or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Talent Code

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

While flying from Salt Lake to Boston, I read The Talent Code.  Non-stop.  I won't try to summarize it, other then to say that I found it a fascinating description of both how great teachers work and how students ideally learn.

 

If you're interested in either the "teaching" or "learning" aspects of this sport (or any sport for that matter...) -- and if you're reading this forum, I imagine you are -- read this book.

 

I intend to read it again soon in a somewhat quieter environment then an airplane.  And I don't usually read books twice.

post #2 of 15

This is certainly interesting.  I just looked the book up and found it one of those "look inside" books.  I read the pages that were offered up as teasers.  Then I googled "deep practice."  Lost of stuff out there.  

 

You've got me wanting to read this book for sure. 

post #3 of 15
Very good book. Highly recomended. Also get the little book of talent, with a bunch of more actionable ideas to out into your practice plans.
post #4 of 15

ok.  I'm hooked.  Visiting to Amazon today, or Barnes & Noble. 

post #5 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post

Very good book. Highly recomended. Also get the little book of talent, with a bunch of more actionable ideas to out into your practice plans.

 

Thanks, I'll look for this one as well.  I assume you're referring to this?

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Little-Book-Talent-Improving/dp/034553025X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1364830083&sr=8-1&keywords=the+little+book+of+talent

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post

ok.  I'm hooked.  Visiting to Amazon today, or Barnes & Noble. 

 

Let us know what you think...

post #6 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinF View Post

 

Thanks, I'll look for this one as well.  I assume you're referring to this?

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Little-Book-Talent-Improving/dp/034553025X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1364830083&sr=8-1&keywords=the+little+book+of+talent

 

 

Let us know what you think...

that's the one, yes. 

 

enjoy!

post #7 of 15

Another vote for The Talent Code from me (thanks Razie for posting about it in the PSIA skills thread)

 

I found it almost unputdownable

 

Daniel Coyle makes a great case for building skills from deep practice, and links into examples from soccer, baseball, music teaching and education. I'm sure that this is relevant for anyone with an interest in coaching or developing skills

 

Two quotes from the book:

 

"Deep practice is not simply about struggling: it's about seeking out a particular struggle, which involves a cycle of distinct actions:

1. Pick a target

2 Reach for it

3 Evaluate the gap

4 Return to step 1"

 

"Of all the images that communicate the sensation of deep practice, my favourite is the staggering babies...a study to see what made babies improve at walking. The key factor wasn't height or weight or age or brain development or any innate trait but rather (surprise!) the amount of time they spent firing their circuits, learning to walk. This paints a vivid picture of what deep practice looks like. It's the feeling of being a staggering baby, of intently lurching towards a goal and toppling over. It's a wobbly, discomfiting sensation that any person would sensibly seek to avoid. Yet the longer the babies remained in that state - the more wiliing they were to endure it, and to permit themselves to fail - the more myelin they built, and the more skill they earned. The staggering babies embody the deepest truth about deep practice: to get good, it's helpful to be willing, or even enthusiastic, about being bad. Baby steps are the royal road to skill"

post #8 of 15

I think an important consideration is the fact that all infants use different body organization to reach their functional milestones. Are teachers as flexible in their allowances for a variety of developmental movements, does a teacher see the best way to use the person's current organization to achieve more complex, functional, and efficient movement?

 

 

This may be long, but is worth the time if your interested in how we learn

 

http://s3.amazonaws.com/insidemoves/Linda_Smith._movement_&cognition_article_copy_f1909.pdf


Edited by chad - 4/7/14 at 4:50am
post #9 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad View Post
 

I think an important consideration is the fact that all infants use different body organization to reach their functional milestones. Are teachers as flexible in their allowances for a variety of developmental movements, does a teacher see the best way to use the person's current organization to achieve more complex, functional, and efficient movement?

