The geneticist looking beyond genes to help all children thrive
Rosa Cheesman is exploring which environments help different children
Interviewee:
Interview by:
Rosa Cheesman studies how children’s genetic dispositions interact with their families, schools, and communities to shape their mental health and learning. Her work blends genetics with developmental psychology, sociology, and large-scale administrative and survey data. Annie Brookman-Byrne finds out more.
Annie Brookman-Byrne: How can studying genetics tell us how to help children thrive?
Rosa Cheesman: Genetics helps us understand how classrooms, teaching practices, and family environments influence children’s development.
I’m not trying to predict children’s futures from their DNA. Instead, I use genetics to clarify how environments matter and to identify the settings that best help different children thrive. Education should adapt to children’s strengths and needs, not the other way round.
“Education should adapt to children’s strengths and needs, not the other way round.”
My work examines how biological variation interacts with social and educational contexts. For example, I’ve shown that supportive school environments can help children who might otherwise struggle because of a genetic propensity for ADHD. I am now investigating the specific practices and structures that provide the support children need. Norway’s large-scale data infrastructure allows me to study in exceptional detail how teaching practices, school quality, and neighbourhood features interact with genetic influences.
ABB: What else are you exploring in your research?
RC: I am looking at how parents’ genes influence children through the environments parents create. With my identical twin, anthropologist Margie Cheesman, I am also beginning a project on the social meanings and misapplications of genetic ‘scores’. Understanding how society perceives genetics is critically important because of the rapid development of direct-to-consumer genetics, embryo selection, and proposals to use genetic scores in education.
Recently, I investigated how genetics influences individuals’ vocational interests. Much research has focused narrowly on achievement or attainment; I want to broaden our lens to encompass children’s diverse tendencies and how these interact with their environments.
Ultimately, I want to reduce gaps in learning and wellbeing linked to neurodiversity and socioeconomic disadvantage. This requires meeting the needs of every child and cannot be achieved with one-size-fits-all education policies.
“I want to reduce gaps in learning and wellbeing linked to neurodiversity and socioeconomic disadvantage.”
ABB: How has the study of genetics changed?
RC: The field has shifted dramatically from simplistic ‘nature versus nurture’ debates. We now study the interplay between genes and environments (including not only parental ‘nurture’, but also schools and geographical regions), since development is shaped by both. Large, diverse datasets now allow us to examine how families, schools, and communities interact with genetic dispositions.
The field of genetics has come to recognise that complexity is an inherent feature of social and developmental traits. Genetic associations with outcomes reflect not just biology, but also how societies are organised and how people move through educational systems.
We’ve moved away from studies of twins, whose genetic similarity helped us begin to understand the role of genes. We are now using increasingly sophisticated DNA-based methods with bigger, more representative samples of children to examine how genes and environments interact. I study families, not just individuals or twins, which leads to a better understanding of how outcomes are influenced by both genetics and social processes.
Finally, scientists are paying more attention to the field’s past. Genetics carries a dark history of misuse, and the field has been strengthened by a willingness to openly acknowledge that history. I hope that future work will be increasingly grounded in ethical reflection and public accountability.
ABB: What are the biggest mysteries in genetics?
RC: The biggest mystery is the detailed mechanisms by which children’s genes influence their learning through developmental and environmental pathways. For example, when schools buffer the impact of a genetic propensity for ADHD, what are the factors that make a difference—structures, pedagogy, peer dynamics, or expectations? To answer these questions, we need to measure environments just as thoroughly as we measure genes.
“When it comes to education and child development, we urgently need to anticipate ethical and social issues before technologies outpace policy.”
An unresolved question is how to ensure that genetic tools are applied responsibly. As prediction of outcomes from genes improves, uses will emerge in areas beyond health. The question is not whether these tools will exist, but how societies will regulate them, and who decides where the boundaries lie. When it comes to education and child development, we urgently need to anticipate ethical and social issues before technologies outpace policy. My aim is to support educational design that accommodates diverse learning needs rather than encourages classifying children.
Finally, a major challenge is to understand to what extent research findings are generalisable across contexts. The relationships between genes and environment differ between cultural systems and policy frameworks. Understanding why these differences arise will require diverse international datasets and interdisciplinary collaboration.
ABB: What are your hopes for the future of genetics?
RC: I hope the field continues to embrace complexity rather than seek overly simplified narratives about genetic influence. Progress will depend on integrating genetics with rigorous social science, developmental theory, and ethical reflection—and on training new researchers to navigate these interfaces.
My vision, with respect to the science of learning and education, is that genetics will be used primarily to understand environments and improve inclusion, rather than to rank or categorise children. This means co-producing research with educators, clinicians, families, and young people; ensuring diverse representation in datasets; and embedding governance and equity into research design.
Ultimately, I want genetics to contribute to a future in which children’s individuality is seen as central, and environments are intentionally designed to help all children thrive.
Footnotes
Rosa Cheesman’s research explores how children’s genetics, families, schools, and neighbourhoods interact to shape learning. Drawing upon large and diverse datasets, she applies novel and interdisciplinary approaches to capture the numerous ways individuals interact with their environments. Rosa received her undergraduate and doctoral training in Human Sciences at the University of Oxford and in Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry at King’s College London. She now works in Norway at PROMENTA, a new interdisciplinary research centre. Rosa is a Jacobs Foundation Research Fellow 2024-2026.
Rosa’s university profile, Jacobs Foundation profile, and Rosa on X.
This interview has been edited for clarity.
Interviewee:
Interview by: