It takes 10,000 hours

by | Thursday, October 30, 2008

A quote in a NYTimes article caught my attention

According to sports scientists, the most significant predictor of an athlete’s skill is the time spent in practice. “It’s not just genetics,” says Jean Côté, the director of the School of Kinesiology and Health Studies at Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada, who has extensively studied the development of athletic talent in children. “There’s no magic to it. To become an expert in music or sport, it takes about 10,000 hours.”

10,000 hours! Given 20 hours a week working on some talent, it comes to around 10 hours years. Turns out that is quite exactly the time that Howard Gardner says that it takes someone to become an expert in any domain. Interesting.

Topics related to this post: Essay

A few randomly selected blog posts…

Like to learn, but hate school

In this TCRecord piece, Daniel T. WIllingham uses what we know about cognitive psychology to explain  Why students don't like school. He suggests that although most people believe that humans are good at thinking, it is actually the weakest of our mental faculties......

Computational Thinking paper wins Outstanding Paper

Computational Thinking paper wins Outstanding Paper

A paper co-authored with Jon Good and Aman Yadav, building on Jon's practicum study has received the Outstanding Paper Award at the SITE 2017. Complete reference, link to article and abstract given below. Good. J., Yadav. A., & Mishra, P....

Measuring what matters: A convening

Measuring what matters: A convening

All of us involved in social design (and I include education in among those as well) ask ourselves, or are asked this question: How do we measure the impact of the work we do? This begs the question, why measure in the first place? Lord Kelvin, one of the greatest...

TPACK Newsletter #25, October 2015

TPACK Newsletter, Issue #25: October 2015 (Updated) Welcome to the twenty-fifth edition of the (approximately bimonthly) TPACK Newsletter! TPACK work is continuing worldwide. This document contains recent updates to that work that we hope will be interesting and...

Going back home

Amita Chudgar, friend and colleague, just sent me this really nice article in today's NYTimes, titled "India Calling" about the second generation of Indian Americans who are now going back to India. These are kids born and brought up in the US, whose parents had...

Reflecting on a Semester of Discovery, Creativity and GenAI

Reflecting on a Semester of Discovery, Creativity and GenAI

This past spring semester I taught (with Nicole Oster and Lindsey McCaleb) a masters/doctoral seminar on Human Creativity x AI in Education. I had wanted to write this post after our last class meeting over a month and a half ago—but travel and life kept getting in...

Laptops in the classroom

Ira Socol has a great post on his blog (SpEdChange) titled Humiliation and the modern professor, in which he speaks to the issue of students bringing laptops to the classroom. Some professors have banned laptops from their classes (I personally know a couple who would...

How cool is that!

I just read on CNN that Obama's likely nominee for energy secretary is physicist and Nobel Laureate Dr. Steven Chu. What a contrast to the previous administration's science policy. (Actually it is still the current administration!) Has a novel prize winner ever served...

The reductive seduction of other people’s problems

The reductive seduction of other people’s problems

The reductive seduction of other people's problems, Illustration by Punya Mishra Anurag Behar forwarded an article: The Reductive Seduction of Other People’s Problems, which I really think is a must-read for any of us involved in education or development. The...

3 Comments

  1. Jimmy Jepson

    Just proves the old adage. It’s an ill wind that blows no good.

    Reply
  2. Punya Mishra

    oops! Thanks, it is fixed now.

    Also, if I remember right, Gardner talks about it in his book “Creating Minds: An Anatomy Of Creativity As Seen Through The Lives Of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, And Gandhi.” A quick web search revealed the following quote:

    Genius normally requires hard work over a long period, with at least 10 years spent mastering a domain and another ten spent working on the problems that will establish a person’s exceptionality.

    So the 10 years time-frame seems to be more for “genius” level people, whatever that means. Here is a link to a Scientific American article (The expert mind) that makes a similar argument for effortful study motivation as being more important than genetics.

    Reply
  3. leigh

    10 years (instead of hours?) – Do you have the Gardner reference – I have used that statistic several times myself, but could never find the correct reference!

    Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *