What People Get Wrong About Deliberate Practice

Deliberate practice is one of the most popular ideas in learning and training. But as this idea has filtered into the mainstream with books from Malcom Gladwell and Anders Ericsson himself, some things have been lost.
This video breaks down three things that many people get wrong about deliberate practice.
00:00 Introduction
00:21 Mistake #1: Is 10,000 hours legit?
01:30 Where did 10,000 hours come from?
02:59 Mistake #2: What is the first step, again?
04:39 Physics lab example
07:27 Mistake #3: On “putting in the time.”
Sign up to my email newsletter, Avoiding Folly, here: www.benjaminkeep.com/
References:
The “classic” piece on deliberate practice:
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review, 100(3), 363. (available at mrbartonmaths.com/resourcesne...)
A comparison between what students do in introductory physics labs and what actual physicists do:
Wieman, C. (2015). Comparative cognitive task analyses of experimental science and instructional laboratory courses. The Physics Teacher, 53(6), 349-351. (available at www.sei.ubc.ca/bitstream/seim...)
An explanation of where the 10,000 hour rule came from and why it’s wrong:
scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-cont...

[@mastershooter64]

"The expert has failed more times than the novice has even tried" I agree it's about cycles of practice and feedback

[@patrickgoetz]

Here's a concrete example of deliberate practice that neatly illustrates the idea. Beginning instrument students will practice by spending 20-30 minutes playing through a piece from beginning to end 2 or 3 times. A far more effective way to practice is to just focus on those sections of the music which are difficult for them to play, and practice those over and over again, skipping the parts of the piece which are easy to play. This is an example of deliberate practice. Great videos, btw!

[@juniperstardust5549]

Yes, this, I've been doing these recently with my piano lessons, I repeat the parts that are complicated and once I'm comfortable I play the whole piece along with the easiest parts

[@Heyu7her3]

​@@juniperstardust5549 I was going to comment that you've gotta do BOTH

[@joshhigh5538]

Works for me

[@MyShyCats]

And when playing th whole piece - one must be listening and analyzing in a way you might not when performing. Asking yourself how did each difficult section go, was tempo consistent, was phrasing right, dynamics, tone, etc.

[@chrisschack9716]

@@MyShyCatsalso, be careful to tie the parts you practiced till you managed to get them back into the piece. It doesn't help if you can manage a difficult passage, if you can't start it.

[@amandamate9117]

Actionable Summary: 1.Disregard the 10,000-Hour Rule: It's a misleading metric. Focus on the quality of your practice instead. 2.Identify Expert Skills: Before diving into practice, take time to identify the skills that differentiate experts from novices in your field. 3.Engage in Practice-Feedback Cycles: Find a way to practice that challenges you and seek expert feedback. Use this cycle to continually refine your skills. BONUS: Practice-Feedback Cycle: Challenging Practice → Expert Feedback → Further Practice → Opportunities → Repeat

[@MohamedAnasMalek]

isnt the deliberate practice cycle = challenging practice + self evaluation + feedback. where did you get opportunities from?

[@Mark4Jesus]

Thank you!

[@dr9205]

Thanks

[@saqibshafin]

Yes, I looked at your playlists. Indeed you are geeky, and if the profile pic is real, beautiful. I'm (not) sorry for saying it out loud.

[@parthshah3800]

Thank you! you saved me 9 mins of my life!

[@matiasgaudenzi8694]

This is something I feel does get overlooked a lot- especially with the whole "hustle culture" that is so common today. You cannot have 18 hours of "deliberate practice" a day- quite simply because if you're doing it right it's uncomfortable and tires you out. After a while, it's not that the work you're doing is challenging- you're just tired.

[@tylerbruce5731]

18 hour "hustle culture" doesnt really exist except on social media feeds. In my experience in the corporate world a lot of "work" done by C suiters for example isnt really what we call work and a lot of them are really good at the "marketing"of themselves as hard workers. Sorta like the whole CEO "reading" 52 books a year thing.

[@continuousdance]

Yes on your idea of the “hustle culture”, which was here before social media.

[@manan-543]

18 hours a day is overkill tbh. But that doesn't disregard the whole idea of hustle culture. U should still be putting in the hours to be an expert. Assuming u got 8 hours of good sleep and 30 mins of exercise, you should be fit enough to try out and practice whatever u want. Since we're humans and we have a lot of distractions we can use the pomodoro technique to get some quality work done.

[@matiasgaudenzi8694]

@@manan-543 I went to a school (engineering, very competitive) where I had about 12 hours of lectures a day (mon-thurs) and then 6hrs on fridays. I've done it both ways. I only started getting "really good" when I dropped those hours considerably to about ~4 hours of deliberate practice maximum in a day and then another 4 hours of comparatively light/easy work. I made breaks, rest periods and workouts a priority. My point was more along the lines of "I don't believe people who say they can work 16 hour days for years"- I've done it and it'll work SHORT TERM (less than a month). This is sort of like training for an ironman vs actually competing, no pro ironman runner runs a full ironman during training, they save it for their "peak" in the cycle.

[@tylerbruce5731]

@@matiasgaudenzi8694 sure. I think most ppl have had experiences where they spent "18 hours" doing something. And yes its not sustainable. As for education "highly competitive", long hour evironments are not better. We now know learning is not a rote "puttin' in thr hours" type of thing. Theres a lot of assumptions and mythologizing about performance and the role "hard work" plays in it.

[@manishm9478]

I work as a software engineer, and have recently found developers that are good at debugging are great at adopting an exploratory, detective style approach. This was not obvious to me until i paired with them to solve some really challenging issues. A good example of how expert practice is not clear, and takes effort to identify.

[@Don_XII]

Could you elaborate more what they do different than the ordinary? I’m interested.

[@aymiraydinli5655]

Yeah I am curious too

[@bushek502]

@@Don_XII You think of debugging as divide and conquer, but to be good at it you must know how the language works and (more) your tools. You use the compilers error as the starting point and narrow down the problem by imagining the code as a sort of a network of nodes (not explicitly), change where you think the issue is and if it isn't gone - repeat. IDE's and languages may make this harder or easier, for example if you don't have an almighty IDE you are going to struggle with debugging C a lot, but if you, for example, use Common Lisp it's going to be easier because you can isolate and test little bits of code in the REPL (which makes it way way easier). So debugging isnt mainly about the code itself but more about the tools.

[@BinxyBrown]

Not op but, There are two types of software developers I've worked with, there are some that just seem like they know everything and they just see the problem and go oh it's probably here and they fix it. This happens with extreme familiarity of the specific code base and the language. If you don't just know because you've fixed it before then you basically start where the bug is occuring, identify what it is then you dig for it in a systematic way. This object isn't showing, when does it show? It shows when x is true, when is x false, okay I know that now, where does x come from, ok this piece of data from a connected system is coming back empty and it's defaulting x to false. Is that normal, if not then you fix the bug there, if it can be empty then maybe there is a logic issue for x under certain conditions where we want it to be true.

