Evidence: How early is too early?

On page 249 in number 62, Shenk references his other work's point about "three Polgar sisters in Hungary, all raised to be exceptional chess players. As each girl was exposed to chess earlier than her elder sister, she subsequently became the better player." (249). Shenk then connects this to Wolfgang's experience with his sister, Nannerl. These stories beg the question: is there a such thing as "too early" when it comes to teaching kids skills? What adverse effects could pushing too young of a child into something have on that child's development, and if encouraging kids to learn skills at a very young age has such a profound effect on mastery of that skill, why do most parents miss this supposed opportunity?

(Eric Savin, Dallastarsfan13@gmail.com)

Argument: Is Competition A Requirement for Success?

Shenk concludes that competition is what drives mankind to excel. As Nietzsche wrote “Every natural gift must develop itself by contests” (146).As Shenk further elaborates, “It cannot […] simply be left ogenes, vitamins, and parents to foster greatness; spurring individual achievement also must be the duty of society. Every culture must strive to foster values that bring out the best in its people” (146). Also consider Ericsson’s statement: “frequent intense engagement in certain types of practice activities is shown to induce physical strain which causes biochemical changes that stimulate growth and transformation of cells” (67). Given the previous, do you agree with this belief that greatness or success only comes with competition? Support your response with research, real life examples, or biological evidence pertaining to topics such as Gene Expression and Adaptation/Evolution. 

Bowen Jin (bowenjin2004@yahoo.com)

Argument: How Important are Genes?

Argument- How Important are Genes?

“Heredity, it turns out, is not as straightforward as we have been taught. Parents do pass unaltered DNA to children, but they also pass on additional instructional material-known as epigenetic material-which helps guide how the genes will be expressed. While genes themselves do not change (by and large) from generation to generation, the epigenetic instructions can change. This means that we can impact our genetic legacy” (118). Knowing this, are we in fact limited by our genetics? For example, are those of us who have parents that did not play basketball competitively at a disadvantage because of our lack of epigenetic instruction? Or are people whose parents did not attend college at a disadvantage intellectually? How does this affect the GxE model? Find evidence to support your answer and include references to Genetics (Chapter 20) Unit and incorporate the biological themes of Evolution and Regulation in your response. 

Bowen Jin (bowenjin2004@yahoo.com)

Argument: Jim and Jim

In the argument section of Shenk's book, he discussed the incident of when two identical twins named Jim were separated at birth and then reunited; there were a number of striking similarities much more than just looking alike and talking alike such as "they had each married and divorced a woman named Linda... they had named their respective first children James Alan Lewis and James Allen Springer," and more (75). Shenk attributes their similarities to early shared GxE as well as shared cultural circumstances. For example, he states that both Jims have the same genes and shared the same womb for 9 months as well as growing up in similar "working class towns seventy miles apart" (83). Why, then, do siblings, who also have very similar genetics due to having the same parents and who have shared the same maternal womb as well as the same household and cultural environments, turn out so differently sometimes? Shouldn't they be very similar according to Shenk's argument? Bring in how inheritance works and the passing down of genes from parent to child. Also include the potential genetic differences in siblings due to the complexities of genetics. Does this disprove Shenk's idea or strengthen it?

(Yanfei Gao, feifeiyg@yahoo.com)

Evidence: Indoctrinated by Mendelian Genetics

Shenk in the evidence portion of his book contrasts his idea of GxE to the widely known Mendelian version of Genetics. He describes the "built-in logical flaw" of the pea plant experiment because all the experiments were performed in a constant, consistent environment, so this eliminates any perceptible impact the environment could have on the pea plants. Obviously under the same consistent environment, only genetics could have an impact on the growth pea plants of the pea plants (184). Is Mendel's experiment and the idea of genetics determining everything less credible when considering this fact? Is this a flaw in his experimental design? Also, contrast Mendel's idea of genetics with the newly learned idea of epigenetic inheritance and the impact it can made on your genes. Also include how inheritance isn't as simple as how Mendel's pea plant experiment depicted it as (for example, bring in co-dominance, sex-linked genes, linked genes etc.)

