Predictors of Success

A Malcolm Gladwell article in a recent New Yorker attempted to analyze the problem of successfully predicting the success of individual candidates in a given profession, specifically with respect to the teaching profession.  The essay is chock full of obfuscating details, hip-hopping from supposition to fact back to supposition, and never forgetting to insert incredulous but sexy-on-the-surface comparison points.

The disparity between great teachers and bad teachers is presented as obvious.  A great teacher is full of energy, engages and inspires the students.  A bad teacher shuts down participation and loses control of the classroom.  Apparently a great teacher can get through three times as much material as his poor performing colleagues.  Of course, this type of analysis can be applied to many professions....

 As a comparison point, Gladwell reaches for a piece of low hanging fruit; he follows a NFL scout in his search for the next great quarterback.  The similarities are almost too obvious to point out.  There are perhaps fifty quarterbacks in the NFL, a few million teachers around the world.  Quarterbacks have to keep their head under pressure, dodge 300 pound behemoths seeking to separate head from back, and throw an oblong ball great distances to streaking receivers.  Teachers have to keep control in the classroom, impart some knowledge, and maybe display some empathetic wisdom to their charges.  

The  resemblances are striking.

To be fair, Gladwell's point is the training for these two professions doesn't predict the successful cases.  Let's see.  The training for a quarterback is to play the position in college football and pretend to obtain a degree.  The training for a teacher is to actually get a degree in a speciality, as well as some courses in education, and perhaps an apprenticeship in a classroom.  For some reason, Gladwell's is surprised that not all quarterbacks, or teachers for that matter, are created equal.  Or that achievements, academic or physical, are not always representative of future endeavor.  Perhaps we should think about measuring the capability to continuously learn, to adapt, to remain invigorated and challenged.

Another comparison point caught my interest.  Gladwell recounts the recruitment techniques of an investment firm.  In order to find a few successful financial advisors, they start with thousands of resumes, whittle the candidates down into double-digits via interviews, send the remaining off to some sort of boot camp.  But that was all besides the point.  Their measure of success, swallowed whole by Gladwell, was the ability to attract hundreds of new clients every year.  No mention of the efficacy of their actual financial advice - apparently no one cares if these clients are better off.  

Likewise for teachers, we can measure test scores and material covered, evaluate how the students are engaged.  But should we take the metrics to the next level - how many of the students grow up to be a success.  How many become doctors or quarterbacks or even financial advisors?  

I'm all for improving the standards of teaching, as well as increasing their relative worth in our society, both in terms of salary and respect.  But Gladwell, known for his trendy and facile talking points Blink and The Tipping Point, should have put some more thought into his arguments....

Perhaps we should think about defining success before trying to imagine what predicts it.