I’m sure some of you have heard about the idea that it takes 10000 hours to master a trade or a skill. It’s appealing, straightforward, and probably has a level of research behind it to legitimize it.
We really like the idea that if we just put in X time into something, we’ll get Y results. It’s the essence of scientific reasoning – X gives us Y through process Z. We don’t need to truly understand Z, we just need to make sure we get Y predictably.
However, “10000 hours” (Henceforth known as 10k for brevity) seems problematic from my perspective. Perhaps there are assumptions being made that allow the law of large numbers or averages to make it an acceptable fact, but allow me some Socratic ignorance so I can talk about my problems with this as an educational idea…
Does it assume that the playing field is level?
The playing field is never level. That is to say that circumstances never allow an hour to mean the same thing from one person to another. People also are not likely to give equal results. (They aren’t machines, you know.)
An hour probably doesn’t mean the same thing to two people, as anyone that read this article featured in LinkedIn’s recent “5 Things…” email would think. n hour for me at home is likely interrupted by noise, calamity, or other required pieces of business like eating or chores. As a student, I tend to think I have a few major disadvantages compared to others. My 10000 hours is probably more like 12000, maybe more. (I hope not!)
This draws into question what an hour actually IS. Does 10k make the assumption that an hour is a”flow hour” as described in another article recently aggregated by LinkedIn? Let’s not make this too complicated and long a post. I think this is a problem if we want to hold 10k as a reliable method of education.
How do you make students fulfill 10k?
I’m not in education, so I don’t have many answers to this. Considering the previous points, students aren’t on a level playing field, and they all don’t get the same results within the same about of time.Which brings me to the most practical and probably the most important of questions regarding 10k:
Where do you find 10000 hours?
Really. Whether you are an adult student like myself, a young student, or a tradesmen, everyone has to put in this X time for Y results under the 10k philosophy. The Z is not known, if not unknowable (although Z can sometimes seem like throwing stuff at students heads and just seeing what sticks), and the ability to find 10000 hours for any of them is difficult enough considering the expectations for Y (which may assume quite a lot). How does anyone find the time?
What 10000 hours really asks of people that live it out is commitment. You either make the time or walk. What’s difficult to understand is that our concept of time in a global information economy is becoming quite distorted and needs increasingly urgent. No one has time, so everything must be done – Now. Combine this with the increasing expectations placed on students and the “work hard to get it done faster” idea starts becoming murky and confusing from an educational standpoint.
What happens when 10000 is no longer 10000?
One of the most powerful and profound things that have been told to me regarding this industry have been told to me in an introductory programming class.
“There is zero demand for simple software. None.”
While use of abstraction and through the process of technological progress – you’d expect the spread of easier solutions and existing code everywhere for use along with the ubiquity and triviality of the skill, but it seems that this effect, if it’s true, is dwarfed by the increasing complexity of software. Each batch of students will need to be smarter, more knowledgeable, and better equipped to handle increasing complex software than the last. Despite advances, skill requirements only go up. The expectations are always higher. How can 10000 hours mean the same when this is happening? People are definitely not as upgradable as computers are, they just have higher expectations put on them. This is probably one of many reasons that ageism is growing in Computer Science. It’s scary stuff, when you think about it. People will always need to put more and more time into it…what does this mean for educating people under a 10k philosophy?
Wrapping up my silly post
It’s very appealing to believe that, given the right amount of work and time, that you’ll master a trade to expectation, but when those expectations change, when the concepts of time for everyone involved in the process are all changing towards inevitable disadvantage, when the means of everyone involved initially vary and may change wildly, and when the needs of everyone at all points of the process are changing, 10k quickly becomes confusing and somewhat fraudulent.
Do I have any solutions? I don’t think I do. I write this particular blog because of my own concerns, because when I think about what I have to do to meet the expectations of both the present and future, it becomes difficult for me to make any choices or draw any real conclusions about what I have to actually do.
Students, in all their forms, have a lot of challenges ahead of them, both in life and in school. While everyone tries to prepare themselves and others as best they can for the present and future, no one always knows what is best, and no one always has the means to deliver the best.
The ultimate takeaway from this is that good education that delivers specific results requires attention and care. We can’t really engineer students or graduates, but we may craft them, and anything that is crafted takes a very special kind of time.
Until then – because I like doing this, and I want to do this, I’ll keep trying to get my 10000 hours, and I’ll just have to leave circumstances to circumstance. I hope I meet expectations, but I may never know.