(Yanfei Gao, feifeiyg@yahoo.com)

Argument: Academic Achievement

On page 51, Shenk relays the findings of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who stated that "high academic achievers are not necessarily born 'smarter' than others, but work harder and develop more self-discipline." How does this idea relate to the GxE model, and what causes those who excel to obtain this work ethic and self-discipline? How does this idea explain the stereotypical lazy student that does well on tests despite a poor work ethic and lack of self discipline? Finally, how does this finding relate to the course of human evolution and how, due to the idea that lifestyle alters heredity (page 161), can we interpret this finding and incorporate it into a more accurate view of human evolution?

(Eric Savin, Dallastarsfan13@gmail.com)

Argument- GPS vs. hippocampus

Argument:

On page 35 Shenk talks about london taxi drivers who have "a greatly enlarged posterior hippocampus” (35). In 1999 an experiment by Eleanor Maguire discovered that “the longer the driving career, the larger the posterior hippocampus” (35). This means that as taxi drivers drove longe,r through the streets of London, they were learning the streets leading a part of the brain to enlarge for the specializing for spatial skills.
 

With this in mind how does the GPS affect the brains for the new generation of taxi drivers, who might not need to memorize or learn as much information as those who did not have access to GPS? Does having a larger hippocampus help an individual learn another skill better? Does having a large hippocampus give better advantage to those in a foreign setting? Do the taxi drivers merely memorize the streets are they create a map in their mind to aid themwhen driving? Relate these back to the idea of different learning processes from class and from outside sources.

 

(Christine Park go2chritine@hotmail.com)

Shenk proposes that "researchers have recorded a constellation of physical changes (occurring in direct response to practice) in the muscles, nerves, hears, lungs, and brains of those showing profound increases in skill level in any domain"(67). Does this imply that with practice to be faster, stronger, efficient, organisms can "adapt" or achieve selective advantages? Distinguish what Shenk's claim is from the rudimentary definition of evolution.

Argument: GxE

David Shenk's main argument is that the model for human development over time is based on a Genetics x Environment model (GxE) in which genes and the environment interact equally instead of a Genetics + Environment model (G+E) where genes lay the concrete foundation for human development and don't interact with the environment until later.

Based on your reading of this book as a whole, do you personally agree with the GxE model in lieu of the G+E model? Why? How does the concept of GxE add legitimacy to the concept of Lamarckism or take away legitimacy from the concept of evolution? Can you think of different examples (other than those shared in the book) in which either GxE or G+E seems more plausible than the other? For what reason?

(Adithi Rao, adithi.a.rao@gmail.com)

Argument: "Hidden" Environments

David Shenk mentions in Chapter 8 the significance of a 'hidden' environment on the development of a child - and how the hidden environment has as much of an impact on the child as the visible and measurable environment and genes do. Because, "each human child is his/her own unique genetic identity conceived in his/her own distinctive environment," Shenk argues that the strict determinate nature of Mendelian genetics can't be considered legitimate (130). However, one cannot assume that through solely observing the environment of spectacularly successful individuals, scientists can create the 'ideal' environment for successful offspring.

How does this concept of a hidden environment acting as a factor connect to evolution? Do you think that we, as humans, may eventually be able to find the 'ideal' environment for successful offspring even with the hidden environment in play? Why?

(Adithi Rao, adithi.a.rao@gmail.com)

Argument - Effectiveness of Learning Methods

The Argument
In this section, Shenk discusses the story of Shinichi
Suzuki, who created the Suzuki method which teaches very young kids to play
complex instruments, like the violin. This method focuses on: “extraordinary
repetition, parental persistence, and strong cultural reinforcement”, which
includes “heavy parent involvement, steady practice, memorization, and lots of
patience” (136). This proved that with “the right training and persistence,
anyone could achieve remarkable success” (137). Relate this type of learning to
the different types of learning studied in Campbell Chapter 51. Do you believe
this is an effective way of learning? Do you believe this is the BEST method of
learning? Why or why not? How does the theme evolution play a role in the
development of the brain and behavior if this was the only method of learning
used by humans to learn?

(Lea Nowack, lea.nowack123@gmail.com)

Argument- Physical Activity

On pages 67- 69, Ericsson explains that performing a strenuous physical activity repeatedly can induce “an abnormal state for cells in some physiological systems”(69), and that these biochemical states will trigger the activation of dormant genes within the cell’s DNA. Therefore, this frequent engagement in certain areas of practice activities will induce physiological strain which will cause biochemical changes that stimulate growth and transformation of cells. Ultimately, there will be improved adaptations of the physiological systems. Explain how Ericsson’s conclusion is valid using your knowledge of gene regulation and of human cells. Use section 6.3 and chapter 18 in Campbell for references. Relate to the biology themes of regulation, evolution, and continuity and change in your response.

