in 1997. The film's name comes from the initials of the four DNA bases of our genetic code: guanine, adenine, cytosine and thymine.

Despite the remarkable advances made by genetics, we are still a long way from realising the power of Gattaca's science. Indeed, there are strong reasons to suspect that we will never be in such a position. Nevertheless, Gattaca's fiction has a certain potency because its core assumption, that we can know an individual's 'true nature' and potential, is implicitly held by many people and exhibited in many settings, most frequently and clearly in education.

I work in Kent where we have our very own version of Gattaca - the 11 Plus, which consists of a series of examinations capable, apparently, of not just measuring a student's academic ability, but also predicting their likely career trajectory. IQ testing is another example, as are certain forms of education geared towards the 'gifted and talented'.

So prevalent is the Gattaca myth that it seems to underpin most educational theories and practices, from Plato's desire to use his academy to separate the elite from the rest, to educational theorist Howard Gardner's portrayal of multiple intelligences, and the fashionable nonsense of personalised learning styles. The UK government's recent five-year plan for education had an emphasis on 'personalised learning', and aimed to offer specialist school provision to all students, whether they be, in the words of one minister, 'sporty', 'artistic' or 'academic'. (Presumably, through some feat of genetic or social engineering, the government will arrange for all sporty children to live near a sports college and all arty children to live next to an arts college.)

These ideas are presented in attractive and palatable ways that suggest warm feelings of inclusion and the celebration of diversity. But ultimately, they divide the world up into different 'types' of people, whose abilities are 'given', and simply mature over the lifespan. Are you a visual thinker, or auditory? Do you have musical or existential intelligence? Are you 'sporty' or 'academic'?

Although the Gattaca myth has a certain appeal, it is also nonsense.


Not only is Gattaca a terrific flick, but the same director/screenwriter alsoi wrote the superb Truman Show and wrote and directed the flawed but entertaining S1M0NE. Taken together they're a penetrating meditation on Man and our relationship to God.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 30, 2004 11:07 AM
Comments

Gattaca never mentions god, it talks about the human spirit.

The author makes the mistake of going to the opposite extreme. There is plenty of evidence of inborn personality traits like introversion/extroversion. We are not blank slates. But government has no business in using such differences to direct society. These things are self directing, the high acheivers will rise to positions of prominence without any outside direction. Genes may give you a predisposition, but there is no way to predict where your future success will lie - only your journey through life will.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at July 30, 2004 11:25 AM

Gotta agree with Robert here - Professor Bailey bends the stick too far in the opposite direction. Hard work is a (still) underappreciated concept though. For those of us with an IQ south of William Sidis, or physical gifts less than those of Michael Jordan, staying power is a terrific equalizer.

Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at July 30, 2004 11:50 AM

I also agree with Robert.

Pace Bruce, staying power is no equalizer against a William Sidis or Michael Jordan with all their gifts, and staying power besides.

Talent and staying power are not mutually exclusive.

Posted by: Jeff Guinn at July 30, 2004 12:16 PM

Slackers always insist others are gifted.

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 1:01 PM

I'll agree with you Jeff, if the person has both talent and staying power, us plebes are doomed. Note that William Sidis ended his days in a succession of menial jobs, and Bobby Fischer....well...

Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at July 30, 2004 1:05 PM

Robert:

Didn't you get tired of Orwell droning on about Stalin and Lenin in Animal Farm?

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 1:22 PM

The 11-plus had and has nothing to do with predicting ability and everything to do with keeping the working class out of middle class jobs and schools.

Hard work has never appealed to me, and I'd much rather succeed with less effort. This is, sometimes, possible to do, especially if your competition hasn't thought things through.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 30, 2004 3:01 PM

No wonder you're so pro-FDR and Stalin.

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 3:06 PM

Mr. Judd;

Well, succeeding more with less effort is called "productivity" and you generally seem to think that's a good thing.

On the original topic, it sounds to me like the "True Name" meme redone with a scientific gloss.

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at July 30, 2004 5:13 PM

Same effort, more accomplished.

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 5:22 PM

The rather simplistic "Truman Show" would have been better if Truman had been captured, once outside the dome, and returned to the Director.
After all, since Truman had been kept by the corporation after his majority, some form of slavery must have been legal.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 30, 2004 7:17 PM

OJ, please remind me again... where does Orwell, Stalin and Animal Farm come into the equation?

Posted by: Robert Duquette at July 30, 2004 10:36 PM

"Gattaca never mentions god"

Posted by: oj at July 30, 2004 11:04 PM

OJ, you can see God as the subtext of a phone directory.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at July 31, 2004 12:50 PM

No, the directory is subtext.

Posted by: oj at July 31, 2004 12:52 PM

One difference between FDR and the Republicans was that FDR wanted to put people back to work.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 31, 2004 2:53 PM

Yeah, the GOP doesn't approve of employees.

Posted by: oj at July 31, 2004 5:42 PM

Not here, anyway.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at August 2, 2004 1:04 AM
« THE HARD EXPECTATIONS OF NO BIGOTRY: | Main | WHY NOT TAKE ALL OF ME?: »