My step-grandson of three spends a lot of his time with me and has learnt a new language - good grammatical English - in 3 months. He says "Let me do it" and I do. Looking back over 70 years, I think we say 'no' to children too much. Let them learn by doing and by talking to an adult - all the time: To fathers in particular. I think you will find very young children will progress rapidly only if they are in constant contact with adults who love them, and are enchanted to see and praise their progress. Say 'no' once too often and a child becomes apathetic and learns the lesson to keep quite and do nothing

Brian Lewis, Manila, Philippines

I have a 3 yr old who can count ,writes her name has great vocab e.t.c. people say 'she's always been bright though` yes but I've counted the steps read stories made cakes,cards,camped,watched tv gone to burger king and worked!Kids want time, money helps of course for classes, different children excel at different things if you dont find out what they're good/bad at how can you guide them!!!

Alexia, Deal, Uk

I don't know about parents having to be graduates. My dad is a graduate, but my mother didn't study beyond the age of 14 (women of her generation were trained to be housewives). I have two masters degrees and a bachelor's degree from some of the best institutions around.

I think it's more the cultural environment at home - both my parents made sure we understood the value of education. But more than this, they believed children need a full-time mother right until kids finish college. Not once did my mother make us feel that she was making a major sacrifice by looking after us so well. Both parents made tremendous sacrifices to give us the best education. This is very typical of Indians my generation (I'm in my late 30s). Virtually all my highly educated and driven Indian friends share the same background. Westerners often seem to wonder why Indian kids are so devoted to their parents, especially their mothers. Now you know.

SKP, London,

For once utter rubbish from my favourite columnist. My ten year is top of her class, my eight year old only middling, despite the same reading, talking, books and so on, and my eight year old eats better and more varied food. The reason - genetics. Intelligence is a product of nurture and nature, but the big determinants of nurture at an early age are health and nutrition . Today's poor in Britain have fantastic health and amazing nutrition (in relation to the rest of the world and all our ancestors), thus nature is the main determinant for the three year olds cited. The clinching proof - girls are ahead of boys. What the middle classes provide in terms of nurture is marginal, the difference for their children between Durham and Oxford, if that. For the difference between say Cambridge and McDonalds, it is nature. That may not be nice, it may not be what we would like, but it is a fact.

Tim, London,

It is a myth that academics lack common sense. Having worked in academia myself for a while 90% had heaps of common sense and I can say the same for my fiancee and his friends who are all Cambridge graduate - we only say it to make ourselves feel better about our own inadequacies. The problem is that when God distributed brains he didn't do it all equally - therefore I would have to concede that parents who have a degree etc are more likely to be more intelligent all round and therefore, unfortunately more like to make better parents and have brighter children.

Alison, London,

It could possibly be cultural but it's hard to say. My family are from Mauritius but I was born here. All through my childhood my parents taught me and my siblings that we should study hard and have respect for our teachers. Teachers came second to parents in the respect stakes. Never ever would either of my parents allow us to swear or abuse our teachers in any shape or form. To do that would be like abusing them and we would be punished appropriately. Many years later, I have two children of my own. I have taught them the same values and attitudes. Sadly though my daughter's teachers were awful. I think primarily because they had the spirit and passion for teaching sapped out of them by children whose parents make no time for them and so have not taught them how to interact. Or indeed about the benefits of a good education. Why? Why are parents so lazy and selfish? Parents, by not caring for your children you are creating a nation of people you will one day weep for.

KS, London, UK

Actually, it is all about genetics. You need to read Steven Pinkers "The Blank State" and you need to do it now. Cancel everything else. If you can't stomach the whole thing, just read the chapter on children.

Yes, it is depressing. Yes, it is heresy to a progressive. But I'm afraid it's true. The only studies that are worth anything are those that factor in natural children versus adopted ones. These show, beyond reasonable doubt, that intelligence is 50% inheritable and 50% random. Culture and upbringing are irrelevant. Science sometimes flies in the face of common sense and requires a recalibration of our thinking. Remember Copernicus. The destruction of the 'nurture' argument is another such moment and society is avoiding the issue like the plague.