 

 

This may be long, but is worth the time if your interested in how we learn

 

http://s3.amazonaws.com/insidemoves/Linda_Smith._movement_&cognition_article_copy_f1909.pdf

 

Chad, what you say above is what PSIA's approach is meant to foster in its instructors.  Individualized instruction, even within the structure of a group lesson, is the very best way to teach. 

post #10 of 15

from my own experience it was more simple to apply genralizations to people for a long time, there is a comfort in knowing that a large percentage of people move the best with certain features, be it walking, skiing, standing , etc the saying goes something like "all happy families are happy for simliar reasons, but all unhappy families are unhappy for different reasons".  So it is easy to apply a protocol to training and movement development.  Fortunately, I came to the realization that is was less and less about correction, development isn't an accomplishment, its an ongoing process.  So how to tranistion someone from what they were already doing into something that is more dynamic and built on their current schema is much more challenging and enjoyable. I think it adheres well with the the findings in developmental learning and in deliberate practice techniques.

 

I appreciate the focus on movment here, but is the sequencing minutiae really so critical, how many times do we find ourselves satisfying our comfort in teaching at the expense of the person trying to learn themselves and expand themselves.

 

 

it is about running, but if you substitute the running for skiing I think it applies and captures the importance of looking at form and development differently then just hammering someone with reps.

 

http://www.runnersworld.com/race-training/the-running-machine-myth


Edited by chad - 4/7/14 at 10:28am
post #11 of 15

Very well put Chad,  I have this same discussion with my children's coaches and the parents of kids in their team.

 

Coaching and teaching are about adapting to the student, not making the student adapt to your teaching style.  This is the difference of a great instructor that can reach and improve 99% of the students vs a great instructor that can manage only 50% is the ability to adjust to the student, not the ability to teach.

 

This is a book I have to buy as the points look very interesting.

post #12 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad View Post
 

from my own experience it was more simple to apply genralizations to people for a long time, there is a comfort in knowing that a large percentage of people move the best with certain features, be it walking, skiing, standing , etc the saying goes something like "all happy families are happy for simliar reasons, but all unhappy families are unhappy for different reasons".  So it is easy to apply a protocol to training and movement development.  Fortunately, I came to the realization that is was less and less about correction, development isn't an accomplishment, its an ongoing process.  So how to tranistion someone from what they were already doing into something that is more dynamic and built on their current schema is much more challenging and enjoyable. I think it adheres well with the the findings in developmental learning and in deliberate practice techniques.

 

I appreciate the focus on movment here, but is the sequencing minutiae really so critical, how many times do we find ourselves satisfying our comfort in teaching at the expense of the person trying to learn themselves and expand themselves.

 

 

it is about running, but if you substitute the running for skiing I think it applies and captures the importance of looking at form and development differently then just hammering someone with reps.

 

http://www.runnersworld.com/race-training/the-running-machine-myth

 

A minute change can sometimes make big things much better.  All big changes don't require a holistic approach.  Tipping points do exist in all kinds of domains.

post #13 of 15

totally agree LF. reductionism requires a great deal of understanding.  The most exciting part about not having to adhere to a belief system that only relies on reducing complex movement to certain variables is the very fact that a small change that may seem far removed from the pieces of a person we look at can cause dramatic reorganization of the entire person. Having the willingness to include holism in our perception opens that many more doors to connecting with a person.  It doesn't preclude the fundamentals, it expands you as an instructor, literally reinventing yourself for each student. flow.

post #14 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad View Post
 

from my own experience it was more simple to apply genralizations to people for a long time, there is a comfort in knowing that a large percentage of people move the best with certain features, be it walking, skiing, standing , etc the saying goes something like "all happy families are happy for simliar reasons, but all unhappy families are unhappy for different reasons".  So it is easy to apply a protocol to training and movement development.  Fortunately, I came to the realization that is was less and less about correction, development isn't an accomplishment, its an ongoing process.  So how to tranistion someone from what they were already doing into something that is more dynamic and built on their current schema is much more challenging and enjoyable. I think it adheres well with the the findings in developmental learning and in deliberate practice techniques.

 

I appreciate the focus on movment here, but is the sequencing minutiae really so critical, how many times do we find ourselves satisfying our comfort in teaching at the expense of the person trying to learn themselves and expand themselves.

 

 

it is about running, but if you substitute the running for skiing I think it applies and captures the importance of looking at form and development differently then just hammering someone with reps.

 

http://www.runnersworld.com/race-training/the-running-machine-myth

 

The "saying" is the first sentence of Tolstoy's Anna Karenina "All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

post #15 of 15

thanks q.  Tolstoy I am not.  That sounds much better than my rendition :)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching