But why an army of *nerd* clones?

[steuard]

I just got a letter from Duke University. Apparently, they want my DNA.

Years ago, Duke arranged for me (and many other 7th graders) to take the SAT. I did pretty well (very well, for a 7th grader). Now, some researchers there(?) are doing a study looking for "genetic markers of intellectual functioning" and they tell me that "There is probably no group of individuals in this country who possess higher measured cognitive abilities than the Duke TIP group to which you belong." (That's just one example of the flattery they've used.)

I'm not sure whether to participate. Being used as a genetic exemplar of brilliance sounds great and all, but I find the premise of the study to be pretty cheesy. They apparently believe that my ability to take standardized tests way back in 7th grade is supposed to correlate significantly with intelligence. That was probably a factor, but especially at that early age I'd think that my parents' habit of reading to me (and encouraging me to read grown-up books) contributed at least as much, to say nothing of the Lincoln public school system's fantastic gifted program (I had already had personal math mentors for several years at that point). It's hard for me to believe that "good 7th grade SAT score" will correlate clearly with anything but "white upper-middle class background".

So, what do you think: should I give them my genes or not?

[Edit: Just to be clear (since patrissimo seems to have missed my point a bit), I recognize that intelligence is a part of why I did well on the test. The genetic markers they identify may well correspond roughly to "smart white upper-middle class" kids. But I have serious doubts about their ability to disentangle those factors.]

Comments

[zathrus.livejournal.com]

(continued)

There are, I think, two areas of real interest here. One is what it is that causes these apparently inherent, inborn abilities. What is it that makes the difference between a child who breezes through calculus at 12 and one who struggles with it at 20, when they started with largely the same background and opportunities? The other is how we can help children -- all children -- reach their full inborn potential. Looking at your DNA can only really address one of those questions -- but it can address that one, at least potentially, and being eligible for TIP marks you (along with most (all?) Mudders) as being in a very small subset of the population, rather far from the mean, that would be difficult to get a statistically significant sample size of without the aid of identification programs like TIP, CTY, etc.

Of course, getting information from you and your parents that went far beyond your DNA could get at other angles on these questions -- are there possibly things going on here that are deterministic but not directly genetic? Gifted kids seem to be more likely in families with gifted parents, but sometimes they happen in families with seemingly no history of intellectual giftedness; why? How? What are the things our parents and/or schooling experiences gave us that enabled us to come to their attention and subsequently excel on the SAT? Are there better things that our parents and/or schools could have done? Etc. Right now, a lot of the research on these things is at the anecdotal stage; moving beyond that would be pretty amazingly helpful to a lot of parents and future generations of gifted kids.

Newt