Clever and demanding parents succeed and have clever and demanding children who succeed and marry their own. Up to now, this has been disguised by the fact women were not educated. We need to accept this science.

James, Maidstone, Kent

Who believes this rubbish anyway? We have never given the true identity of our children on the stupid and worthless ethnicity forms handed out to parents to complete. Accordingly, my half-Jamaican, half English children are mixed Chinese, Indian or any other flaovour we choose. We are not alone either. I know of many, many parents who either ignore them or play silly games like us. All children are the same!!

Don, Surrey, UK

This kind of stuff repeats generalizations from American studies decades ago.

Many of these studies have been conducted by faculties of education, possibly the least rigorous and reliable departments in any university.

The fact is that such studies, even when conducted properly, cannot discover cause and effect.

What they find is something David Hume wrote about so very long ago, two phenomena simply tend to happen together.

There is no question that an important genetic component is buried in such studies. More gifted parents tend to talk to and stimulate their children. Indeed, often, poor parenting is associated with low intellectual abilities.

Bright parents don't need to be asked by teachers to take an interest in children's progress. Dull ones often don't even respond if asked.

We should encourage parents towards such behaviors, but even if we succceed, I'm afraid we'll find we don't get 'bright' children this way. Better adjusted, yes, and that's worth having.

John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada

Loving your children and actually taking an interest in the way they develop and behave? This affects them?!!? wow who would have thought!

phil, london, uk

The thinking behind this paper is flawed. It does not matter whether we have bright children or not. Yes, we should talk to them, read to them, play with them and simply be human with them, as much for ourselves as for them. We should not allow them to watch crap films or eat rubbish. But, more than that, we should have a society that does not discriminate against not being bright, but judges us on our humanity. Now that would be brilliant.

Fanus Dreyer, Dumfries,

At last someone has spoken up for common sense.
Our children were raised to know right from wrong and not to drop litter.
More importantly we read to them, talked to them and played with them. We are not academics or middle class but ordinary working parents.

R.Evans, Nottingham, England

It is unfashionable to say so, but if you want bright children choose bright parents. All the social engineering in the world cannot make bricks without straw.

But bright children aren't necessarily a blessing.

Terry Hamblin, Bournemouth,

I am a young black student in today's British society. I attend a central London college and i share several classes with twenty five other students .

It can be sheer agony when i am trying to do something calming after a hard lesson and am being prodded so i can do someone's homework. Parents need to do something about their children and shouldn't blame class or ethnicity!

I believe that some of them are definately the cause of their parents' backwards upbringing. You can see that some of them took to watching 'Corrie' rather than study for that 15 minute psychology quiz that we have in the morning.

However, we cannot just blame children. I think that parents need to remember that when their child comes home and dumps their bag on the floor, it should be searched.

It seems all too easy to park their offspring infront of some cretinous television show and want tax payers to hand them benefits for doing nothing when they could be showing their child, working hard is key.

Josephine Nelson, London, UK

Oh dear. You certainly missed the point, didn't you? The point is that smoking (and drinking Coca Cola and eating Pop Tarts) are simply not healthy - especially for children that don't know any better unless we teach them. Naturally that doesn't mean that every child (or adult) that partakes in these unhealthy vices will be a failure. But, they aren't healthy no matter how much you might jump up and down and say you think they are.

I find it sad how poorly some parents care for their children. For example, in the US I have started to notice something interesting - why is it that at the beach (or pool) I often notice it is the significantly overweight children that are often sunburned? Not only aren't their parents helping their children maintain a healthy weight, but they aren't teaching them how to care for their skin. Doctors are saying that even one bad sunburn significantly increases your changes of developing skin cancer in later years.

KD, Massachusetts, USA

"The basic material is dictated by genes."

Unless you are a geneticist you are fundamentally unqualified to make a statement like that.

Kids require time and energy. If you spend more time and energy making ends meet, but while not earning enough to pay for childcare, you've got less time and energy for your kids. Simple as.

Alan, Northampton, UK

Mr Aaronovitch makes a (tentative) crucial point about the cause and effect of poverty and poor attainment by children.

