A summary of Steve Stewart-Williams's recent newsletter post, itself summarising Russell Warne's Quillette article "Education's Elephant in the Room"
Most of us want to believe that a good school can level the playing field — that with the right teachers, curriculum, and resources, all students can reach broadly similar outcomes. Psychologist Russell Warne, writing in Quillette, argues this belief is not only wrong, but actively harmful to students.
IQ remains the single strongest predictor of educational outcomes. Warne cites research suggesting that in industrialised nations, roughly 90% of differences in learning outcomes are tied to individual student differences, with only about 10% attributable to school- or classroom-level factors. This is a remarkable finding that should reshape how we think about education policy — yet it rarely enters the conversation.
Warne's article suggests we are still, decades later, building policy on those same false premises.
Full article: Steve Stewart-Williams — Intelligence and Education
Most of us want to believe that a good school can level the playing field — that with the right teachers, curriculum, and resources, all students can reach broadly similar outcomes. Psychologist Russell Warne, writing in Quillette, argues this belief is not only wrong, but actively harmful to students.
The Equalisation Paradox
The counterintuitive core of Warne's argument is this: when you improve learning conditions, achievement gaps don't close — they widen. Better schools help every student learn more, but the highest-ability students gain the most, pushing the spread further apart. The Soviet Union tried to solve this by banning standardised tests in 1936, finding it easier to hide the differences than eliminate them. The lesson? Individual differences in cognitive ability are stubbornly real, and erasing the measurement doesn't erase the gap.IQ Is the Elephant in the Room
IQ remains the single strongest predictor of educational outcomes. Warne cites research suggesting that in industrialised nations, roughly 90% of differences in learning outcomes are tied to individual student differences, with only about 10% attributable to school- or classroom-level factors. This is a remarkable finding that should reshape how we think about education policy — yet it rarely enters the conversation.
What Teachers Believe (And Why It's Wrong)
Warne surveyed 200 American teachers and found alarming gaps in their knowledge:- Over 85% believed IQ was too simplistic a measure of intelligence
- Almost 85% endorsed Howard Gardner's "multiple intelligences" theory — which has little support among psychologists
- Almost 40% thought "street smarts" were more important for life success than IQ
- Only one third believed that higher IQ scores would predict better school performance
The Role of Genetics
Perhaps the most politically charged point: the heritability of IQ in wealthy, industrialised countries approaches 0.80 in adults, meaning around 80% of individual IQ differences are linked to genetic variation. Yet in a British survey, only 29% of teachers believed genes ranked among the top three factors influencing student achievement. The gap between the scientific consensus and what educators are taught — and believe — is enormous.What Should Actually Be Done?
Warne advocates for practical, evidence-based adjustments:- Ability grouping so teachers can pitch lessons appropriately
- Extra tutoring for struggling students
- Accelerated pathways for gifted students — there is no evidence that grade-skipping harms children academically or socially
- Up to a quarter of American students could potentially skip their final year of high school
Warne's article suggests we are still, decades later, building policy on those same false premises.
Full article: Steve Stewart-Williams — Intelligence and Education