[@diogofelix8626]

My opinion on debugging regarding exploration: Programming is basically transforming data, some data goes in, some data goes out, the code is just half of the picture because we're missing the data, debugging is basically feeding some data (can be test data our real world data) in the code and study how it handles, depending on the language we have tools for that, debuggers, where you can inspect the values and how the code are changing them, it's really akin to an detective approach really. We have unit tests as well that do exactly that, we call the code with some data and we can see the values it returns and compare that against some expectations. Debugging is an invaluable skill, especially when you're are working in a new codebase that you don't quite grasp how it handles the data that goes in, it helps you a lot in forming a mental model (understanding) of how the code works.

[@Simeulf]

An example of your first point: I played chess for countless of hours from ages 13-18 barely improving my rating at all (regular practice), then I bought a couple chess books and started to stud various skills (deliberate practice). After a year my rating improved about five hundred points. Suddenly, the games had a lot more depth, and I started to notice more of the patterns that expert chess players have built into their intuition. Really interesting video. Before watching I have always believed in the 10,000 hour rule. Weird how such concepts can become so widely acknowledged within a given culture.

[@byronperez9199]

Very true. I think that without elaboration, many people can become very misguided. Thankfully, we have videos like these to clarify matters up.

[@durschfalltv7505]

Between 13-18 how many of the games you played sid you win? Did you win at all?

[@RobBCactive]

​@@durschfalltv7505if he wasn't winning about 50% of a point in each game his rating would have plummeted. He may have been improving just not as fast as other players who used their time better.

[@randomcosmos3600]

one thing he did not mention was that the 10,000 hours was an average of the experts. The range was from 5,000 hours to 20,000 hours for some. There is also a genetic component, not just deliberate practice alone.

[@mrlaser7580]

@@randomcosmos3600 Yeah but even still, there’s a major difference between someone who’s studied for 5000 hours and someone who’s studied 20000 hours. There’s no overcoming the hurdles of time invested simply because your a genius.

[@jeremyshull8850]

This video really resonated with me. I'm a software engineer, and I became better faster than any time before at a job where all the code I wrote was heavily reviewed by really good programmers. It was tough, but worth it.

[@neutrino109]

Unfortunately, I feel like mine was the opposite. I started an internship which became I job. No real help, the senior dev even once said, "I'll defer on the Javascript to you, you're the expert." In what universe am I an expert? Haha. I guess the benefit was learning to lean on my autodidactic skills. Get it across the finish line somehow!

[@wiczus6102]

@@neutrino109 "You're the expert" wasn't an observation. It was a nomination.

[@MrAntice]

@@neutrino109 This is the conundrum all self taught developers face at one point or another. We have to find creative ways to get feedback on our work without the benefit of having an assigned senior to guide us. Some people turn to professional coachers to get the needed feedback, but this runs the risk of ending up with a bad coach. change your coach regularly if going this route. Others like me turn to reading up on the various concepts and schools of thought you find in the field. Deliberate study of various programming concepts/paradigms and how they inform how code is structured is a big topic for me right now.

[@lazygardens]

My HUGE improvement as a technical writer came when I had an extremely nit-picking engineer as a reviewer. Because if all you get is praise you don't know where your weak points are.

[@MrAntice]

@@lazygardens There is a difference between feedback and nit picking. Feedback is when you are questioned on your choices, and have bad practices and anti patterns pointed out. nitpicking is giving you shit for not using the "correct" variable name. One of these is useful, one is just meant to put you down.

[@matthewalan59]

The importance of the 10,000 hour idea is simply that many people do not know that expertise comes as a result of lots of hard work. I spent a dozen years as a math teacher and was surprised at the number of students who seemed to think that math skills came from some magical process that was invoked by people who were "good at math." Even with the best coaching and highest quality practice, you still need to put in the work. Many people go through life without ever becoming good at any challenging skill. I think this is unfortunate.

[@piccalillipit9211]

*I STILL THINK YOU END UP DOING 10K HOURS TO GET WORLD CLASS* I started learning to tailor bespoke men's historical Savile row standard suits 4 years ago. I am at about 5,000 of practice and I would say I am about halfway to being truly professional. All this was followed and I am a quick learner, I am used to learning new skills. I was shocked when I worked out I was at the 5k hours point. The thing is, its the law of diminishing returns with anything. Getting competent takes 1k hours. Getting good takes 2.5k hours. Getting excellent takes 5k and getting world-class takes 10k, but most people would struggle to tel the difference between good and world-class... Im at the point now on that Dunning Kruger graph where I KNOW how much work is required to get that last bit of perfection. And its huge.

[@Fritztafer]

the missing ingredient is passion

[@Handlebrake2]

Sometimes it does come naturally to some ppl.

[@jan-lukas]

The thing about maths is that if you're good at it, math lessons are probably enough to keep you good at it.

[@dangallagher6176]

​@@Handlebrake2 the issue is, what does 'coming naturally to someone' mean? Is it really a genetic aptitude, or is it because they concentrate more? Or because they get better sleep? People forget that these are absolute core components of learning that vary wildly, yet so often are all chucked into the 'natural ability' bucket

[@vijaygopal9557]

I have never written comments for KZbin videos, but I am making an exception with your video. And that is because of your third point: the right metric to use is the number of feedback cycles and not the time put in. I have read a lot about DP but this one point blew me away. I can now see where I was going wrong. I am going to drastically change how I have been going about my DP. Thank you Ben - this was a crisp and value adding video.

[@benjaminkeep]

Really glad it was helpful! Good luck with your DP!

[@borianspassov6648]

Еее😊😊😊

[@amandamate9117]

Actionable Summary: 1.Disregard the 10,000-Hour Rule: It's a misleading metric. Focus on the quality of your practice instead. 2.Identify Expert Skills: Before diving into practice, take time to identify the skills that differentiate experts from novices in your field. 3.Engage in Practice-Feedback Cycles: Find a way to practice that challenges you and seek expert feedback. Use this cycle to continually refine your skills. BONUS: Practice-Feedback Cycle: Challenging Practice → Expert Feedback → Further Practice → Opportunities → Repeat

[@kylelind6239]

I think you've already caught this but... the key to improvement is to have an effective feedback loop which informs you, quickly and effectively, of when you are performing a task well, or poorly. Without that feedback, improvement is impossible. The more swiftly you can complete a task AND be informed of the quality of your work, the more quickly you can improve. ALSO, the clearer the information provided to you in that feedback, easier it is to make the correct adjustments, rather than blindly experimenting.

[@yoidkldk]

If you want to be an expert the first step is developing a strong foundation. That's what labs teach. Even in getting improper results, it becomes important to understand why.

[@Alex-js5lg]

You nailed it with this. It's exactly why promoting someone based primarily on the amount of time they have in an organization is a mistake. Time in is irrelevant if you've been closed off to new experiences during that period.

[@migueldemaria3830]

In some fields, practitioners are systematically worse in some respects the longer they've been out of school!

[@sheilawilliam441]

I totally believe in the concept of the number of feedback cycles. I teach ADVANCED AUDIT in a professional accountancy program. And creating exercises for my students so that they can have FEEDBACK CYCLES has increased the pass rate for this exam significantly

[@benjaminkeep]

Interesting - thanks for the example!