It is NOT the lack of money that is the cause, lack of money is a consequence, an outcome. We always fail to sort out these problems because we approach solutions on the basis that money is the cure.

It is individual people's attitude to life in general that leads to overall poverty, monetary and cultural poverty.

To be blunt - some people lack ambition, they are thick, they have no imagination, they don't care enough, they are ignorant and as a consequence of this they don't get to take advamtage of the wonderful opportunities that exist in the UK to earn a decent living (if not get filthy rich).

Analysis of these issues reveals a stupid double-standard - the UK is at the same time both the Euro land of opportunity for millions of Poles, Lithuanians, Banglkadeshi's etc and an economic wasteland of no jobs, no opportunities and DWP benefits.

Simon, Brighton, England

The "poor health of Scots" is only with regard to the post-industrial post-working class, concentrated in the urban Central Belt. There are huge differences even within cities. I live in the West End of Glasgow, near the university: life-expectancy here is considerably higher than in the East End of the city. It's about class, poverty and education, and the over-reliance of sections of the lumpenproletariat on drink and drugs. Whole communities have been left without secure employment basis since the heavy industries disappeared.

Please don't tar all Scotland with the 'Trainspotting' brush.

Doc M, Glasgow, Scotland

As long as a river of funding is available for consultants to churn out the results of their lengthy research, the more reports we will have to read. Put simply, in Britain in the 21st century, an endless stream of reports, initiatives, focus groups and committees are the ultimate substitute for action.
The driving force behind adults giving their children the attention and education they need to thrive is an aspiration for the kids to do better than the parents. In any situation where that driving force is missing, the kids will suffer. I don't believe it has anything to do with class, locality, culture or wealth. Although there is no doubt that money is an excellent facilitator. I don't agonise over the feckless parents, and I don't support state intervention to help the kids of feckless parents. In a globalised world, more than ever, it's dog eat dog.

clive, surrey,

First the author of this article makes a lot of assumptions. Please don't put any more pressure on these rich families to push their kids even harder to read by 4 or 5. My sister, a long time educator says kids learn to read at different ages and as long as a kid is reading by age 7 they are usually okay. So there is time to catch up even if you have not had what David considers the right childhood. I also work with a 14 year old who is a couple years behind his peers in reading and math. He comes from a poor family and has not had much help. However spending one on one time with him has really helped him this year. I have worked with several kids at this redirectional school and thats what they need, some one on one time with a caring adult. If their parents will not do it, or they can't because they work two jobs then volunteer to help out. There is a great organization called Communities in Schools check it out right now. www.communitiesinschools.org

Suzanne, Cary, NC

So diet, discipline, books and talking will raise a genius? Nothing new here. Where are the explanations? More importantly, why should any parent *want* to raise their child to be a genius, or anything else?

Children are not products, they are ends in themselves. The article repeats the fundamental error of human relationships: trying to mould people according to another's vision.

Tom, Bristol,

Rarely has a comment annoyed and aggravated me more. From the initial fulsome declaration of drooling admiration for the moneyed classes and their fabled offspring ‘absurdly tall and elegant’ to the final couplet of Indians and Scots simplistically solving all our problems by making children thinnest and most ready, there is a slavish devotion to the hallmarks of the middle and upper classes. The writer could be forgiven this as a personal issue with which he is doing battle, if it were not for the rest all swept away with a large arm: the fat, TV watching, Coke drinking fools who knife each other over an imagined slight and don’t read or own books. If only they were more like us is the breathless whisper that hangs over this column. What values are everyone else permitted?

severin, London,

Oh David, at least they ARE talking to their children. My parents (who didn't have two spare brass farthings to rub together) used to talk to me in 'childish' words like the ones you deride, but the point is, they DID take me to see horses - and ducks and goats and cows and all sorts. And we read. Lots. So now I can talk like a cockney, swear like a docker, and write, when I choose, like a BBC news presenter. From the 1950s. It's about getting actively engaged with your ickle kiddywink, not whether or not you teach them RP. Innit?

