Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, May 13, 1990 TAG: 9005130270
SECTION: HORIZON PAGE: F-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Reviewed by Dr. FRANK TOTA
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
With the tremendous attention being given to schooling and the involvement of politicians in educational matters at all levels, Guy Odum has examined the changing family pattern and its impact on society and the schools. His thesis in "Mothers, Leadership and Success" is that the dominant mother is the reason for successful children.
High expectations from the mother, especially as evidenced by her questioning, reinforcing, encouraging and being demanding produce children who achieve. Both dominant and non-dominant mothers who provide early intellectual stimuli "enhance . . . intellectual levels," but only the dominant mother determines achievement.
By age 6 intelligence has become reasonably stable, according to Odum. Can a nation at risk afford to ignore early intervention? What role will society and government play in "family affairs?" Can ethnic groups affect their futures by assisting "dominant" women in understanding their legacy to have children? Can America be saved by affluent "dominant" women having children or adopting them?
The author believes that "jobs should be designed to satisfy the needs of people with different dominant levels." The dominant risk-takers may be the hope of America, and the infusion of immigrants may help because risk-takers and dominant people tend to migrate.
Odum's lack of evidence to support his generalizations and his lack of attention to "personality" are troubling. While the book is replete with historical allusions and contemporary illustrations, one wonders whether more than superficial attention has been paid to some of these. Odum uses Robert J. Rizer's "Winning Through Intimidation" as an example of an attitude fitting the popular mood, though the book's content really belies its title.
Our age of intellect has been affected, Odum says, by a dramatic drop in levels of intelligence and achievement among those born during the age of affluence. Dominant women had fewer children during the baby boom. Odum points to 1964 as the year education began to decline, when the baby-boomers turned 18 and entered college, and when the woman's role in the home was looked upon with less respect.
He advances an interesting thesis on the attitudes of the non-dominant youngsters. He sees their behavior as anti-academic and their need for social services increasing. In addition, Odum indicates a general decline of schools due to fewer dominant teachers, students and especially dominant mothers. He relates an "apple-to-apple" comparison of past and present educational successes and shatters the rose-colored-glasses look.
Odum calls on society to reassess and emphasize the value of the person - his dignity and self-worth - separate from his intelligence, with the hope that then the public school systems might respond.
He also advocates encouraging dominant women to adopt unwanted children soon after birth, and placing dominant women in charge of day-care facilities. Education would be improved by reallocating $38.9 billion from colleges to elementary and secondary schools, to return to the percentages in place when public schools were thriving.
Odum states that two educational goals are in direct conflict: providing quality education and eliminating student dropouts. "One cannot have it both ways," he says.
The age of decadence seems to be upon us, and Odum offers convincing evidence, though he would be disputed by those who hold that freedom, even though loosely defined, is a sign of advancement. Has the author stretched the limits of democracy? Each reader may have a different answer. If widely read and taken seriously, Odum's ideas could be a topic of discussion at universities, in churches and among parents in taking another look at child-rearing practices and at that single component which may set the stage for all future learning and behaviors - mother.
by CNB