[@sarahyip2825]

Never forget- good teachers are our very first feedback loop together with conscientious parents!

[@ndub4014]

@@sarahyip2825 True! We just need to have a growth mindset and consistently put in focused work on the appropriate skills........

[@HariPrasad-iq9ks]

I teach Accountancy, can you kindly explain how you have created the exercise for the students

[@xCheddarB0b42x]

I used this on myself to complete an important professional certification exam.

[@jobaecker9752]

As a musician, you've provided some interesting new ways to look at this. I, like some other musicians, tend to start "noodling off" into other distractions as we practice, and I realize that I'd be better off having a very clear concept of the outcome of my practice AHEAD of time, rather than just "well, hopefully I'll improve a little."

[@bobsmithy3103]

My Notes: When you learn a skill you should: 1) Identify the expert skills. These are the sub-skills which contribute significantly to the output of the skill. 2) Create tight feedback loops of: learning aspects of sub-skill -> applying sub-skill to test limits of knowledge -> getting expert feedback -> repeat Here is a concrete example for learning character illustration: 1) Expert skills: perspective, anatomy, forms, gesture, shapes, color, lighting & shadow 2) Feedback loop for one sub-skill: learn about 1, 2 and 3 point perspective -> Draw simple forms in 1, 2 and 3 point perspective -> Get expert feedback on WHAT went wrong, WHY what you did was wrong and HOW you can improve. Additionally get the expert to redline WHAT the correct answer should be. Here a routine someone could use to study illustration that using the above ideas (i'm open to feedback if anyone has a better routine): 1) Pick a sub-skill of the skill you want to focus on for the next week (eg: 1, 2 and 3 point perspective) 2) Allocate a period of time to develop said skill everyday (eg: 23:00->24:00) 3) Before studying get rid of distractions (eg: clean physical environment, clean digital environment like tabs/applications, block websites/ips, set phone to silent mode) 4) Join a physical or virtual study group if you want to increase friction of not studying and for accountability 5) Set a session goal before starting. This anchors yourself and serves as a measure to check if you made progress by the end of the session (eg: Goal: Can draw a cube from 1, 2 and 3 point perspective from various angles while keeping all unrelated variables constant) 6) Briefly review past notes on subject if you have any 7) Start going through resources while noting down questions and contradictions, also try to compare and contrast the information to your existing knowledge. Try applying the knowledge and see if there are any gaps in your understanding. 8) Every 5 minutes or summarize your learnings purely from recall. Only refer to the resource until after you think you've recalled all the knowledge you can. Especially note learnings you notice that are relevant to your goal. 9) After completing the resource or a certain allocated time, summarize all you learnings. 10) Apply and test your learnings by doing exercises. Then get feedback from an expert. You want to get the expert to give you the correct solution as well as feedback on WHAT went wrong, WHY what you did was wrong and HOW you can improve. 11) Summarize learnings. Also consolidate and organize your knowledge into a single source of truth like a document containing everything you know about the skill, serving as a cache so you don't need to refer to the original resource or get feedback as much

[@mhreinhardt]

There is a pretty famous study done in a photography class where in one group the professor said the students would be graded on a single photo they present at the end of class. The other group were solely graded on the number of photos they took, but still had the opportunity to select the best of the bunch to present in the final class. The result? The group that was told they'd be graded solely on quantity produced objectively better final photos than the class that was told they'd be graded on just the final photo. I'm not refuting this video, as I don't think any of the students were "experts" in photography by the end of class. However, I do think quantity of practice is more important than quality when moving up from beginner level because you don't even know enough about the subject yet to define what to be deliberate about to improve until you gain enough experience. In any case, thanks for the insights in the video!

[@Saurygiel]

Personally I like to see that example as a reason against perfectionism, which can slow development in anything a lot. Quantity like that can be important if you need more experience in the form of data to know where to focus your deliberate practice towards. Assuming you've identified expert skills like he talked about in this video this might not be as necessary since that in and of itself gives you data. If are new to the subject of photography and have zero context on how to do anything or what you need to get better at and how to improve on them, or even knowing what's important to be aware of at all, then of course the quantity can be helpful to map out your limitations and what variables are most relevant (imagine if you were trying to use a lidar scanner to map out an object with 500 dots instead of a few slightly larger ones). However I think that understanding expert information can also give you that data and better direction. Either way though, practice is practice, and it's better than nothing so there's nothing wrong with trying to feel your way through something when you need to.

[@munendrasharma8028]

But it is only for beginners. After a certain you have to change your approach where your weakest areas needs to be worked on

[@Heyu7her3]

I'm actually surprised by that because we tend to want to get that 1 thing "right" and will produce many to make that 1. We also don't know how many "duds" they produced.

[@PatternShift]

@@munendrasharma8028 nails it -- what a beginner needs is fluency and familiarity. Quantity wins out there. What an intermediate needs is to quit falling into comfortable patterns and to do things they can't yet do -- stretching to reach new objectives. That's where quality of practice really comes in. What an expert needs is even more extreme -- to be able to have new insight into the core components of their field of practice, so they can reconstruct those core components into something new.

[@HishighnessMrL]

I've reached expert level in two sports running and field hockey and I can say without a doubt that deliberate practice is important but only once you've reached the intermediate to advanced stage before that it's better to just go through the motions a million times and focus on the numbers and repetition simply because it's easier to reach a higher level this way than by doing deliberate practice which is more mentally tough and frustrating as you still won't see the results for months until your mind and body has developed to a point to being able to accomplish the skill you're practicing. It's also more fun to challenge yourself when you're at a higher level than when you're at a lower level and in fact I've found that doing hard things at the beginning was more prone to making me want to quit than pursuing the expert level in any field. Another thing to note is that progress in the beginning is almost exponential whereas the higher up you go in a discipline the more incremental and slow progress becomes and taking this into consideration a person who starts out as a beginner could catch up to any expert within say a 5 year period whereas in those same 5 years the expert could only improve by so much.

[@guywithknife]

Practice doesn’t make perfect, practice makes permanent. It’s important how you practice, just as is said in the this video

[@billminckler6550]

It’s NOT “practice makes perfect.” It’s “perfect practice makes perfect.” 😊

[@1eV]

are you kidding me? These videos are insanely thought provoking and terribly helpful. keep making them please.

[@kenroberts5768]

The takeaway I got from your video was the phrase “Learning is reorganizing your brain 🧠 ”. I’m recovering from a stroke, and it was nice to have that label for the reorganizing my brain has been doing. 🙏

[@SoloRenegade]

"Perfect Practice makes Perfect"

[@LuKiSCraft]

I work in a customer-facing technical software sales role. This advice most certainly applies there. Instead of just watching a bunch of endless training videos, reading documentation, etc, I cooked up my own Azure AKS cluster and started installing & configuring the software. I am speeding ahead of most people who have been at the company 2X as long as me. In order to sell the software, you have to understand intimately how it works. The only way to understand it intimately is to get hands-on and be willing to fail / get stuck for hours.

[@57thorns]

Sounds reasonable, another thing I learned at some point was toner sales. (It was en example, I am _not_ a sales person.) If a salesman in a suit asks you to buy extra toner with your printer, you go "nah, not going to need it, we do not print those volumes, but we need a printer". But if the service tech says "you might want some spare toner", chances are you trust them. By showing that you know the software, you become the trusted engineer, not the distrusted sales person.

[@lucthelazysquid20]

Since you asked, yes, this video was very useful to me. 1. It gives a reframing on the path of mastery that is not focused on time, and for me that's very reassuring, cause I've heard many teachers saying again and again, "practice this a thousand times", "after 50k repetitions you'll get good don't worry". It's not that it won't take a long time to develop the skills, or improve beyond certain plateaus, but that I don't have to repeat something mindlessly a bazillion times just to reach a quota, to get better. 2. The importance of the practice-feedback cycle, and being aware of it even before starting a practice session. For example, I'm learning to draw on my own, so if I want to practice a skill without having to reach a teacher to get feedback (which for some I should and I will), I'll need some kind of ruleset or reference to compare my drawing to, so I can have feedback to see how correct I am, and in subsequent tries if I'm improving or not. I believe that is in part why drawing from live models is such a good practice to improve figure drawing and it's subset of skills. 3. The importance of identifying the expert skills before starting a practice session. That's surprisingly difficult, but I'll try to make a habit of it. So thank you very much for the video.

[@jimmyvo1667]

i just discovered your channel recently and love your videos. I'm always trying to improve my study strategies and your videos definitely confirmed a lot of my experience.

[@wesselcusters1308]

I found it very enlightening to hear you talk about misconceptions 2 and 3! (The first I was already aware of ;)). Asking yourself what makes an expert, is something that I should really do more often. And I noticed that focussing on time can result in a lot of pressure and disappointment which inhibits your learning and your fun while learning something. Thanks for making this video! :)

[@benjaminkeep]

My pleasure - glad it offered some value to you!

[@someanimatordude2925]

Two years later and you're still empowering people. I have lived a life where small things have tuckered me out and anything I wasn't good at on the spot destroyed my sense of self worth. And when i put in the time, the marathon of useless practice wore me down and discouraged me. Identifying expert skills sounds simple. But to me there's a gap in the implicit and explicit identification. Implicit breeds a passive mindset. A field of "I wish i could do that. Look at how well they can do that." Explicit breeds an active mindset. "This person moved their knife through the onion with the tip on the board and the heel angled up. This resulted in the onion staying together while being sliced, allowing it to be easily picked up and moved to the pot." I'm rambling. Point is, thank you for sharing. I find this perspective most helpful indeed.

[@crafteariee]

Oh woah, thank you for this video! I've been reflecting on some insights that I've taken note from all sorts of professionals from different fields I respect who have put these principles, especially quality skills identification, proper feedback cycles and practice into their own craft that reaffirms the value of deliberate practice with both their careers and other aspects of life. It's given me a greater sense of respect for the hard work and thoughtful attention they put into at their own time that I hope to continue to learn from too.

[@jlofi000]

As a college student taking physics I agree, I would love to have designed a lab to measure the acceleration of gravity rather than follow instructions after learning about it in lecture

[@Globiworld2000]

And also 90% of fields ( from building sites to medicine) once you are builder,doctor,etc to not discover anything but made things identical over and over and get paid for it- which loook like is not the case of “physist”- which look in his case as a scientist who is tasked to discover new things. perhaps approach with self discovering is in certain area correct - but do you as somebody to invent again how to make fire with two sticks or you teach them by example and ask to repeat?

[@alant779]

The 10000 hrs idea is a great motivational tool for me. If I suck at something, I am reminded I haven't actually practiced that much at it. Or if I feel like I'm really good at something, I am reminded I can be even better if I put in even more time into it. But taking it as dogma? That's the opposite of learning.

[@LisaGelhaus]

Another important element of expert feedback is POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT. Find a mentor who not only points out your mistakes, but helps you see what you’re doing RIGHT. Practice them both. Deliberately. Iteration of good or bad emphasizes synaptic connection. Which means don’t repeat doing-things-wrong (that’s me: singing the wrong notes in the shower over and over again) or that’s what will come out in performance! This has been a useful realization for me on the mentoring end as a public speaking trainer and on the receiving end as a learning musician.

[@st0sk1]

This is an interesting analysis of learning which I’ve never heard of before but kind of had gut feeling of what effective study is vs grinding memorization. Thanks for the introduction to deliberate practice.

[@Rafael_Oiticica]

Every time I see someone saying things like "I've spent 40 hours doing this work" (it can be a article that was written, or a work of art...), I remember this thing you said in the point 3. "Hours" doesn't mean anything if you aren't receiving quality feedback from yourself or from the tutor (expert). I loved the video, as many others from you! As a psychology that works in higher education, this video means a lot for me. Thanks! :D

[@lauritzdavidjr3454]

Very good video. It helped me to learn and understand a lot of the key concepts when it comes to learning and I'm getting new skills so I can be more effective and productive. Perhaps a follow-up video that goes into detail of specific techniques and effective practices for the learning cycle would be a good addition to this series.

[@MiamiHeat872]

This is very enlightening and useful to know. I think this also showcases how KZbin is such a great educational tool for someone in your position that has highly specialized knowledge to teach.

[@PaperTigerProductions]

That first step of identifying the expert skill/s is SO important - would love to see you do a whole video in that vein. There's so much wrong with the current education system which keeps on churning out graduates that aren't really equipped for success. Also, that example you gave about physics is the literal reason why I decided I was NOT going to pursue a career in science. I remember spending two weeks at an international science camp with about 100 other bright minds all psyched up about learning cool science. One of the session activities we were herded into was trying to get us to reconstruct the experiments that were done to prove the Earth is round (though they were a little smarter than that and set the whole case study on an Earth like planet). All 30 of us in that workshop twigged about two minutes in after reading the first couple of clues and my group dutifully completed the tasks, feeling kinda patronized. Despite the threat of a class presentation at the end, one group spent the entire workshop constructing ridiculous superstitious theories to justify how the "evidence" we gathered proved the existence of a perfectly flat plane created by God and that the day/night cycle was due to the eternal Fast and Furious celestial chariot race between God and Anti-God. Needless to say, that particular presentation was the absolute highlight of the workshop.

[@benjaminkeep]

Haha - sounds like at least it was entertaining! Yeah, maybe you could tell from the video, but the mismatch between what science and math students do vs what scientists and mathematicians do is something that really bugs me. And, I think, results in cases like yours: people turning away from the disciplines (or believing that they "just aren't a math person"). I was involved in some research in this area and was really shocked at how much good small tweaks to science labs can do: how much more sense-making and argument and creativity more realistic labs can generate. I also think it's creates widespread misperceptions about how science works which contribute to science illiteracy. Anyhow. I'll put a video on identifying the expert practice in the docket. Mostly need to figure out a title and thumbnail. : )

[@amandamate9117]

Actionable Summary: 1.Disregard the 10,000-Hour Rule: It's a misleading metric. Focus on the quality of your practice instead. 2.Identify Expert Skills: Before diving into practice, take time to identify the skills that differentiate experts from novices in your field. 3.Engage in Practice-Feedback Cycles: Find a way to practice that challenges you and seek expert feedback. Use this cycle to continually refine your skills. BONUS: Practice-Feedback Cycle: Challenging Practice → Expert Feedback → Further Practice → Opportunities → Repeat

[@cryora]

My experience in graduate school is that physics is less about physics as much as it is about dealing with your advisor's personal quirks and really the quirks of everyone you rely on so that they can help you graduate. Physicists are also known to be the most difficult people to work with. My advisor and this machinist one time were trying to one up one another about who is more difficult to work with, physicists or machinists, as though they were proud of it. It's not necessary the case everywhere, but the university I attended, most of the staff have this sort of ego that they would accept no less than bootlicking in order for them to be willing to offer you their help. It ended up getting to the point where the only reason anyone would help me was because I was associated with and in a way asking on behalf of my advisor, who was the program director.

[@chcampbell123456]

One of the most important parts of deliberate practise is to continually focusing on upgrading the quality of your attention to detail and avoiding those times when you just zone out and repeat "mistakes". There's a lot of crossover to mindfulness here.

[@pat-enz]

Agree with everything. I studied and study about how to study, and the matter of studying itself is something like a lifelong process to me. Progressive evolutionary awareness through self-evaluation and understanding your leaning type with evolving stages of your development in your discipline.

[@UdochiOkeke]

I understood your point in this video. It was clear. And I intend to try to identify the expert skills to focus my intentional practice on in my areas of intended mastery. Thank you for the insight.

[@agesileus]

Excellent video. My definition of deliberate practice is working on weaknesses with complete concentration and expert feedback with repetition until mastery. It’s very difficult to do this without a coach because the learner doesn’t have the mental model to give themselves quality feedback or to know what they need to improve. Very few people have ever really done much deliberate practice. I can only do about 2-4 hours per day myself. I think Erickson found a similar range in his research.

[@aljonserna5598]

It's true, I did practiced sword martial arts alone for quite some time and I learned a lot but still noticed I'm lacking something and it's the quality of practice, especially from a teacher and groups. EDIT: This video is helpful since not all of these are easily obvious, especially another comparison would be lifting weights on your own for a long time vs. being taught by a gym/instructors or from military--this is the same premise why reading books written by experts or people who really experienced things out are very important but still having a physical mentor and constant feedback is what will make you learn drastically.

[@davidw1170]

Good video for someone who is deliberately practicing and can use an expert opinion. The video definitely left me wanting to hear more from you, and I hope that is a win for you.

[@Khyrid]

When I was in art school I remember my professor explaining how we often spend massive amounts of time practicing drawing wrong, making the same mistakes over and over when what we should have been doing is having an aspect of critique and refinement to these muscle memory habits.

[@Action.by.Action]

Sounds like my martial arts instructor. Spending years doing it wrong, then more years "unlearning" to get it right. Improvement takes time. But just going through the motions isn't going to get you there.

[@hulkmahmut]

It was helpful. Like you said, I couldn't figure out the first step, and I think the first step is the most important one. Identifying the experts' practice is the key, I guess.

[@spirit4u]

this video has been helpful & kind of made sense to the times when I have had practice questions with rather than just re reading the primary information of the topic

[@MikeDial]

This is an insightful video. In my career as an intelligence analyst, it was indeed helpful to learn foreign languages and analytic techniques. Becoming an analyst, however, involved learning how to ask the best questions and figuring out the best way to answer them. I had to learn it mostly on my own and I discovered that many are not interested in learning how to do it. Now that I'm retired and trying to become a better musician, I find that, while I am practicing, I'm probably not asking he right questions.

[@rickyp9803]

Yes, it's been quite helpful, and I even watched it twice. It helped me confirm that I'm already on the right track. I'm currently learning JavaScript through Udemy courses, and it made me realize that dedicating 10,000 hours to mastering the language may not be enough; it's likely to take about a year or a bit longer. Consulting with experts is essential, but it's equally important to ensure that they possess not only deep knowledge of the subject but also the ability to teach it effectively. One great advantage of these online courses is that you can always 24/7 reach out to the instructor for guidance and feedback. I'm fortunate to have found an excellent instructor who has made the learning process incredibly enjoyable. Thanks to his engaging teaching style, the hours of lectures and practice don't feel burdensome at all.

[@bazil9060]

Answering your final question, sir: this video really was helpful for me. Though it wasn't a ready 1-2-3 "to-do" list, it did make me meditate and reconsider some of my attitudes for work and learning. And that was even more valuable! Thanks for that! 🙂

[@robertjones1730]

I learned to play Banjo in one year and played in a local band after. My method of learning so fast was akin to learning to swim by jumping in the deep end. I picked the hardest songs and tried to learn to play them without looking down at the strings at all, forcing myself to not only learn it, but to learn the FEEL of it, where the notes were for both hands. It was slow at first but linking the sense of touch with sound proved stronger than sight with sound, after all, I'm training motor skills

[@tomdebevoise]

Studied guitar for 30 years, and I got to a certain level of proficiency. I had some excellent teachers and we had a saying: practice makes permanent. Mastery comes from realizing what you are doing wrong and adjusting your practice. This is why some of the very best musicians still have teachers or coaches; they are able to discern tiny, subtle issues with their students playing.

[@dsterry74]

This was a good video. This was a good reminder of what deliberate practice really is. A nice follow up would be how to identify the skills of experts so that you can begin formulating a plan for deliberate practice.

[@abhiraaid]

WOW man, never heard someone pointing these out, this well. Thanks for the video :)

[@MikeyAntonakakis]

Awesome advice! I played football in high school and specialized in punting. I was fortunate enough on a few occasions to get nearly one-on-one coaching by Ray Guy (arguable the best punter of all time, and an all-around exceptional athlete in multiple sports). More than any of the mechanics of punting a ball, his key focus was on learning how to coach yourself - how to build that feedback loop between your senses and your self-analysis (not easy to find a punting coach). He summarized it as "practice doesn't make perfect - perfect practice makes perfect." His point was that every good repetition during practice reinforced the skill, of course - but conversely, every poor repetition built bad habits, poor skill, etc., so the focus should be on both getting it right and as quickly as possible not getting it wrong! Punting a football seems like a pretty straightforward thing, but the details of the mechanics are fairly complicated and happen very quickly. A punter has 1.2-1.3 seconds from the time the ball hits their hands till it hits their foot if they don't want a blocked kick, and there are a several motions that have to take place simultaneously in that timespan. Those motions all have to happen with precise placement/movement (+/- a few millimeters) and precise timing to ensure a good kick - not to mention adapting to things like a bad snap, rain, wind, one of the linemen forgetting to block, etc. Practice usually involves focusing on one of those motions/timings for several repetitions, and due to the singular focus on one parameter it's really easy to let the others degrade during those repetitions, like herding cats in your own brain/body.