Anna Morell, London, UK

children are a gift to those who want them,but a great resposability comes with that gift.My parents made many sacrifices for me despite the poverty we were living in.It made a difference.Now i too make as much time and resources available as i can,and my son makes me proud every day.He is excelling both at school and in the community.

paul turner, toronto, canada

Wait a minute. Back up. Who says that having a child 'school ready' at three is necessarily a good thing? Has anyone done a study of the achievements of children who were or weren't school ready at age three and compared them as adults? Maybe the Bangladeshi children were allowed to be little for longer. Maybe the extra time spent being babyish serves their overall development as humans. As for the mother who gave her son Coke (Tut, I don't approve either. I'm have a bonding moment with Mr Aaronovitch.) only valued football for him because that's what her family and neighbours value most. Thank heaven she's sending her son to school so he can learn that the world is more magnificent and various than that. Maybe he'll have a terrific teacher who sees potential of another sort in him and inspires him to follow his own dream. I think you're right about the relationship between cultural poverty and actual poverty, though. You have to imagine a better world before you can live in it.

Nancy Wood, London, UK

Scottish schools have always been tougher academically than English ones. While modern education is largely designed to keep the middle class engines running, it is not entirely the fault of parents when their children fail. The first truly public schools, remember, were set up for children from poor families and the whole point of them was to raise up these folks from poverty, illiteracy and misery.

Charlie, Ex-pat, USA

How harsh to claim that less educated people do not bring up children well. In my experience as a teacher I found many uneducated people were the most keen to ensure that their children did much better in life. It is especially harsh to jump to conclusions that lower class parents 'don't care' about their children's development.

Perhaps the secret of bringing up bright children is having parents who are interested in a wide range of topics, such as politics, the latest scientific advances, social developments and all the other things which make life so fascinating.

Above all loving children is important. And love is nothing to do with class or money. Yet having enough money to enable parents to spend time with children is important.

Nurseries, child-minders and setting boundaries are not proven to help children's development. Perhaps they limit character formation. Television can be a source of knowledge and understanding, opening growing minds to the universe outside the home.

ER, Croydon, England

I rather think Ms Schumann has misread the article as the comment about smoking is related to mortality rates.
That aside I couldn't agree more with the comments about the necessity of talking, reading and playing with our children. Interaction with adults and peers is vital to cognitive, social and moral development.

LMartin, Cambridge,

You musn't gove the impression that anyone can have bright children. The basic material is dictated by genes.

R Mason, London, UK

You cite the results of the study, could we get a citation? Does the study provide any confirmed or discarded hypotheses on why the children varied?

J Giles, Los Angeles, USA

It's very simple. The parents who either don't talk to their children or do so in baby-language ("Mummy's going to take you in her brum-brum to see the nice horsies", and "Say 'ta' to the nice man") are directly responsible for their children's failure to excel at school. Such idiotic behaviour is, to my mind, a form of child-abuse, but you hear it on all the time.

David Garfield, London, UK

It's all about parenting and practically everything else is an excuse - surely that is obvious. My Mom and Dad told me that 50 years ago. Why do our academics seem to lack common sense or fail to reach obvious conclusions - or is it that common sense tells them that without many of these pointless studies they would have to get a real job. What next, an expensive study to find out if the Pope is a Catholic?

Al, Weybridge,

Yeah, like smoking is the cause of children being backward etc. Lord love a duck!!! Brave New World!! You would never find a great writer, musician or artist smoking now, would you? Surely if they smoked, they would only ever have made garbage collector grade, then they could have collected this article and most of its contents.

elizabeth schumann, Paris, France

Whilst I agree completely with the above, it saddens me that such statements need to be made at all. That elements of society find it a surprise, or need to be told, that mentally and physically stimulating children from an early age aids their learning and development highlights for me a growing cultural concern.
In an era of 'multiculturism' we should learn from those who strive to maintain culture (i.e. the 'Indians') and consider why it is that our own culture seems so rapidly to fade; with the ultimate 'knock-on' effect of decreasing culture through generation to generation.

