To what extent do sociologists agree that different levels of educational attainment are affected by genetics?
A sociologist would not agree that a student's genetic make up has an affect on their educational achievement. They would state that there is also no scientific evidence what so ever to explain or suggest that a person's chromosomes determine their successes within the education system.
Instead, they would suggest that the patterns in differences of educational attainment are down to social factors. A sociologist would explain the differences in terms of human social life, groups and societies. Sociologists aim to investigate and understand the social world and human behaviour within it. They are particularly interested in the way society influences us and shapes our lives.
In the past it was assumed that some strata of society were superior to others because they inherited intelligence or artist abilities along with their physical appearance from their parents. This belief in "genetic endowment" has been challenged over the past one hundred years and the "nature vs. nurture" debate continues. Many definitions have been given to explain the nature of intelligence. A simple one is "the ability to perceive and solve problems" - the nature of the problems will however depend on the society in which they exist.
A lot of research has been aimed at establishing whether, and to what extent, intelligence is inherited. Conclusions have ranged from that of Watson (1931) who stated "There is no such thing as an inheritance of capacity, talent, temperament, mental constitution and characteristics", and that of Floud, Halsey and Martin (1956), who argued "it is well known that intelligence is largely an acquired characteristic", to that of Jensen (1969) and Eysenck (1973), who have maintained that genetic factors are much more important than environmental influences in producing differences in intelligence. Most research since has concluded that intelligence is in some measure inherited but that environmental factors can be conclusive in its development or otherwise.
In Britain the major argument with regard to environment and heredity revolves around the impact in differences in academic achievement between the social classes. Although differences in measured intelligence have been taken into account, the impact of the environment upon a child's educational chances seems of much greater significance.
For example, the environment will include the kind of stimulus a child receives in terms of speech, books, encouragement and example. It will include varies in facilities such as housing, computers, privacy and private tuition; it will include values of the home, area, and local peer group. Also, it will even include nutrition, for there is some evidence to suggest that severe malnutrition within the first few years can affect the development of the brain. Therefore, the differences between the environmental factors which affect the working class and middle class mean that they will seem to have a different level of intelligence.
A sociologist would not agree that a student's genetic make up has an affect on their educational achievement. They would state that there is also no scientific evidence what so ever to explain or suggest that a person's chromosomes determine their successes within the education system.
Instead, they would suggest that the patterns in differences of educational attainment are down to social factors. A sociologist would explain the differences in terms of human social life, groups and societies. Sociologists aim to investigate and understand the social world and human behaviour within it. They are particularly interested in the way society influences us and shapes our lives.
In the past it was assumed that some strata of society were superior to others because they inherited intelligence or artist abilities along with their physical appearance from their parents. This belief in "genetic endowment" has been challenged over the past one hundred years and the "nature vs. nurture" debate continues. Many definitions have been given to explain the nature of intelligence. A simple one is "the ability to perceive and solve problems" - the nature of the problems will however depend on the society in which they exist.
A lot of research has been aimed at establishing whether, and to what extent, intelligence is inherited. Conclusions have ranged from that of Watson (1931) who stated "There is no such thing as an inheritance of capacity, talent, temperament, mental constitution and characteristics", and that of Floud, Halsey and Martin (1956), who argued "it is well known that intelligence is largely an acquired characteristic", to that of Jensen (1969) and Eysenck (1973), who have maintained that genetic factors are much more important than environmental influences in producing differences in intelligence. Most research since has concluded that intelligence is in some measure inherited but that environmental factors can be conclusive in its development or otherwise.
In Britain the major argument with regard to environment and heredity revolves around the impact in differences in academic achievement between the social classes. Although differences in measured intelligence have been taken into account, the impact of the environment upon a child's educational chances seems of much greater significance.
For example, the environment will include the kind of stimulus a child receives in terms of speech, books, encouragement and example. It will include varies in facilities such as housing, computers, privacy and private tuition; it will include values of the home, area, and local peer group. Also, it will even include nutrition, for there is some evidence to suggest that severe malnutrition within the first few years can affect the development of the brain. Therefore, the differences between the environmental factors which affect the working class and middle class mean that they will seem to have a different level of intelligence.