[@nanaadommills-robertson7464]

This channel is gold! Thanks for all that you do (one satisfied subscriber)

[@CJSanders310]

Helpful video! Reinforcing that time isn't a metric I should use, and figuring out a new way for me to perceive time and practice.

[@ferventfoureyes]

I love this type of content. You've got a new sub with the bell ALL THE WAY ON! THANK YOU!!!

[@aadi.p4159]

I really like your yt channel and i think more ppl need to teach "how to learn and improve properly". Could you give an idea on how to ace exams like gre, sat or a more tough exam that many Indians have to give like the jee. I feel like that last one would be especially very useful with your background, we could finally get a good roadmap in improving exam scores

[@HallOfThought]

Definitely a helpful video - I think it's exceptionally worthwhile to dispel common myths of significant issues like this that frustrate people from learning. I also really found the explicit framework for physicists really insightful - I've always felt there was a large gap in the way "experiments" were generally conducted undergrad university and that it would have been far, far more useful to use the open framework you just described - Luckily I had the chance opportunity to practice this method in my final project in university was similar and really was the only one that provided huge value to me later on in my professional life. It was also the most fulfilling, as I was a clearly different person after the experience.

[@tomlewis4748]

It was helpful. Keep doing it. There are other ways to look at this that might make more sense to me, even if not to anyone else. Malcolm Gladwell was assuming that his readers were savvy enough to realize without being told that quality is more important than quantity. It went without saying. And the thing is, if you are motivated to put in 10,000 hours, then you are likely to concentrate on quality and ignore quantity. That makes reducing it to a large number much more significant. If you are not motivated, then it might not be the case that you are concentrating on quality. So it's much more complicated than just the concept of quantity, OR the concept of quality. It also depends on not only how much there is to learn, but whether it is something that can be learned in the domain of the conscious mind, like carpentry, or something that is actually in the domain of the unconscious mind, like art. Learning to be a master carpenter is learning skill and technique and craft, and it's done primarily in the domain of the conscious mind. We learn what we think about directly, explicitly, about how to do it. It takes a long time to get good at it. There is some art involved, but not that much. 'Science education' very likely falls into a similar category, yet that is less about skill and technique and craft, and more about explicit conscious knowledge. Learning to write fiction well also takes a long time, but only maybe 40% of that is skill and technique and craft. Those things are learned explicitly, like carpentry, automotive mechanics, plumbing, HVAC, etc. But in art, the other 60% comes from implicit learning, and that is not something you can approach consciously and decide to learn 'these three things on Tuesday', for instance, bc it's not easy to just decide to wrap your conscious mind around something that is only in the domain of the unconscious mind. Of course we who write would love to be able to sit down and 'identify the expert skills'. We try to do that. That is one good approach to technique and craft. But the fact is many of the core things that make an artist a good artist are not something we can simply identify in our conscious mind, so we can't just know consciously what they are and write them down, consciously. The 'First Step', when learning art, is obvious, but it's in many ways not all that accessible. It's ineffable. So, 'good luck with that'. This is why art can;'t be taught. There is no language in the unconscious mind. Even a MFA in literature can't teach you the first thing about how to create art. It can only teach skill and technique and craft. Art must be self-taught. Since they can't teach that, their weak substitute for that is telling you to go read other authors, and maybe, just maybe, something will rub off by osmosis. IOW, the task of teaching becomes something the student needs to do for themselves. And it is based on what you refer to as 'feedback cycles'. Write, evaluate, revise. IOW, learning from trial and error. Make mistakes, fail, and learn from that how to move forward and succeed by not making mistakes. This is why in 'science education' you have lectures and labs. The lectures (hopefully) aid the accumulation of conscious knowledge. Labs do that, too, but they also allow implicit, unconscious learning. It's like the difference between someone instructing you how to ride a bike as opposed to getting on and riding it, which is how you actually learn (the riding part (unconscious) is what works, the instructing (conscious) is essentially ineffective). And of course 'labs' for an MFA in literature are useless, unless it's based on students actually doing the deliberate practice of writing, which is a solitary, internal pursuit, not suited for 'labs'. To learn art, it's quite often not about consciously trying to learn facts. That doesn't even work. It takes enough deliberate practice for it to just soak in naturally. And guess what-10,000 hours will certainly get you at least part of the way there if you are motivated to focus on the quality of your learning process. But for the most part it happens in the background, and not from trying to make sense of it consciously. I probably have over twice that amount of effort invested, virtually all of it focused on quality, and I still learn more every single day, every single time I put in the deliberate practice. I don't set out to learn this and that. What I learn is typically a surprise-something I wasn't even expecting. 'And when you get to 10,000 hours, what you realize is you have much more to learn than you ever would have dreamed. So you can't simply underthink the concept of 10,000 hours and consider it bogus, unless you are looking for ways to boost your ego comparatively with everyone else, which is a pretty stupid goal, and sadly, way too common. Any way you look at it, having the motivation to do the hard work and do it for that long and with an eye on quality is a good idea, meaning the concept of 10,000 hours holds a great deal of value for those willing to put those hours in, and maybe no value at all for those not willing, and for those who want to underthink it and are instead looking for shortcuts, which is typically the case. It can't be summed up in one word like 'nope'. Doing that implies underthinking it. But I agree-thinking of it as a number goal is not the best approach. Once you reach 10K hours you know the insignificance of the number, and hopefully, you realize this going in, bc it's not about the number. It's about the due diligence of doing the work. To get good at anything means to realize that there really are no shortcuts. You must put in the effort.

[@gilbertowanderley6405]

I enjoyed this video a lot. As someone who is learning Go I can already see where I can focus to better use my learning time. Thanks I'll sure see more of your videos

[@nasim1616]

It was really helpful. Not too long, to the point and easy to understand, thank you :)

[@the_furf_of_july4652]

I enjoyed this video a lot. Even without any goal I’m working towards it makes me feel a lot better about what I used to perceive as failures.

[@321Blast]

It all made sense to me! I totally agree with all of this. I think passion also has a huge part to play in this. A genuinely passionate person (with discipline) will strive towards excellence in their craft.

[@ostensibly531]

I found 2 out of 9 minutes of this video helpful. I would've preferred for "quality practice" to be explained systematically. It's just my personal preference. Thanks for making it anyways.

[@AIVERSE694]

Me too!

[@ZimZam131]

2 out of 9 is better than most videos

[@MePeterNicholls]

I *think* it means self critical feedback loop, reflective and adjusting. Being totally aware of what you’re doing, not just doing it as it your going through the motion.

[@1982gonzocontroli]

So happy to have found this video, now I have a good reference for any time someone causally mentions Gladwell as good advice :P

[@apharos]

let me try changing the physicist example into a software engineer: 1. converting written specification into "clean" code 2. able to learn and apply new technology / tools quickly 3. soft skills / interpersonal skills how might one practice these skills? 1. go into an open source project, and work on issues / feature requests 2. When you are starting a new project or have the freedom to choose new tools, avoid your comfort zone and reach for the "newer" toys and try make it work 3. work collaboratively on bigger projects that require frequent communication and where you have defined responsibilities and duties. Some bigger open-source projects would fit this requirement

[@lucasdecarvalholorena5193]

This video, combined with your other one about generative thinking (the experiment that teaches how to learn), helped me think how my English teaching strategies affect my students. I'll try to emphasize more the correction and rewriting of their short written productions I request during the lesson so they fixate the feedback better. Also I loved the point in the other video you validated here about explaining the next coming practices to prepare the brain for them.

