
How to do deliberate practice - cwb
http://thetalentcode.com/2011/05/31/a-gauge-for-measuring-effective-practice/
======
zarastralia
Something I recently discovered: the secret to deliberate practice is to
consciously enjoy it by entering more deeply into the experience. This
approach is the opposite of enforced drill. Thus, when you are bored and
enjoyment starts to flag, you stop immediately (nothing is lost by this).

Enjoyment both motivates further practice and makes what you are trying to
learn more memorable. For example, if you are memorising a phrase in a foreign
language, you revel in the fruity sounds you are making and in the delicate
dance your lips and teeth and tongue are performing; you marvel at the pattern
of connections between the meaning of the phrase and other ideas you have
learnt.

It goes against the grain because one of the legacies of schooling is the
assumption that learning is difficult and painful. (Paradoxically, by
continuing to believe this one makes it so.)

~~~
Travis
Reminds me of the koan, "Wash the dishes when you are washing the dishes."

~~~
zarastralia
In my case, 'flip the cutlery before placing it in the dishwasher.'

But yeah. The problem isn't that learning is unenjoyable, but that _we don't
enjoy it enough_.

------
wccrawford
I actually disagree with the 'play perfectly' example. It emphasizes the
beginning of the practice and de-emphasizes the end. If playing the whole
thing 20 times is boring, imagine how boring it is to play the beginning over
and over until you get the whole thing perfect 5 times?

Guitar hero has a mode that lets you practice pieces of a song. You can
practice each segment to perfection, then play the whole song. This targeted
practice should be a lot more effective and still obey the idea of what he's
saying.

I once had a teacher that took offense at the statement "Practice makes
perfect." They always changed it to be "Perfect practice makes perfect." I
think it's more in line with the article's meaning, too.

As another anecdote, I've been studying Japanese lately. Never before have I
been so acutely aware that the only way to improve a skill is to use it.
Reading English for me is -very- easy and enjoyable. Japanese started out
extremely difficult, time-consuming and painful. A few years later, and I'm
much better at it... But my listening skill (for Japanese) has hardly changed
at all. Why? Because I almost never use it.

~~~
jonprins
Another problem with stopping and restarting with every mistake, is you learn
to stop and restart when you make a mistake.

This makes it really, really awful if you're playing a recital and slip up
just a tiny bit (obviously, you should practice it so you don't slip up /at
all/, but let's be realistic here. Even people studying to be performance
majors make mistakes in their recitals) - your first instinct would be to
start the passage over, which is the /last/ thing you want to be doing.

It also makes it nearly impossible to play with a group.

~~~
icegreentea
Yeah. My experience with playing (long long ago), as well as while practicing
wrestling moves is that you need to do a mix of isolated, and complete
practice. The mix depends on your proficiency, length involved, complexity,
and some other contextual stuff. I could tell when I practiced just isolated
elements too much because then my transitions would be obvious. In fact,
having that mix will increase your engagement (which was his original point
anyways).

But in my experience, the 4th criteria is by far the most important. Not only
is it more effective, it's a hell lot more enjoyable.

------
sayemm
Here's a good piece by Dr. K. Anders Ericsson on _Expert Performance and
Deliberate Practice_ , he's the guy who's pretty much behind all this research
on deliberate practice and the making of outliers -
[http://www.psy.fsu.edu/faculty/ericsson/ericsson.exp.perf.ht...](http://www.psy.fsu.edu/faculty/ericsson/ericsson.exp.perf.html)

~~~
nerfhammer
Here's a whole book on the subject:

[http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591842948/ref=as_li_tf_tl?...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591842948/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=blogrevol-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=1591842948)

~~~
spottiness
I read this book and although I enjoyed it and found it interesting, I think
that the author undervalues the importance of innate talent. According to the
author, almost everybody can become great at anything given the right
motivation, hard-work, and coaching. I find this principle wrong, based on
what I've heard experienced coaches say, and my own experience through 19
years of schooling. In other words, a lot of (non-scientific) evidence
suggests that great performers have above average innate abilities in what
they do. These abilities are common in the population but in no way general to
most people. So, those born with the "extra" in a particular field, paired
with great couches, family support, and an emotional fabric that keeps them
focused for a long time, will have the chance of making it to the highest.

