Ordinarily, Jane Waldfogel's...

...name alone would be enough for a post in this blog.

But what interests me more about the Columbia University professor is her take on nature vs. nurture (my emphasis):

More generally, one very clear message from research is that the relevant question is not nature vs. nurture. The more we learn about these things, the more we understand the role played by interactions between genes and environment. Children with a particular genetic endowment will go on to have very different outcomes depending on what environment they grow up in, and effects of environmental factors will vary depending on the genetic endowment of the child. In a classic study conducted in New Zealand, for example, children who had a specific gene associated with antisocial behavior were four times more likely to develop antisocial behavior — but only if they experienced harsh and inconsistent parenting.

It is clear that environmental factors, and parenting in particular, have a large influence on child development. Parenting is particularly important in early childhood, when children are so dependent on their parents and when they are exposed to few outside influences; but even during the school years and adolescence, parents continue to be an important influence. They select the community their family lives in and the school their child attends. They even have some influence over the peers with whom their child associates.

The debate continues.