[@LordAus123]

The video was helpful because it reinforced my understanding that practice is not about time but about iterations of trying, failing, and noticing new things to try again differently. It also has opened my mind to the fact that what makes an expert expert is not necessarily obvious and I need to actually study and observe and think about what makes experts expert.

[@tomsisson660]

Your video was very helpful, especially the part where you discussed feed back cycles as assisting you more than the amount of time you put into mastering a subject. One idea here though is that you must develop an ear for telling when someone is giving you honest feedback in a feedback loop and when they are telling you something just to tear you down and try to hurt you; this can be especially true in the music business where guitarists and other musicians tear each other down to hurt their competition. Please make more videos on this subject. Tom Sisson

[@jzero4813]

2:27 - It ALSO depends on the individual. Some people learn incredibly quickly. Others learn incredibly slowly. The great irony is that learning is also a skill that is improved with deliberate practice, so people who have spent more time practising how to learn and how to teach themselves will be naturally much faster at learning anything new than people who have not. The method you're proposing is suitable really only for people who require guidance and assistance to learn new things. Autodidacts are perfectly capable of learning and becoming experts in new skills without requiring an expert for feedback. In some ways, the method you propose can lock people into learned helplessness - NEEDING an expert to validate their efforts. The end goal should always be to be able to learn a new skill without requiring an expert. Only then can a learner be considered truly independent.

[@actuallyasriel]

As someone currently going through with learning new skills they've been sleeping on, it's often disheartening to stare down the barrel of putting in the hours. Nothing is worse to my brain than a grind. Reframing my practice in this way has made it much more enjoyable and edifying, such that the time simply disappears. That's kinda the whole point, really. Practicing in a way that gets your reward system going and encourages you to push forth such that you're not really thinking about it.

[@hedaros17]

I have been following Ericsson's studies and I am very proficient at his theory. In regards to point one. There is nothing special about 10,000 hours as you mentioned it but not for the reasons you mentioned though, it IS about the quantity and quality of the practice, the amount of hours was taken from his first study in 1993 with violin students, he was introduced (without knowing yet) to deliberate practice, thus every violin student had access to deliberate solitary practice, and the difference was NOT in the quality of practice alone what set them appart but instead in the amount of solitary practice, the very best performers had approximately gathered a total of 10,000 hours at age 20, but they focused on the age 18 in the study, which was 7400 hours for the best performers, as mentioned in the study. So you must informed your purposeful practice (deliberate practice) (the quality) and later focus on the hours (the quantity) when wanting to improve at every field.

[@TheSalMaris]

Not at all too abstract. And Helpful in the sense of focusing on possible end product or goal. This is useful in any field of endeavor. I've always viewed that 10,000 hour "rule" with skepticism. Thank you for this.

[@bruce-le-smith]

i've found that seeking expert feedback that challenges me is very essential. glad you raised that point. a critical review process by trusted and kind peers and mentors is essential. i suspect violinists get so much unsolicited feedback, in addition to solicited expert feedback, that they forget it's even happening. everyone hears a wrong note on a violin!

[@BrainHax]

This was super helpful video ,I have subscribed this channel Would be looking forward to see more such videos about learning

[@Hwkman4]

While on the outside it appears not overtly helpful you have absolutely nailed it. As a physician. The difference between a good physician and a mediocre one is almost down to algorithms. A good physician has built out algorithms to simply common difficult issues so that they can spend more time on parts that are yet to be placed in the algorithm. This allows for them to not only notice abnormal findings, but realize when a normal finding is contextually abnormal. An example. I saw a patient with a wound on their leg. Which is common. The nature of the wound was a pressure wound " bed sore" (contextually uncommon). I sent for a test for his arteries and a hemoglobin level. He had severe arterial disease only in 1 branch of an artery and was anemic. His primary Physician Assistant said oh the anemia is not too bad. But in context he already had poor flow to the area (low oxygen) and has low oxygen capacity. He was someone who needed a blood transfursion despite 99% of people with his lab values being ok.

[@avinandac]

Wonderful video.... You just nailed some of the finer subtle points which no one talks about..... ❤... Can you please make some more videos on this?.... It will be very helpful

[@philippwaag2173]

bro this video was really really good. no superficial no sense but deep and simple and powerful.

[@FeralMina]

I would love to see you make a video about how these principles could most effectively be applied in second language acquisition, specifically. In any case, thanks for making such high-quality, instructive content!

[@bogdiworksV2]

Identify why you want to learn the language - day to day convo, school or university studies, understanding films, media, going on holiday. Learn the vocab that applies. Read papers etc to improve your vocab. Rely on similar languages you already know. Try to find native speakers and talk and listen to them for practice. Listening is just as important as speaking, because you need to familiarise your ear with how that language sounds as spoken by natives. Learn writing last, unless you need it for school or uni. No matter what anyone tells you, it takes time to get fluent.

[@FeralMina]

@@bogdiworksV2 For myself, I choose a different path. I believe in delayed language output, which means I believe in getting hundreds of hours (or even thousands, depending on how different that language is from our other language(s)) of input (preferably audio input) before even attempting to output. To my mind, one should try to develop a crystal-clear perception of what success actually looks like before attempting to achieve it. If we don’t know exactly what we’re aiming for, or can’t yet accurately perceive what we’re aiming for, how can we ever hope to achieve it, after all? In language learning, it can take thousands of hours of input to be able to develop the ability to even accurately perceive the phonemes, tones, and prosody much less the syntax, grammar constructions, and so forth. Frustratingly, we certainly think we’re perceiving things like phonemes and tones 100% accurately (because thanks, Dunning-Krueger Effect!). But we can’t possibly have an accurate perception of anything that we’re hearing that doesn’t exist in the same form in our native language(s), at least not for quite a long while. We can’t know what we don’t know! Our brains were long ago optimized to out native language(s) and now filter out sounds, tones, constructions, etc. that are unfamiliar to us. So it takes us hundreds or even thousands of hours of input before we can break down that automatic filter in order to even perceive things accurately, much less acquire them, much less be able to output them with any accuracy. I think about the well-known phenomenon of native Japanese speakers who are learning English being unable to differentiate between /l/ and /r/ sounds. It takes thousands of hours of input and conscious effort for them to be able to accurately perceive and distinguish those sounds, and even more training to accurately produce those sounds. And people who attempt outputing those sounds before they can accurately perceive them find that their inability to perceive them results in an inability to produce them, and then regularity outputting them fossilizes their production at that level. As such, they typically never develop the ability to perceive or produce those sounds. But since they can’t accurately perceive the sounds in the first place, they probably end up thinking they sound just fine when they talk, even though people who are native English speakers might think they have a thick accent. I can see this play out in my own language learning journey. At every stage, I would have sworn I was able to accurately perceive the phonemes and tones of language, but nope! And I only realize that inability in hindsight. Damn Dunning-Krueger! 😅 So I wait. Until I’ve developed a crystal-clear perception of what success actually is, and have fully acquired that crustal-clear perception, I do not attempt output. After all, if my concept of success is flawed and/or incomplete, then my attempts at replicating it will inevitably be flawed. I believe that’s how people end up with thick accents and fossilized grammar mistakes, they start outputting while their concept of success is not yet fully accurate. So yeah, just my two cents on my own language journey. But I’d like to hear from a learning scientist what the current science has to say about it.

