Campus Review Volume 28 - Issue 8 | August 2018 | Page 20

industry & research campusreview.com.au The case for and against precision education If DNA can predict intelligence, should we teach students according to their genetics? By Loren Smith P ersonalised learning in schools is all the Gonksi-fuelled rage, but what if it meant more than individualised learning plans and assessments? What if it meant mapping curriculums to students’ genomes? This may sound like the plot of a sci-fi film, but credible scientists are proposing it. THE GENETICIST Spearheading this movement is American behavioural geneticist Professor Robert Plomin. Now based at King's College London, undertaking a long-term study of 13,000 twins pairs, he calls this concept ‘precision education’. Genetics is responsible for 60 per cent of the differences in learning ability, and the specific DNA for about a quarter of that proportion has been identified. 18 By contrast, Plomin says classroom size, for example, accounts for “less than 1 per cent” of learning ability. Learning ability, in turn, significantly predicts school achievement. Yet our current education system doesn’t take any of this into account. Although Plomin admits precision education is a long way from being realised, he says because the studies that found the DNA differences were only conducted in the last three years, we are getting closer and closer to the possibility. “The idea is that we’ll eventually be able to find the DNA differences that account for all 60 per cent of the [genetic] differences,” he says. Likening precision education to a “tsunami”, Plomin says that when it arrives, it will fundamentally change how education is delivered. Plomin sought to assuage fears that precision education would be used in a eugenics sense – that is, to make the smart smarter. In fact, he thinks it should be used to help the more needy. For instance, if a child possesses DNA that determines they will have difficulty learning to read, which is detectable from birth (as DNA doesn’t change throughout one’s life), specialists can intervene early to prevent that child from struggling at school. This, he says, is preferable to trying to treat the reading difficulty after it’s apparent. “It’s hard to put Humpty Dumpty back together again after he falls off the wall.” Neonatal ADHD detection could be another use for precision education. Plomin says this would avoid the drugging of youth for ‘ADHD’ without biological cause. However, he admits that precision education’s use will ultimately be predicated on people’s values. “Educationalists are more concerned with the Finnish model. That is, bringing all kids up to some minimal level of literacy and numeracy so that they can participate in society. I think that’s what will happen first. But, of course, parents who have talented and gifted children are always saying, ‘What about us?’”