The feedback definitely helps. That’s not the point.
But even the act of sheer momentum makes a big difference.

Look at the cartoons on this blog. I’ve been drawing cartoons for about 20 years.
And yet see the difference in the cartoons in November and those in February of 2009.
I didn’t take any classes, didn’t get any feedback, and yet the brain is able to take an old brain map and create a whole new brain map.
I was surprised at the improvement, when I wasn’t even trying to improve.
And of course, you can see the improvement for yourself.

So yes, momentum alone has made the change.
But you must also remember that momentum alone is not working.
As we do stuff, our brain layers new information every day (and night) and though we may never get any direct feedback, we still are improving our ability.
And if you simply get on a bicycle and pedal away–without any feedback–your brain will resolve the balance issue over a few days/weeks.
Will feedback make the process faster? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the person giving the feedback. And how they give it. And when they give it.

So yes, it’s pretty complex.
The science is not new. The science of learning is old.
We’ve just avoided issues like momentum, and put all our faith in talent. Which is the biggest problem of all.

If you read outliers and talent is overrated then you’ll know what i’m talking about. The difference is between practicing a particular skills and having instant feedback (the pot looks awful etc)

So in this example, the person doing the 100 pot won’t necessarily be successful. He must be really engaged in practicing a particular skill in pot making..maybe how to make the shape symmetrical and then practice a lot on that…each time learning from feedbacks.

This is a very new science so I might be wrong too

Good article sean

Yes there is. If we are on the same page as regards to talent and intelligence. These are two big words that requires a lot of explanation.

You may find some of the posts here (over 35 of them) on the Myth of Talent at http://www.brainaudit.com/blog

Making 10 pots in one hour will produce 10 crappy pots. Making 1 pot in an hour will produce 1 very nice pot.

This is true, but only if you take one hour into consideration. If the same two potters worked over a month, for instance, the learning for the potter who made more pots would be better than the person who simply focused on one pot.

This is because to make 100 pots, you’d have to make a lot of mistakes. And the brain learns over time, and not immediately. In fact, the brain needs time to work things out. Which is where dreaming and time out comes into play.

In an hour, the person who makes one pot will certainly come out on top. In a month, the person who makes 100 pots will come out on top.

1) Two potters getting different results:
Yes, that’s true. Two potters will get different results. But are we comparing the potters? No we’re not. We’re simply talking about moving forward. Of improvement. Most of us are very stuck on becoming Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods. We can’t wrap our heads around improvement. If we improve by 5% or 10% in our own skills, we’ve improved. We don’t need to become a Michael Jordan.

And yes, based on the abilities, the two potters will make different pots. And of varying quality.

Also, there is a talent and intelligence to factor in. An idiot with shaky hands will never reproduce a decent work of art compared to an intelligent person with agile hands (given the same environment and time frames).

“A” grade isn’t far away