(I have a friend that thinks otherwise and I tell him: "Remember when you were
in first grade, try to remember your classmates, what percentage of them could
have become Nobel Prize winners in Physics given the right nurturing
conditions?". According to the author of this book, almost all of them)

~~~
kenjackson
_I find this principle wrong, based on what I've heard experienced couches
say_

Maybe less time on couches and more time with coaches would change your
perspective?

With that said, there is a guy, Dan, who is testing this theory with golf. We
still have a few more years to see if it works.

<http://thedanplan.com/>

 _"Remember when you were in first grade, try to remember your classmates,
what percentage of them could have become Nobel Prize winners in Physics given
the right nurturing conditions?". According to the author of this book, almost
all of them_

I haven't read the book, but have read articles. I thought the goal was
"expert level", not Nobel Prize level. There's a pretty big gap between being
a Chem expert and winning the Nobel prize in it.

~~~
spottiness
>>Maybe less time on couches and more time with coaches would change your
perspective?

:) funny... (fixed the typo, thanks.)

>>there is a guy, Dan...

Is this Daniel Coyle? I read his "Talent Code" book too. Similar to "Talent is
Overrated" but doesn't neglect innate talent as much as the other.

>>I thought the goal was "expert level", not Nobel Prize level.

Expert level in the book is as good as one can get after 10,000 hours of
"deliberate practice" with great coaching. The author doesn't make any
distinction between expert level and super high achievers.

~~~
kenjackson
Not the same Dan. This is just some guy who read about the 10,000 hour thing
and decided to test it on himself.

Regarding how good can one get -- the term used by the research is expert.
But, at least in the papers I read, they don't make it clear what expert is.
For example read:

[http://www.ida.liu.se/~nilda/Anders_Ericsson/Ericsson_delib_...](http://www.ida.liu.se/~nilda/Anders_Ericsson/Ericsson_delib_pract.pdf)

But in my own personal theory... you become Michael Jordan by doing the 10,000
hours+ and having innate gifts. You get a basketball scholarship (D1-D3) by
doing the 10,000 hours.

~~~
spottiness
Thanks for the pointers. I'll read it later tonight...

My own personal theory is similar to yours: among the genetically very tall
males, there is a lot of people with the innate abilities of Michael Jordan
(let's make it 40% of the original set). From that subset, those that put the
10,000 hours with great teachers plus other things will become the likes of
Michael Jordan.

------
te_platt
For me the most important part deliberate practice losing all embarrassment
about making mistakes. Practice should give a chance stumble at the edge of
your ability and take chances you wouldn't in a live performance.

For more detail I highly recommend "The Perfect Wrong Note" by William
Westney.

------
mattgreenrocks
It's interesting that each of those practice scenarios he recommends are
fairly dangerous from the point of view of the ego. I would be very
apprehensive about learning the multiplication tables in a public fashion.

~~~
wccrawford
All education works best when customized for the learner. In your case (and
mine!) you prefer to learn without the possibility that someone will ridicule
you for making a mistake. Many people actually learn faster/better when the
threat of ridicule is on the table, though.

Assigning homework actually has the same effect as the in-class quiz, since it
forces each student to reach in the same way and would be another example.

~~~
rhizome
_Many people actually learn faster/better when the threat of ridicule is on
the table, though._

Really? How many?

~~~
Wilduck
I don't know about how many, but I certainly do.

------
ChuckFrank
Part of what these suggestion contains are the basis for the emerging field of
game learning. While the wiki is surprisingly weak on the matter --
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_based_learning> \-- the idea is that
structured conditions of gaming/sports success can be applied to teaching and
knowledge acquisition. Some of these ideas include:

Coached practicing / Competitive performance evaluation / Transparent Scores /
Winning opportunities / Final Awards.

------
raju
I have been thinking about this for a while now, and I am not quite sure how
to apply it, to say learning a new (programming) language (I have been playing
with Clojure for a while now but am nowhere near productive in it).

I guess the part that confuses me is the first step - "R stands for
Reaching/Repeating" - How exactly would you apply this to learning a new
language, framework, algorithm?

Folks here on HN - Any words of advice?

~~~
teach
When I wanted to get better at Python, I started working through the problems
at Project Euler[0], because they were novel and interesting. Also, many of
them needed non-trivial optimizations to produce an answer in a reasonable
amount of time.

After about 20-25 problems, I found myself reaching for the Python docs _way_
less.

[0] <http://projecteuler.net/>