Neil Edat (neil.edat@gmail.com)

Argument-Positive Triggers

Shenk’s GxE model explains how our environment interacts with our genetic factors. Shenk also goes on to encourage that when positive environmental triggers are discovered, “the appropriate response is not to caution against their possible irrelevance, but to embrace the influence they have on our genes”(46) and lives. Some triggers that are known today, found on page 47, include speaking to children early and often, nurturance and encouragement, and reading early and often. These environmental factors all relate to the communication, behavior, culture, and social aspects of humans. Because of our capacity for learning and versatility, human behavior is more flexible than that of any other animal, and this has contributed strongly to human evolution. How does human communication differ and compare to those of other animals (use chapter 51 in the Campbell)? How do genetic makeup and the environment contribute to the development of behaviors in both humans and animals (use page 1142 in the Campbell book and the concept of sociobiology)? Incorporate the themes of evolution and interdependence in nature in your response.

Neil Edat (neil.edat@gmail.com)

Evidence: Changes in the Body

Shenk continuously mentions the importance of practice throughout his argument, and specifically emphasizes that "[There is] emerging evidence that extended practice has profound effects on...muscles, nerve systems heart and circulatory system and brain" (Shenk 251). Why is practice so important to Shenk's argument? What are specific examples of changes that may occur to the specific parts of the body given in the quote that show the change practice can have? Use accurate support for your examples and incorporate an biological theme that pertains the the effects of practice.

Joseph Hugener (jah1112@comcast.net)

Argument- Motivation

 Shenk keeps explaining that if one wants to achieve greatness, they need the motivation to be able to go through the “daily grinding commitment to becoming better” (68). Even though part of his advice is purely counseling, how could the motivation described on page 120 be able to physically help one to pursue a talent. What are other mental drives that Shenk describes could help to push one forward to achieve greatness? How would the mental drive of a person actually affect outcome of a skill genetically? Think along the lines of environmental stressors and brain related hormones. Incorporate the growth mindset theme.

(Christina Li, christinali208@gmail.com)

Evidence: Intracellular Environment

According to Michael Meaney of McGill University, "Everything we have learned about molecular biology has show that gene activity is regulated by the intracellular environment" (195). Both the outer environment and the DNA sequence affect gene expression indirectly, but some of the factors that determine more directly what genes will be expressed are "hormones released by endocrine organs, cytokines from the immune system, neurotransmitters form neurons, nutrients derived from food" (195). For each of these four factors, choose a specific example of a biological pathway. Explain what environmental influences would initiate or affect the example, how each example moves through the body to reach target cells, and how the example affects the intracellular environment to change gene expression.

Adele Padgett adele.padgett@gmail.com

Evidence - Human Body Affected

On page 70, Shenk states that "sublime pianists" to "profound physicists" all required the average “ten-thousand-hour mark” of practicing in order to achieve greatness. Daniel Levitin supports this claim that this is a known number for success and that no one has ever been able to prove that perfection is possible in less time than this (256). How do you respond to this claim that an average of 3 hours a day over 10 years is all that is needed for greatness? Why this number and how have scientists been able to prove this to be true? Also, how do so many hours of practice play into gene development? Are genes made more complex during training, or how are they controlled in order to achieve such muscle memory and perfection? Do people with certain genes for memory have an advantage over others starting from scratch? Cite specific real world examples and make biological connections to muscle development, memory, or motor skill refinement.

Lily Walker (lwalker220@gmail.com)

Argument - Ten-Thousand-Hour Mark

On page 70, Shenk states that "sublime pianists" to "profound physicists" all required the average “ten-thousand-hour mark” of practicing in order to achieve greatness. Daniel Levitin supports this claim that this is a known number for success and that no one has ever been able to prove that perfection is possible in less time than this (256). How do you respond to this claim that an average of 3 hours a day over 10 years is all that is needed for greatness? Why this number and how have scientists been able to prove this to be true? Also, how do so many hours of practice play into gene development? Are genes made more complex during training, or how are they controlled in order to achieve such muscle memory and perfection? Do people with certain genes for memory have an advantage over others starting from scratch? Cite specific real world examples and make biological connections to muscle development, memory, or motor skill refinement.

