Verified by 
Key points
- Children who do better at school have greater success in life.
- DNA can predict how well someone will do at school, as a new meta-analysis has shown.
- DNA-based predictions can be used to help children who struggle in school.
- Safeguarding is needed for DNA-based predictions to mitigate risks of genetic discrimination.
By Kirsty Wilding
Even before children set foot into a classroom for the first time, they have been told that doing well in school is important for their future. Good grades unlock possibilities for achieving prestigious educational qualifications. People with these qualifications often have greater success in life: Among other things, they work in highly respected jobs and earn more money than people without further educational qualifications.
Differences in how well children do in school are evident from the first day of primary school. Over the years, these differences manifest and get larger. Knowing why children differ in school performance is key to helping them to do better in class. In other words, understanding the origin of children’s differences in education is key to improving how we teach and learn.
An important factor when it comes to explaining differences between individuals is our DNA. We inherit genes from our parents when we are conceived. From then on, our inherited DNA differences remain unchanged and affect all aspects of our development. A new meta-analysis (which I worked on) was published this week. It asked: How well do our inherited DNA differences predict our school grades?
Using DNA to predict school grades: Polygenic scores
Over the past two decades, researchers have developed a new method for using DNA to predict how well someone might do in school. This method is known as polygenic scores. Polygenic scores are summaries of DNA variants – Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms or short ‘snips’ that are smallest unit of genetic differences between people. To find out which ‘snips’ are linked to education, researchers compare the DNA of people with different levels of educational qualifications, ranging from secondary school leaving certificates to Ph.D. degrees. These comparisons show which DNA variants are more frequent in people with more educational qualification as compared to those with fewer. Polygenic scores are then the sum of the DNA variants that a person carries that are associated with education.
Polygenic scores do not mean someone's traits or abilities are set in stone. Instead, they index a genetic tendency or likelihood to think, feel, and act in certain ways. For example, children with lower genetic propensities for doing well in school are likely to find it harder to sit down and concentrate on their homework than kids with higher genetic propensities for education. That doesn’t mean, however, that they do not sit down and concentrate on their homework. It also doesn't mean that they are worse students than children with higher genetic propensities for education. It's just that they are less likely to find schoolwork easy.
DNA is a powerful predictor of educational success
This new meta-analysis pooled data across 10 studies with a total of 83,000 children and adolescents to show that polygenic scores predict how well someone does in school. The meta-analytic estimate suggests that up to 25% of differences in school grades between individuals can be attributed to genetic differences.
These effects may seem small but they rival those of other well-known factors. For example, Ofsted school ratings are weaker predictors of children’s school grades. The meta-analysis also suggested that increases in polygenic scores are associated with spending up to a year more in full-time education. In the UK, this could mean earning a master’s degree and potentially earning 10% more over a lifetime.
The meta-analysis also highlighted that polygenic scores do not predict education equally well for everyone. Specifically, polygenic scores were only about half as predictive in African American individuals compared to those of European ancestry. So far, about 80% of behavioural genetic research has focused on people of European ancestry. We therefore don’t know much about DNA-based predictions in populations of other ancestries.
Should genetics be used in education?
Our meta-analysis underscores the importance of genetic differences for understanding why children vary in their learning abilities. But the article also highlights two big ethical concerns regarding genetic predictions in schools.
First, DNA-based predictions could be misused. For example, they could lead to some children being excluded from difficult lessons or from challenging classroom environments if their genetics are misinterpreted as an obstacle to learning. As a result, children’s differences in school grades would become even bigger. What’s more, this false interpretation of DNA-based prediction could reinforce narratives that unfairly label some children as “lost causes."
The second concern is that children and their families may respond negatively if they hear that their polygenic scores are low. For example, parents might feel guilty or blame themselves for their children’s genetic makeup, or children might lose motivation in their studies, if they believe that low polygenic scores make them unlikely to do well.
We believe that these ethical concerns can be mitigated. One important way is to educate families, children, teachers, and the wider public about what genetics means. The more people know about genetics, the less likely they are to fall for the false narrative that "DNA is destiny."
In short, there is growing interest in applying polygenic scores in education but we are not quite there yet. More research needs to be done on the role of genetics for differences in school performance before we can be sure to use genetic information in responsible and productive ways. In the words of Marie Curie, “Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less.”
"Using DNA to predict Education: A meta-analytic review" is published in the journal Educational Psychology Review.
