Special Interests

Sunday, January 31, 2016

Sunday Inspiration -- Love Never Fails

Three things collided over the last couple of days.

The first is Wisconsin Women's Basketball Coach Bobbie Kelsey's now viral rant entitled "Get Your Butt in the Gym!"



Here are the two quote I like best from this rant.
"So if people think they are going to get that on the pillowcase it's not going to happen. You can't nap your way to being a great shooter."
So often people -- especially kids -- say that excellence is something you are either born with or you are not. But true excellence is only achieved with a lot of work and practice regardless of your talents.
"And it don't have to be an hour, two hours, 20 minutes every day that's what Nicole does. 10 minutes after practice every day, that's it. Its no magic formula, no secret potions you rub on your hands."
This is exactly what I have found working with kids. Consistent bouts of short extra work goes a long way.

No we cannot all be Steph Curry, but we can all follow the pattern of excellence that the Steph Curry's show us -- daily consistent practice.

So if we know the path, then why don't more people follow it? Here is where the second part of this collision comes in.

Adam Grant in the Sunday New York Times has an excellent piece on raising creative kids linked here: How To Raise a Creative Child. Step One: Back Off -- NYT -- January 31, 2016

Grant's piece starts off with the curious mystery of child prodigies. They are amazing when they are young. Their parents celebrate their talents, but prodigies rarely ever fulfill the promise of their early talents. "Child prodigies rarely become adult geniuses who change the world." Why? It seems they become conditioned by schools, society and their families to be conformists. "Creativity may be hard to nurture but it's easy to thwart".

So what should parents do to nurture creative kids. Some studies say fewer family rules.  By limiting rules, families of creative children encourage thinking for one self. The rules that are encouraged also usually had to do with creating an ethical code. Lastly, families of creative kids certainly valued success and excellence but they really valued finding "joy in work." So these children were encouraged to "sort out their own values and discover their own interests."

Grant sites a study by psychologist Benjamin Bloom who examined the early lives of world class musicians, athletes, artists and scientists. What this study found is these world class performers had parents who responded to their intrinsic interests. "When their children showed interest and enthusiasm in a skill, the parents supported them."

Few world class performers also had early stellar coaches and training. A study of the top 10 tennis players in the world show that they all started equal with their peers. And what the majority of these now current tennis stars found from their first coaches was that they made the sport fun.

There is more to Grant's piece that is worth a read -- especially the fact that most creative contributors depend on breadth of knowledge not just depth. But here is my connection to Bobbie Kelsey's rant. To be great, there is more than just getting your "Butt in the Gym." You have to have the passion internally to see you through those many many days of what may at times seem like mindless practice to get to excellence.

You have to do it because you love it not because you are expecting any particular outcome. The activity in and of itself must be rewarding to you.

And so in a bit of irony, at church today, one of the readings was St. Paul's 1st Letter to the Corinthians 13. I have heard it hundreds of times and you can google it if you want to review the whole thing as it may be one of the most quoted verses in the Bible. But the sentence that stuck with me this morning was "Love Never Fails."

If you want to be great or just happy and satisfied in life, find an activity YOU love and devote yourself to it. Keep looking til you find it.


1 comment:

  1. Great article. I've enjoyed all I've read by you.

    I don't think the reading was irony, though. Maybe an interesting coincidence?

    ReplyDelete