Essay on Malcom Gladwell : The Truth behind the 10,000 Hour Rule
1125 Words5 Pages
The road to greatness is a long path filled with struggle and time. Based on research by the best-selling author Malcom Gladwell inside his book Outliers popularized the idea of 10,000 hours of guided practice “the magic number of greatness”(Gladwell, 47). With enough practice he said anyone could achieve any work that of a professional. While some say the 10,000 hour rule is the key to success I believe that success is based on genetics, talent, and time period. It is whether one was born with the talent, achieved it later within life or was born during the wrong time period is what makes a master out of someone. Where the 10,000 hour rule is not a truth. What is the 10,000 hour rule? Malcom Gladwell uses this rule to help explain that…show more content…
It could be the best at track, or even baseball. Most professional athletes have been playing that sport since their childhood. They did not start later in the game but yet earlier than others. There are some “late bloomers” who have crushed the stereotype of the 10,000 hour rule. For example Dazzy Vance, at 31 years of age, pitcher Dazzy Vance had an embarrassing 0-8 record. Those are not what usually makes a Hall-of-Famer. “When he bloomed, it was with a dazzling Technicolor blossom. He owned National League hitters with a furious fastball, leading the league in strikeouts for seven straight seasons” (Newman, 1). It didn’t take him 10,000 hours to ‘master’ pitching like it didn’t take Fauja Singh 10,000 hours to run the best at his age. His career in marathons started in at age 89, he ran the London marathon. The "Turbaned Tornado's" best time, 5 hours and 40 minutes when he was 92 years young at the Toronto marathon. Among his many records, he is the oldest person to run a marathon at age 100, the fastest male over the age of 90, fastest over the age of 100 to run the 5,000 meters, also the fastest over the age of 100 to run the 3,000 meters (Newman, 10). He retired with an amazing record and not 10,000 hours under his belt. What does this say about the rule? That anyone can start something whenever one feels like and become the best at it.
There can be something said for “talent” in which one is either born with or born without. This could be linked to genetics, many
The 10,000 hour rule—first proposed by a Swedish psychologist and later made famous in Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers—states that exceptional expertise requires at least 10,000 hours of practice. The best of the best (the Beatles, Bill Gates) all amassed more than 10,000 hours of practice before rising to the top, Gladwell argued. So greatness is within virtually any person's grasp, so long as they can put in the time to master their skill of choice.
A new meta-analysis, however, indicates that the 10,000 hour rule simply does not exist. As Brain's Idea reports, authors of the new study undertook the largest literature survey on this subject to date, compiling the results of 88 scientific articles representing data from some 11,000 research participants. Practice, they found, on average explains just 12 percent of skill mastery and subsequent success. "In other words the 10,000-Hour rule is nonsense," Brain's Idea writes. "Stop believing in it. Sure, practice is important. But other factors (age? intelligence? talent?) appear to play a bigger role."
While this is the largest study to date to arrive at this conclusion, it's not the first. Soon after Outliers was published, experts began calling foul—including the expert who supposedly coined the rule, Anders Ericsson. As the Guardian pointed out in 2012:
There is nothing magical about the 10,000 figure, as Ericsson said recently, because the best group of musicians had accumulated an average, not a total, of over 10,000 hours by the age of twenty. In the world of classical music it seems that the winners of international competitions are those who have put in something like 25,000 hours of dedicated, solitary practice – that’s three hours of practice every day for more than 20 years.
Ericsson is also on record as emphasising that not just any old practice counts towards the 10,000-hour average. It has to be deliberate, dedicated time spent focusing on improvement.
So despite the new evidence that the 10,000 rule is bull, like the studies and articles that came before it, that message will likely fall on many deaf ears. The 10,000 hour rule seems to have entered into the common lore about success: it's a nice idea, that hard work will actually pay off. And no peer-reviewed study has so far succeeded in toppling that catchy message.
Like this article?
SIGN UP for our newsletter