The Argument - Respiratory System in Athletes of Different Ethnicities

The Argument ~

Shenk suggests that Kenyans who can
athletically perform better, especially with running, than their Caucasian
athletes in the Olympics come from the “Kalenjin tribe in the Great Rift Vally
region of western Kenya, where they have a centuries-old tradition of long-distance
running.” This tradition of running and cattle raiding was continued because it
directly linked to survival since “the better a young man was at raiding
[cattle]- in large part a function of his speed and endurance- the more cattle he
accumulated […and] since cattle were what a prospective husband needed to pay
for a bride[..., such] a reproductive advantage might
cause a significant shift in a group’s genetic makeup over the course of a few
centuries”(103). Relate how natural selection and adaption/evolution ("survival and reproduction") play
into the development of the differing performances due to changes in the lungs.
In addition, compare and contrast the vital capacity, tidal volume, and
residual volume of the lungs of an American athlete to a Kenyan athlete, or an
average European Caucasian’s to a Kenyan athlete. Would a Kenyan athlete
experience a Bohr shift, and what causes this shift? Would this
shift be more significant than a shift in a Caucasian athlete in training from
America?
Relate back to the Respiratory System, the biological theme of
homeostasis, and the concept of evolution/natural selection.

Lea Nowack (lea.nowack123@gmail.com)

Evidence: Muscles

On page 309 of The Evidence section of The Genius in All of Us, David Shenk states that "in musculature, we are not all created equal. Although on average, humans beings have about a fifty-fifty mix of slow and fast-twitch muscle fibers, some are born with differing proportion", completely going against the GxE model. However, Shenk refutes the claim, stating that "muscles are tremendously adaptive to external stimulus" (309) as well. How can muscles change due to their environmental factors? Cite from the text and additional external sources if necessary. In addition, what abiotic or biotic factors contribute to this adaptation? What events in the past allowed human beings to evolve into having "on average... a fifty-fifty mix of slow and fast-twitch muscle fibers"? How do the structure of the different muscle fibers relate to the task that they must carry out?

~Jimmy Chang

Argument: Parenting the Wrong Way

Shenk describes one of the mistakes of many parents attempting to raise exceptional children as "attaching high-achievement to love" which results from "narcissistic parents" who have "grown up believing that, in order to be liked, [they] must be exceptional in some way" and act this way toward their children who grow up to "struggle with social and emotional challenges" and "frequently [have] a hard time forming life partnerships" (138). The children become "addicted" to pleasing the parent which is dependent on their achievement. Based on this model, can interdependence be applied to support the idea that the cycle will inevitably continue for the next generation? How can this method of parenting be supported by ideologies such as the recently popular outbreak of 'tiger-mothering' against Shenk's claim that this is the "wrong way to direct your kids toward achievement"(139)?

Kate White (kw2020@gmail.com)

Argument: Environmental Demands

In page 40 - 41 of the Argument section of The Genius In All of Us, David Shenk quotes psychologists Mandel Sherman and Cora B. Key that "children develop only as the environment demands development", following their study that isolated societies tended to have lower IQ's than societies integrated into the modern world. How are the two societies different from one another? What selective advantages are providing for increasing intelligence capability in a more modern society? What is the selective advantage of not having this increase in a more isolated society? How is this phenomenon significant to the doctrine of survival? Explain and reference specific parts of the text.

Following on that assertion, Shenk references psychologist James Flynn in his study that IQ has steadily increased over the decades, "a staggering difference of eighteen points over two generations" (42). How does this trend cohere with the previous claim, and how has this shift in intelligence capacity reflected on our society? Cite from personal experience and from the text.

Argument - Clones

Rainbow the cat was cloned in 2001 to make Cc the cat. Although the cats shared the same DNA, their appearances and personalities were very different (74). What does this explain about the GxE model vs. the G+E model? If Rainbow and Cc shared the same DNA and appeared very different, why do identical twins, who also share the same DNA sequence, often appear very similar?
Ted Williams was one of the greatest baseball hitters of all time, and after he died in 2002, "his son, John Henry, became convinced that his father's particular genius could be equaled only by a perfect replica: a clone" (73). What is the flaw with John Henry's logic, and why is he wrong? Why and how would making a clone of Ted Williams' DNA create a different Ted Williams than the original?