David Fish, Cardiff, UK

The Scottish mortality stats are completely skewed by high drug overdose rates amongst the young in certain areas of Glasgow and the wealth stats are skewed by those who can, moving South where the money is better (purely by virtue of a critical population mass). None of this is rocket science. The wealth stats are unlikely to ever change until people realise that greater wealth - above a certain ceiling - is seldom associated with greater quality of life. I live in the East of Scotland and am consistently pressured by my main clients to move South. My response is always the same. Why would I want to move to an area where the house prices are a joke, where the countryside is mundane at best, where it takes hours to move around on clogged up roads and a breath of fresh air would be a breath of fresh air?

Derek S, Dundee,

I've already figured out that my three year old has a better vocabulary than the bottom ten per cent of adults.
Children at young ages cannot usually transcend their parents, so it seems here is the explanation.
People largely reproduce their own kind. With help and education later on individuals can achieve more than thier parents.
What we do about the findings of this study is another matter The choices range from eugenics to intervention to acceptance.

jane, oxford,

I was brought up in a working-class family. We had little money as my father's health had been ruined in World War II. He could only work when he was well enough and my mother was obliged to take a low-paid job to help feed us. My parents were not lavish with their attention nor did they provide their children with lots of books and toys, having their work cut out merely to exist, but they instilled a clear sense of right and wrong in us and taught us to work hard. I flourished academically, going first to grammar school and, later, to university and achieved a high level of education and professional qualifications. I put my good brain down to heredity: my father was poor but very bright ,as was my paternal grandmother, who had no schooling after the age of 8. My background doesn't fit the 'wealth and class' explanation and I would imagine quite a few others could say the same.

sarah, bournemouth,

This article is absolutely spot on. I have a toddler. My husband and I both have degrees and work as professionals (I am part time). I am shocked by the way many people are bringing up their children. Children are left in front of a tv for hours on end and parents swap stories about how much their children love certain programmes. Their vocabulary is stunted, their exercise is stunted and they simply don't learn about shapes, colours, numbers because their experiences are so limited. It is naive to believe that they will learn as much from watching "educational" tv. Many of my friends never seem to have a conversation with their children and you can tell. I don't want to sound like a crank but television is a large part of the problem. Mothers sit and veg in front of poor quality tv rather than invest a bit of energy in their children; when children become hard work they are plonked in front of the tv. How many children have their own tv and dvd player? Many have players in the car.

Sky, Sheffield,

Well said. It is important that babies are actually talked to and not talked down at. This not only helps their confidence, but also improves their ability to conceptualize issues at later stages in life. It is really impossible to quantify the effect of confidence on the overall development of children. However, thesedays we pretend to work too hard that we hardly have time for the little pleasures of life examplied by talking to our babies, reading to our toddlers and considering our children. Reminds me of the poem of William Wordsworth "the World is too much with us"

ose okpeku, cardiff, wales

David I disagree with some of your comments about Scotland, which I think are frankly not too well informed.

As a Scot who lived in london for 14 years before moving home I can see first hand the lack of personal confidence we have as a nation and how this is being improved by home rule.

We have a generally higher level of poverty than England and it is physically identifiable. My wife, who is from India, says she never expected to see European people in the physical state many nof the pooor are in a western country - and I don't think this has anything to do with fried Mars bars, or any of the other cliches. It's about long term poverty.

As for the rest ; I fully agree. Too many parents think "running about with a football" is the be all and end all for wee boys. Footie is fine in its way, but when you child is barely literate I would have thought that reading with Mum or dad would be more important. Kids need input and many adults are too ,lazy or selfish to provide it

Andrew, Edinburgh,

To right about reading to your children,when our two first went to the local school I found that hey were ahead right from the start.It seemed that some of the parents believed that it was the schools job to teach them everything,so when they got to the school they were immediatly behind.
So from the start these kids thought they were behind or thick,so they start their life feeling they cannot compete.Bad for them,bad for social mobility and bad for the country.