[@jkucharewicz]

@@bogdiworksV2are you French?

[@rephaelreyes8552]

Hi Benjamin! I just want you to know that you have a great underrated channel.

[@benjaminkeep]

Thanks!

[@Tiantkd]

very clear and simplified way to put it all. It happens me at work that people think that know how to do their work but it always turns out that they know how to do it and barely scratch the suface of what is the actual result of their work that is considered a succes o a work well done.

[@rolandfisher]

I haven't done an exhaustive search, but I've been exposed to dozens of university's teaching curricula, and I have yet to see one that teaches what the professional does.

[@rilauats]

THX, great learning points in just a few minutes. Greatly appreciated!

[@Zupecki27]

My term for this has always been ‘practice with purpose’, but I also like ‘deliberate practice’… it has huge benefits over just sheer brute force repetition!

[@Artful.Guitarist]

I'm really enjoying your lines of reasoning. The quantity vs quality argument reminds me of a Buddhist saying; "If only the length of time one sat in meditation was important, then chickens would be enlightened."

[@CheDCanal]

this video was quite helpful for me, cause I can recall couple times where I progressed a lot in one things, and falled to progress in the other things for the same period of time (even though I was equally engaged in all of them)

[@productivebeasthopefullyso194]

I'd like to hear even more abstract concepts. It was very insightful, thank you very much.

[@micha_elknight]

i love this info cause it correlates to how I am playing and improving in Tekken 8. Thank you so much for your work

[@hajiimpressions8113]

I am endeavoring on a new skill, or should I say take my present skill from beginner to expert, but didn't know how. Your video gave me some very crucial insights. Thank you!

[@jonathanjohnson2785]

Thanks so much. Good points raised❤

[@larrysankey6976]

This video is helpful because when it's spelled out the way you did, it makes perfect sense and you completely understand why 10000 hours doesn't really work for explaining becoming an expert. The explanation you gave doesn't seem abstract at all. It seems concrete and practical.

[@andyo1999]

Throughly enjoyed and even gave thumbs up when prompted! Thanks for posting

[@feistyburrito9732]

This video has some insightful tips. I’ll go and implement this for my Korean/Japanese language study. I’m planning to go to Korea and Japan in 5 months. I’ll come back and update after my trip in May 2024. Wish me luck 🍀

[@tonbonthemon]

I had been practicing Tai Chi for about 7 years and wasn't really getting any where, even though I had teachers with fairly decent skill. I was often craving feedback and clarity on methods, and I wasn't quite getting it. Over 7 years my skills had barely improved. Then I found a slightly different lineage known for its clearer instruction, and I began taking private lessons as opposed to weekend public group classes, and occasionally a "public" class where personal feedback was pretty much a standard feature. It's only been a year but I think my tai chi has improved immensely because of this change, which facillitated better SOLO practice. Every time I practice on my own, I do aim for around an hour or so, however that's more of a way to avoid going easy with superficial practice sessions, and my sessions naturally end up being that long because I know what things I need to work on based on what my teachers have told me, I know where I want to get to, and I know HOW to do that based on the instruction I receive. I also have models to look up to; I hear about how other accomplished practitioners structured their practice, etc. I know a number of different ways to approach a session based on what I think is necessary.

[@thegzak]

I do also think skills develop asymptotically for people, ie diminishing returns after a certain point, and what makes everyone unique is the shape of the curve - some people are just natural, others have to work really hard. It’s therefore important to be efficient with time and set realistic goals.

[@Mikebigmike94]

i am glad i stumbled across this video, i've studied a few things in the last few years, maths, physics, engineering, programming etc. and i have noticed when solving a problem and it only gives you the answer, it is close to useless, but if the solution is a fully worked example step by step, the concept clicks faster. Too many textbooks omit a good amount of worked examples mainly to the professor can get the solutions manual. I swear by the method of worked examples.

[@davidbrohede]

This is pure gold. Thank you for making this video!

[@evandixon1990]

I never comment on here but this such good info that I need to hear more of - especially the bit on expert practise. This video was very helpful and I'm new to your channel. Please make one on improving creativity if possible, Thanks 🙏

[@gameraggedbroadcast5416]

Checked out your other vids and everything is what I need to learn right now thank you.

[@eliaswischnivetzky4588]

excellent video, you sure can Keep at it benjamin

[@GregWhite2014]

Love this, in ways I didn't expect to when I clicked on this video. As a result of watching this I'm finding myself looking at my thinking in a new way. I do a lot of math related and engineering rated maneuvers as a living. I was tortured in 3rd grade to memorize multiplication tables and I think that had a very deleterious effect on my brain usage which carries onto today in subtle ways. I am noticing that sometimes practice for me dulls my sense of curiosity, kind of a remnant of "giving up" I experienced with the rote memorization I'd learned. As a result I think my thinking becomes tiresome after a while when this shouldn't be the case. Surprisingly, I've never thought much about how I practice. I became competent enough by putting in the time. I'm feeling like this vid has opened me up a bit toward introducing my innate curiosity and excitement into the thinking process. (Seriously, I'm not buddies with the presenter) This has also had repercussions in the way I approach playing musical instruments too. I can beat on the technique and forget about how much I love music. THis video has me thinking......

[@edwardroneill]

I like the way this is more about the teacher's POV, and the other video addresses the solitary learner. (I'm thinking there's a lot of those on KZbin!)

[@benjaminkeep]

Thanks - there are indeed!

[@AFGautonompunk]

it was rather helpful and i loved how you're taking starcraft 2 as an example (in a former video on deliberate practise) - i remember first learning of it through @JaKaTaKtv, through whom i started to learn using an alternative and more efficient hotkey layout, the core. haha, it's really nice to see my niche interests synergising and i'm quite happy to have found your channel, as i'm reworking my learning routing for university purposes.

[@TheGamingDandy]

One thing experts consistently say in every single field is firstly to: Always master the basics. If you move on too quickly because your want to get to the "fun stuff" you're going to be standing on weak foundation. Without becoming an absolute master at the simple basics of whatever thing you're training in, you'll never actually become an expert. You'll only become pretty good. Which for some things is fine. I'm a pretty good swimmer. I'm a pretty good Halo player. But if you're truly passionate about something, don't ignore the basics. Build a strong foundation.

[@ryans6186]

Super helpful, glad it came up in my feed.