composition 102

Summary and Response to “The Matthew Effect”

Malcolm Gladwell derives The Matthew Effect from biblical Matthew where it pronounces that whoever has more will be added and they will have abundance. Those who will have none, even the little that they have will be taken from them (Matthew 25:29). The main idea of The Matthew Effect is to demonstrate the various indicator loops available to the society. It is undeniable that the society is designed in a such a way that people who possess a lot will continue to have even more because they will use what they have to get it. They will end up having an abundance (Rigney 52). In other words, they are presented with advantages and opportunities to expand their horizons. On the contrary, those who have less or none get few chances and leads to increase their wealth. Their affluence continues to deteriorate because of their fixed costs and eventually end up having none.

In the chapter called The Matthew Effect, Gladwell focuses on the advantages and openings presented to people who are born early as compared to those who are born later (Gladwell 16). To emphasize this claim, he gives an example of hockey players. A considerable number of hockey players are inexplicably born early in the year. According to Gladwell, being born first gives them a lead and opportunity to grow stronger and become better coordinated and bigger compared to players who were born later in the year (20). Because they are sturdier, well-coordinated, and more prominent, most people trust their ability, including their coaches. Eventually, they receive more focus from their overseers in terms of coaching time. Compared to the others, they cultivate more self-confidence. In essence, this example demonstrates these players will have all these advantages and opportunities because of some benefits they received at random, and they use that leverage to acquire even more opportunities and benefits.

In the Matthew Effect chapter, it is possible to examine how the author challenges the conventional notions of success. He disagrees with the idea that success is a result of hard work and talent, as he believes that the aged-based difference plays a significant role in determining a player’s success. According to him, a player does not need to be talented or hard working, but he or she needs to have a plus over the other players. He describes success as “accumulative advantage.” I strongly agree with the author on this point as I find this true in all life aspects.

In a more realistic scenario, it is conceivable that students of different birth months have involuntary disadvantage or advantage in class. For instance, youngsters born at the start of the year are considered older than those born later in the year. While they are only seen to be a few months older than each other, significant differences in both physical ability and cognitive capacity may be realized (Little). The advantages push the young people into patterns of encouragement and discouragement. They can also make children fall into achievement and underachievement situations that can carry on into their adult lives. Consequently, there can be difference in qualifying for individual programs or being part of talented groups that are given more time to practice advanced work. Therefore, cumulative advantage plays an integral role in influencing students’ success in college and universities, which affects their opportunities in the job market. Gladwell also notes “we cling to the idea that success is a simple function of individual merit and that the world in which we all grow up and the rules we choose to write as a society don’t matter at all.” (17). The author disagrees with this notion, as he believes that birth dates matter and determine an individual’s potential. Tutors will never have all students who are born in the same month in their classroom, but that is not important. The vital thing is for teachers to acknowledge that students can have the same skills if given enough time to practice.

The author describes Canadian hockey as a meritocracy, but I tend to disagree with the author. Meritocracy implies a social pattern that provides advantages and opportunities to people based on their ability rather than their seniority (Frank). The main point of this chapter was to prove how hidden powers of hockey players, due to their maturity, were a detriment to the younger players. The description means that Canadian hockey players have success because of their natural talents, but this is not the case because of unfair advantage of the players. The players in the Canadian hockey are selected based on their origin and the month in which they were born.

Gladwell also uses The Matthew Effect to analyze the American educational system. Depending on the state, particular cut-off dates specify the age in which children should be admitted to Pre-K. During school admission, it is not surprising to find parents denied school admittance for their children because their offspring have not yet reached a particular age. As a result, parents are forced to hold their children back, and in most cases, they find themselves even skipping Pre-K and put them directly to kindergarten after a parent comes into conclusion that the child will catch up with the other children (Gladwell 26). However, things do not just happen according to parents’ expectations. Most children do not catch up, and they end up falling below the chain of academic expectations not only in their lower classes but also later in their academic life (Walberg and Tsai 360). Arguably, this is due to the fact that the children who matched the cut-off dates were always a step ahead in academics. It is not astounding to find them a step ahead even in the job market. Eventually, this primary disadvantage accumulates other disadvantages all the way through their lives.

I firmly agree with Malcolm Gladwell regarding the American educational system. Children who were born before the cutoff dates and got admitted to Pre-K always have a competitive advantage over others regarding academic achievement. The most important factors that explain these benefits are early exposure to academic life, new educational practices, and more outstandingly, first-year education practices and learning. Besides, relationships are also important to kids during the early period. Children who get enrolled later always experience challenges while interacting with others. As a result, they rarely get help from their fellow children in case of academic difficulties. By the time those children born after the cut off period create friends, the others have already begun profiting from the friendships. Ultimately, they always lack critical skills that are available in others and are most likely considered incapable and unintelligent.

Works Cited

Frank, Robert. The Myth of Meritocracy and the Role of Luck in Successful Lives. 6 September 2016. <https://www.newamerica.org/political-reform/events/myth-meritocracy-and-role-luck-successful-lives/>. Accessed 1 April 2017.

Gladwell, Malcolm. Outliers: The Story of Success. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2008.

Little, Brown. The Story of Success. 2008. <http://hepg.org/her-home/issues/harvard-educational-review-volume-79-issue-3/herbooknote/outliers_344>.Accessed 3 April 2017.

Rigney, Daniel. The Matthew Effect: How Advantage Begets Further Advantage. New York: Columbia University Press, 2013.

Walberg, Herbert, J and Shiow-Ling Tsai. "Matthew Effects in Education." American Educational Research Journal. 20.3 (1983): 359-373.