Nigel Wheatcroft, Wimbledon, uk

John from Bristol seems to think that Jews are a race. Through contacts to Jewish friends and by reading I rather got the impression that Jews have always been good in childraising and that giving a chance to their children is very important to Jewish families. They do exactly what the article points out: talk to their children and give them reading skills. I (not Jewish) did exactly the same. I read to my children and taught them to read by themselves when they were between 7 and 8. It was a little harder with the boy, because there isn't enough interesting literature for boys on the market. I watched TV with them and taught them to make a choice and only watch the good stuff and only a small dosage of it. The same with PC and games. They never had a gameboy. We played cards and other family games after dinner and they painted while I was reading. Games, painting and reading fosters thinking and creativity. It worked out fine. Too few parents take the time and energy to act like this.

Dany, Munich, Germany

spot on as usual.. as a soon to be 1st time father this article screamed out at me. I myself grew up on tv and result most of my knowledge from it my mother hapily tells people i was an easy child just sit in front of the tv with a bag of crisps and i was fine. fortunately i grew up very quickly at 15 i got my first A-Level in maths left scholl with 12 GCSE's finished college with a phew more A-levels worked for a couple computer firms and hated it. got depressed as all that work was for nothing and university would prove to expensive. so went back to work as a concierge (worked as one to pay for college) and am now a head concierge at a very well known hotel in london.
The jobs and even are general perception of work is different depending on class. where as someone middle class would feel head concierge was a let down street sweeper would have pleased my parents as they see the value of money not the work. so in the end its down to the individual and not a general rule...

A. Tony, london, england

john are you serious??

john2, london,

Bertrand Russell, I think, warned us about the folly of following the cry of the herd and true enough, the Coca-colonization of the four corners of the globe has brought in its wake a uniform mass culture, debilitating junk food, poor role models, passive forms of recreation and other unedifying products that sap the soul, enfeeble the mind and spirit. The susceptible are the young. But as the truth of the Jesuits' saying "give me the child until seven and I will give you the man" also consists in the dedication to their charges, so couples need to consider that rearing children is a serious business that makes great demands on their time and resources. So, what is the secret, David? Perhaps, a stable and caring family environment, Montessori kindergartens, books, good food (oats for breakfast, tosais, chapatis for lunch), Mozart to listen to (or learning a musical instrument if there's an inclination), participation in group activities, holidays abroad etc. But they don't come cheap.

SD Goh, PJ, MALAYSIA

It is possible that you may inherit high IQ. However, if your parents are not şnterested in bringing out the best of you, then it could be a waste. The problem is cultural poverty as rightly identified by the columnist.
Jewish people are generally good academics and business people because their parents are interested in bringing out he best of them. They are also culturally richer.
The same goes of many Indian people as well as well educated Brits.

R. Ince, Istanbul, Turkey

To use Mr Fitzgerald's ridiculous analysis, that would be the same members of the Jewish community who work in perfectly ordinary jobs in factories and supermarkets then would it??

If there are a disproportionate number of that religious group in those professions,(which frankly I doubt) it is simply that as children, their parents loved and nurtured them and encouraged them in their schooling instead of just dumping them down in front of a tv with dinner on a tray!!

Jay, London,

Educated parents lead to educated children, because the parents have the discipline required to train their kids. Also they know the rules and how to beat the education system.

javed, london, uk

Babies need to be talked to, toddlers need to be read to and children need to observe their parents reading for enjoyment! I believe this is a crucial under recognized factor in the development of good reading habits in children.

James , Canberra, Australia.

Well said. Dearie me, if this article was in the Guardian, there would be aneurysms bursting all over Islington right now in indignation.

You are right, sir.

Andrew, london,

Because intelligence is inherited, it would be a good thing to be born a jew, then you could be a writer or a lawyer - (jews inherit a high verbal IQ).

john fitzgerald, bristol, england

Most people have children not because they want to but because of all kinds of pressure. Because we are supposed to rather than want to. Children in a lot of families are considered as nuisance, something to get rid of as soon as possible. I definitely agree that children should be read to, and should spend as much time with their parents as possible, but now with most parents out to work, most children are deprived of that. Weekends are also not for children as parents want time for THEMSELVES. Why do most children find pleasure in watching tele, playing on the sordid video game, and other unhealthy pursuits is for the very reason that parents are not available when needed. I feel sorry for today's young

virginia, Brisbane, Australia