Adele Padgett adele.padgett@gmail.com

Argument- Gene Correlation

Shenk mentions that genes don't directly code for a trait, and that they only increase or decrease the chances of trait expression (107).  This is a little different from what we learned in Mendelian genetics when we calculated the genotype which led to a particular phenotype.  We learned that genes are the blueprints to life, which Shenk rejects vehemently.  Explore the impact of this interaction of gene from climate in specific examples that might be common to us.  For example take height in gymnasts who TEND to be shorter than average, what factors might be triggering this trend?  What sort of interactions with the genes do activities related to gymnastic training have on height?  Why is it that most people who play a musical instrument TEND to be better in school, what factors are possibly triggering the interaction for the genes to be expressing higher levels of brain activity?

Argument: Is Evolution a Choice?

Argument -
The common notion that “We cannot change our genes” is reinforced even in class (Shenk 157). Evolution is not a choice.  Yet in 1999, botanist Enrico Coen discovered that changes to the epigenome can be inherited in the Peloria toadflax flower.  Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck supports this discovery with his idea that "an individual's actions can alter the biological inheritance passed on to his or her children" (Shenk 155).  Is Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck correct?  Can our lifestyles change our own gene expression as well as that of future generations?  How can Lamarck’s idea be connected to evolution or are they completely different things?  Support your argument with the discoveries discussed (such as about the toadflax plant and the mice) as well as an explanation of how the epigenome affects gene expression.

Christine Zhao (c_zhao@ymail.com)

Evidence: Brain and body

Ericsson argues that the "Brain drives the brawn", in other words he believes that with increased athletic ability there comes great change in the brain (page 251). Shenk then takes this idea and elaborates on it. He argues that people who have superior skills in a certain area "draw more elaborate mental representation of what they want to do" (Page 252). Which of Shrenk's claims in his argument does this assertion support? How does this assertion support Shenk's claims in his argument? Relate answer to growth v. fixed mindset. Include outside research for support.


Joseph Hugener (jah1112@comcast.net)

The Argument: Practice Makes Perfect

Many of us have heard that practice makes perfect. Supposedly, if you keep on practicing, you are bound to get better. Many of us also don't believe it because we've practiced, yet we don't seem to be improving. This leads many people to believe that not only do you need to practice, but you need to have that special gene to help you excel. According to Ericsson, this is not true because research has "failed to reveal reproducible evidence for any genetic constraints for attaining elite levels by healthy individuals" (68-69).  From this, Shenk has concluded that "nonachievers seem to be missing something in their process" (69) rather than in their genetic coding. What process is Shenk talking about? Explain what happens in the body as a result of this process towards achievement. How has the understanding of practice versus perfect practice changed over time? 

(Kalista Noegroho, Kalista.dara@gmail.com)

Argument: The Elastic Mind

In “The Genius in All of Us,” Shenk writes that “our brains and bodies are primed for plasticity; they were built for challenge and adaptation” (131). From this, it is obvious that the advantage in having such the power to “change [our] minds when faced with the data” is the ability to quickly adapt to the environment (131). Yet, just because we are faced with similar sets of data does not guarantee that we will all end up with similar products. As Patrick Bateson suggests, GxE is “like baking a cake…A hundred cooks may start out with nearly the same ingredients but will in the end produce very different cakes” (23). Thus, the notion of “hidden, undetectable differences” – especially Crabbe’s three city rat experiment (129) -- suggests that the environment has effect that is much more pronounced and evident than is explained by the idea that we adapt to what’s around us (130).

Relating the Relationship between Structure and Function and possibly Interdependence in Nature, provide specific examples in how it is more advantageous to have a plastic mind or body over a fixed mind or body. Next, providing evidence, contemplate on how a plastic mind is important in the GxE model and how it helps to disprove some of the old notions from the G+E model.

Some thought questions. (But you are free to answer them in your post.) There isn’t a correct answer:

A child who grows up immersed in a musical background is assumed to find and develop a love for music. Is this necessarily the case?

In the Crabbe’s three city rat experiment, the macroenvironment of where the rats were in the world was enough produce changes. Does this mean that no matter what the interaction of GxE, results will always be truly random? Or can we at least attempt to point someone in a certain direction?

Since the mind is plastic, how easily can it be moulded? That is, if someone held a certain skill, left it alone for several years, will the skill be retained or must the person learn the skill again?

The Argument: Environmental Factors

David Shenk discussed how John C. Crabbe's experiment with mice proved to the world that even slight environmental changes could radically change a mouse's reaction to alcohol and cocaine. In order to minimize extraneous variables and to really narrow down on slight environmental factors, "he conducted the exact same study at the same time in three different locations" (128). Crabbe went through specific procedures to ensure that the mice had "identical genetic strains, identical food, identical bedding, identical cages, identical light schedule, etc." (129). Even with all these controls put into play, "invisible factors" (129) managed to influence the behavior of these mice. Using the GxE equation and information about this experiment, explain how it is possible for such results to occur in spite of the measures taken to control certain variables. What internal processes influenced the mice to have different reactions to alcohol and cocaine?

(Kalista Noegroho, Kalista.dara@gmail.com)

Argument: Puzzles and the Growth Mindset

Within The Genius in All of Us, Shenk describes an experiment in which psychologist Dweck observed that when 400 students were asked to complete a set of puzzles and upon completion one group would be praised for their natural talent and the other group praised for their work ethic, then were offered either a harder puzzle or an easier puzzle, "A staggering 90% of kids praised for their hard work chose the more difficult puzzles" and "More than half of the kids praised for their inborn intelligence chose the easy follow-up puzzle" (98). Seeing that Shenk uses the experiment to assert that people with a growth mindset are much more intellectually ambitious and successful. Considering the theme of structure and function as it relates to the phenomena observed in the experiment, how is Shenk's idea of a trend being associated with people with belief in malleable intelligence able to be modeled in what we have learned in AP Biology during this year (Hint: Endocrine and Neuro)?


Alex Nye
alex.nye95@gmail.com 

Argument: Sculpting A Culture

Argument- Shenk argues through economic observations of cultural differences that the key to a strong education system is "To sculpt a culture that can accommodate different personality types and levels of motivation" (151). This theory of sculpting a culture is one which seems to be even more improbable in present day education. Shenk also reflects that this system can be created through lessons learned from a 2006 study which observed that in matriarchal cultures, women were more likely to exhibit competition thriving personalities and in patriarchal cultures, men were more likely to exhibit competition thriving personalities. The lesson being that "There is no fixed male or female competitive biology"(151). Shenk, quoting Gneezy, goes on to express that what may be the best education policy is one "Targeting the socialization and education at early ages as well as later in life" (151). Seeing that this is a fairly bold assertion as students in the US generally have stood by a multiculturalist sentiment since the 1970s, how does this idea of sculpting a culture apart from ethnic or social norms play into the "AP Biology Culture" at Stevenson High School in teaching methodology (Hint: Look at Erdmann's "Growth Mindset")? Also, what biologically justifies the method of sculpting a culture based on targeting socialization at early ages as superior to the present day American educational structure (Think effect of coed vs. single sex schools)? 


Alex Nye
alex.nye95@gmail.com

The Arguement - The Greatness Gap

Shenk states that people with "gifted talents" make the "average Joe's"  feel that "these extraordinary performers cannot possibly belong to the same species as you or me" (57). In 1785 Christian Friedrich Schubart claimed that "Poets and musicians are born" (58). While in 1862 composer Peter Lichtenthal said "Musical genius is that inborn, inexplicable gift of Nature" (58). The definition of "genius" has not been changed since the late 18th century, but the "endowments" of gifts have (58). Explain how the view of "gifts" have changed over the centuries. Use specific examples and use the G+E model and the GxE model in your answer.

Argument-Rats and their environment

Rod Cooper and John Zubek conducted a study on rats' intelligence(27). They started with "Maze-bright" rats that had tested well in mazes for multiple generations and "Maze-dull" rats that had consistently tested poorly for generations with 40% more mistakes. They were raised in three different environments: enriched, normal, and restricted. The expected results were that each rat would get slightly smarter when raised in the enriched environment and slightly dumber when in the restricted environment. However, the results showed that in the extreme environments, the bright and dull rats performed virtually the same. How are these results explained? How does this support the GxE model? Also, explain the role of epigenetics in this scenario. Alex Casino (Alexjcasino@gmail.com)

Argument-Failure of prodigies

Lewis Terman, the creator of the IQ test, did a decades-long study of child achievers and prodigies. He tracked 1500 "exceptionally superior" students into adulthood and found that none of them went on to live exceptional lives, while two students that were rejected for the study won the Nobel prize and two were wold class musicians(91). Similar studies were repeated with the same results leading Ellen Winner to conclude that, "Most gifted children, even most child prodigies, do not go on to become adult creators"(92). How is it possible that exceptional students with high IQs were not exceptional in their careers? Explain how the different environments that the students experienced influenced their genes. How does this relate to a fixed versus growth mindset? Alex Casino (Alexjcasino@gmail.com)

Evidence: Fetal Development

In footnote 94, Shenk talks about the impact of sound on the fetus and of research on the long-term effects.  Exploring this idea, there were several examples cited such as Yo-Yo Ma the famous cellist who listened to classical music when he was in his mother's womb and ended up becoming the top cellist in the world.  Other incidents included harsh sounds that resulted in violent responses from the fetus such as kicking, and then the same sounds eliciting different responses after the baby is born. Explore this idea of gene regulation during gestation.  Why and how can the effect of sound during fetal development have an impact on responses from the human life after birth?  In particular focus on the development of the fetus and at what stages this effect on genes could be taking place.

Argument: Ethnicity and Genes

Shenk seems appalled by the idea that the stereotype that African-Americans are better at certain sports (especially running) exists. He emphasizes that while "geneticists and scientists...found that their "secret weapon" was the protein- alpha actinin-3" (101) , this in reality, was not a secret weapon because while 98% of Jamaicans had this protein, so did "80% of Americans, almost 240 million people." (101) He claims that it's "climate, demographics,... and folklore" (101) which have influenced the gene which facilitates the production of this protein to be activated. However, since this gene has been activated over so many generations, is it possible that evolutionary changes within African-Americans have occurred over time relative to the Caucasian or any other population? What physical differences might have manifested themselves to actually make the African-Americans more physically able to have this gene activated (think positive feedback?) or would any at all? Why do Jamaicans still have 18% more of their population proportionally than we do with this gene? Do you think if a Caucasian grew up in the same environment as a Kenyan runner, they could be just as successful? Explain your answer using justification from the book and incorporating the themes of evolution and/or structure and function.

(Michelle Kelrikh, mjkelrikh@gmail.com)

Argument: epigenetics and lifestyle

Shenk begins to offer some support for Lamarck's much-ridiculed idea that personal experience can alter heredity. He states how certain lifestyle experiences, such as children being exposed to more rigorous mental activity, can give a genetic boost to future generations. "In other words, we may well be able to improve the conditions for our grandchildren by putting our young children through intellectual calisthenics now" (162). For example, "could a family's dedication to athletics in one or more generations induce biological advantages in subsequent generations?" (162) However, much of Shenk's early argument focuses on his idea that there is no such thing as inborn talent. "Talent is not the cause but the result of something," (60) he declares, that something being extensive deliberate practice that causes our "muscles and brain [to] adapt to the demands that we make of them" (67). Does this mean that, when Shenk says that practice changes the body (65), the same physiological changes that give people "talent" can also be inherited from previous generations that have done the work for us? Shenk does admit that genetics play some role in determining our full potential. Examine how much GxE development in one generation can give an advantage to future generations, and how much must be attained by one's own practice.
Vivian Wang (vivian.wang9895@gmail.com)

Argument-Non-Achievers

Argument- In Accordance with Ericson's study as to why some individuals are able to excel whereas others aren't, it was found that "one or more aspects of style or intensity of practice, or technique, or mind-set, or response to failure" (69) caused those individuals to be extremely successful. Are any of these factors more important than one another? Furthermore, it was also stated that genes still play an integral role in one's success in that induced "biochemical states will trigger the activation of doorman genes within the cell's DNA" (69) which will then cause "adaptive change"(69) within these genetically "gifted" individuals. Taking into account the notion of GxE, does practice overcome this difference? Or does genetics always put others at an impassable advantage?

Sai Nimmagadda (saiguy@me.com)

Argument: Motivations

Shenk repeatedly states the notion that motivation must be present in order for success to occur, that "ultra-achievers" (120) do not have things come easily to them but rather are "irrepressible and resilient" (120) in working towards the things they want. If all humans are born supposedly able to "adopt a particular lifestyle of ambition" (120) given the right environmental factors and motivations, then how do these motivations become present in the minds of some, often children, or even adults, but not in the minds of others? For example, why do not all children of musicians become successful musicians themselves? Like the example of Mozart that Shenk repeatedly mentioned, these children too would have been exposed to the environment of music from a young age. So why do only some supposedly "prodigious" people develop this resilient quality? If someone is never presented with the correct environmental factors, does this mean that they will never able to gain this motivation to do something? Is it possible that there are certain genes that motivations so-to-speak "activate" and cause physiological changes in the brain in order to allow this person to develop this lifestyle and foster this motivation? Explain your answers in terms of evidence from the book and also in relation to the theme of structure and function.

(Michelle Kelrikh, mjkelrikh@gmail.com)

Evidence - An athletes genes

It is a common stereotype that african males are better at sports than their white counterparts. Jon Entine wrote in his book Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Whit We're Afraid to Talk About It that black athletes are propelled by high performance genes inherited from their west and east African ancestors. He later goes on to describe West African males. He writes "[black athletes] are endowed with shorter trunks and smaller lungs, longer arms and legs, narrower hips, heavier bones, more muscle all around..."(298) which leads to greater success at certain athletic events. Claude Bouchard counters this argument by saying "...these biological characteristics are not unique to either west or east african blacks. These characteristics are seen in all populations..." (102). However he would later say that based on the limited number of studies available "there seem to be more African Blacks with such characteristics than there are in other populations" (299). If there were to be a specific gene that led to these characteristics, are certain groups of people evolving toward being genetically superior at athletics than other groups? If it turned out that there was no genetic reason behind the trend of Black success in athletics, describe some possible environmental causes that would result in superior athletes within a population.

Evidence - Natural Talent

In chapter 7 Shenk discusses what is necessary to become a genius. Continuing with the theme of GXE and how the environment in an important player in how each person turns out, Shenk writes on page 118-119 "Even in a land of free choice, we are mostly shaped by habits, messages, schedules, expectations...Many of these elements are passed down...with little or no change and are difficult or impossible to alter". This shows he feels that the environment can control our outcome. However, in the evidence section on page 318, Shenk says "Many people who stand out as being extraordinary do so because of choices they have made...", which indicates that some have chosen to be great. Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, and Whalen write in a 1993 study "...talent is much more widely distributed than its manifestation would suggest." (120). How much of our talent is a result of our choices? Could we all become great in athletics, academics or the arts if we just chose to work harder than the rest? How true is the saying practice makes perfect?

Argument- Marshmallow test

Argument:

On pg.140,Shenk describes the experiment done by a psychologist from Stanford, Walter Mischel, tested 4-year olds on their patience and self discipline and the affect of their future academic successes. In the experiment, the children were given an option to either take a single marshmallow, or wait for an indefinite amount of time in order to receive two marshmallows. The results were about the same for 1.the taking of the initial single marshmallow 2. waiting for a while, but eventually settling for the single or 3. waiting for a full fifteen minutes for two marshmallows.Later the experiment was followed up with The study of the SAT scores of the subjects fourteen years later. The results were that for those that could wait for the two marshmallows, they scored on avg. of 210 pts higher than the group that could not.

How does this experiment support Shenk's argument on the growth mindset and how does it go against? How does the experiment (141), a side experiment, reviewing the idea of developing skills, support Shenk's theory of GXE.


Christine Park (go2christine@hotmail.com)

evidence- the exact same?

Evidence:

In chapter four, Shenk reveals a more specific example of the environments influence on a person's physical structure using evidence from Michael Rennie. The human body is made and influenced by the environment and natural endowment (genes). This is how two identical twins can "sculpt their bodies by different training regimes” (266) creating two different body types.

If the environment was the same and people had similar lifestyles could the body structure be the same? How does this idea relate to the theme of 'relationship between structure and function' between the environment and the shape the body? 

 

Christine Park (go2christine@hotmail.com)

Argument: Passing on Traits

DNA has been proven to be hereditary, and epigenetic material is also passed on, "which helps guide how the genes will be expressed. While genes themselves do not change (by and large) from generation to generation, the epigenetic material can change" (118). While genes can be changed between generations, the environment seems to be a bit more decided than previously thought because we tend to, "conform to established cultural norms" (118). How do these insights change the old nature/nurture paradigm? How large is the influence of past generations' environments on a child? If all instructional material is not preset as it is transferred from generation to generation, what influences the changes, and how large are the affects? Can the environment of a parent alter the epigenetic material they pass onto their children, and, if so, how large of an influence does their environment have?


Jenna Sherman (jsherm013@aol.com)