Given all the recent threads on success and the 40P challenge,I thought people,it be itenrested in Noa Kageyama’s recent article about goal setting:
https://bulletproofmusician.com/if-youre-going-to-set-goals-this-is-probably-how-you-should-do-it/
Hint his article, he linked to an earlier article of his about WOOP goals, which was a new one for me (he also links to an article about SMART goals, but I’m pretty sure more people are familiar with that one)
My problem with WOOP is W: "Wish: Come up with a meaningful goal; something important to you that you’re willing to work for."
I have no idea what to wish for. Yes, I could wish that miraculously my memory would improve, that I would not be such a slow learner - but life is better when accepting reality and that includes that I need to work hard in order to learn pieces on the piano.
So what else to wish for? I don't do exams - I don't have any wish to do exams.
Yes, I do have a folder with pieces that I would like to play but are too difficult for me. I check this folder regularly to see if any piece may be possible for me, but I do that anyway.
I also have a list of pieces that (I hope) are not too difficult for me, and I will play them when I am done with my present pieces.
So, what to wish for?
*
... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...
On second thought, I do use goals, but only very short-term ones. For instance, I will play through at this tempo and catch all mistakes I make, so I can practise them separately. Or, now I'll focus on technique, in particular the end and the beginning of each phrase. Or, I will start learning to play each section a bit faster.
However, sometimes I need to change the goal, for instance when the goal is to focus on technique and I make not one but five mistakes, or I make a recurring mistake, I need to stop and take care of the mistakes first, before returning to the goal of working on technique.
I think that Noa Kageyama would call them process-oriented learning goals.
They are the only ones that makes sense to me, when I don't do life performances or exams.
*
... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...
I admittedly had a short read through both articles. My quick impression is that in the first one, the "goals" are not real goals. Passing a GPA isn't. Such a goal also does not reflect any interests (real goals) by a student - it's an externally created thing that works within an institution. the "wish" in the 2nd one actually constitutes a real goal, and it engages the student rather than being an externally imposed thing. If this worked better, then may be it is due to the nature of the 'goal". Contingency plan is logical because stuff happens. It makes sense that this would make a difference.
keystring My quick impression is that in the first one, the "goals" are not real goals. Passing a GPA isn't. Such a goal also does not reflect any interests (real goals) by a student - it's an externally created thing that works within an institution
To me, these are “outcome goals,” and as you say, are distinct from “process goals.” Achieving a particular GPA is, in my opinion, a fine goal to have. Just because it’s externally created doesn’t make it meaningless. For a high school student or college student, having a certain GPA is a necessary prerequisite for other things. For example, in our program, if a student wants to study abroad, their GPA has to be above a certain number or they simply will not be accepted to go abroad.
But without being accompanied by some process goals, it will make it harder for the person to figure out how to achieve that goal.
Maybe the GPA example isn’t the best example for our discussion here though…
To bring it back to piano, I have always had some goals, what I think of as “big picture goals,” but which are essentially outcome goals. One is to sightread well and another is to be able to perform, to play for others, without falling apart in a puddle of nerves.
Neither of these are externally created or externally motivated goals. But they are outcome goals, end points which don’t tell you how to reach the. So without process goals, I would be unlikely to get close to achieving either of them.
I think I have always made process goals for my piano playing. Somehow, instinctively, I think, I figured out very early on that what matters most is what I do every day. Then when I started a participating in piano forums, I learned more about goal setting and refined how I articulate my goals for myself, and that has continued to be beneficial.
But IMO there’s nothing wrong with a big picture goal, an outcome goal. It just has to be accompanied by some process goals in order to give the person something actionable to do while they’re plodding along in the big gulf between where they are now and where they want to be.
@ShiroKuro you put a lot of thought in your response so I took some time to try to put together my thoughts.
I'm thinking in terms of reaching things in piano or any instruments, practically or "in practice". Getting a high GPA or good grades in music might be a motivation to keep you going and doing your best. (In same case it might even cause anxiety with an undermining effect). The point is that in the act of practising, there is nothing to focus on. To learn or to gain skills, we need to focus so as to get somewhere. Your example of "sightread well", "perform without falling apart", they at least have some kind of shape to them. There is a broad thing to aim for, though I agree that it's not that specific as an aim. In the least you're mindful as you practise that you want to improve reading; playing before others and your subconscious will be guiding you this way or that - though this is weak.
I cannot see studying or practising, without having an idea of what, specifically, you are practising toward, and then also how you will do so. The GPA or high grades or successful musician are too abstract. What do you aim toward - specifically - as you practise? It seems logical to me that those students who defined their own goals, and worked toward them in a targeted manner, including having ideas of how to do it and what to do if obstacles come up, would do better.
In teaching, we had "aims and objectives" with in a teaching unit for a given subject. The aim was never "do well" or "get high grades" in general - it involved a subject area like math. though aiming to integrate with other subjects. You had a broad aim of what the students will be able to achieve by the end of that module, and then how you would reach this day by day. You subdivided into smaller tasks, smaller skills - how you would teach it, what activities the students would do to gain the skills and knowledge. As students being our own teacher when we practice (even if we have a teacher), we must look at how we will work on a given thing (process), and we also need a given thing to work on.
We may be thinking similarly but it's hard to put things into words adequately for a topic that isn't that trivial.
I think one thing that bothered me in the article (one or both) was the goal of a summer job, high grades --- what happened to wanting to learn a lot in a subject for the sake of learning the subject? This felt like external motivators: gold stars, high grades, the summer job - and distracting away from what is being studied - when the best success is if you are interested in and involved with the subject.
The second method had the students figure out what they themselves wished for. This is also a stronger motivator, because it's their own wishes, and they have connected with what those wishes are. This also creates a finer focus because of the definition and personalization. When I tutored students, often at a moment of problems, getting them to own their own learning rather than passively following the program in school, or trying to please the teacher, made a huge difference.
