# data[].attributes.body
Gladwell mentions that once a person bypasses a certain IQ, however much higher their IQ is no longer matters as long as they are “good enough”. Is it possible that a similar theory can apply to parent income in relation to their parenting methods? For example, is there a visible difference in parenting method between middle-class and high-class parents that drastically affects the child’s success? Or does it not matter as long as they are not low-class and thus doesn’t engage in the parenting style that makes the child more likely to achieve success?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with harmony that Gladwell isn't trying to promote equality. I think he is just trying to point of the advantages some receive. He is trying to prove that most successful people are successful because of there opportunities. He also is stating that it is almost impossible to make people receive the same opportunities. Their will always be unfair and he wants be to recognize that those unfair advantages are why successful people are successful.

# data[].attributes.body
I think there is a threshold to the 10,000 hour rule. Once you reach the 10,000 hour rule you are defined as skilled artist or player. It’s just like how when you reach a 130 IQ you reach a limit to what IQ number matters. With the 10,000 hour rule when you are good at something you are good so no matter if you practiced 5,000 hours more you still just as good as the person who practiced 10,000 hour instead of 15,000. Just like the IQ a smart person is a smart person, just like skill level a talented person is talented person wherever one is slightly better then the other.

# data[].attributes.body
Would ones parenting style effect whether someone reaches the 10,000 hour rule?

# data[].attributes.headline
Gladwell makes the claim “So what do you do if you’re an athletic young Czech with the misfortune to have been born in the last part of the year? You can’t play soccer” (Gladwell 31). Do you agree with Gladwell's idea that you lack opportunities if you are born at a certain time of year or do you just think his claim is a discouragement to those who are young for their age group?

# data[].attributes.subject
Gladwell makes the claim “So what do you do if you’re an athletic young Czech with the misfortune to have been born in the last part of the year? You can’t play soccer” (Gladwell 31). Do you agree with Gladwell's idea that you lack opportunities if you are born at a certain time of year or do you just think his claim is a discouragement to those who are young for their age group?

# data[].attributes.body
Does parenting-style influence a person just when they are a child or throughout their entire life?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Paroma’s idea that multiple factors together outweigh single factors. In the chapter 10,000 hours on page 41, Gladwell comments “late born prodigies don’t get chosen for the all star team as an 8 year old because he is too small”. In accordance with Gladwell’s comment he states that “without this 10,000 hours under his belt, there is no way he can ever master his skills necessary to play at the top level” (Gladwell 41). These ideas combined go to prove how opportunity, timing of birth, and hours of practice all go hand in hand with each other. In order to achieve mastery and success you have to have all the factors come into perfect play for you. The timing goes to prove how some are lucky in order to have the perfectly timed opportunities to put in the work needed to succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
When you have an IQ of 180 it is too high to still retain practical intelligence and an IQ of 130 is the perfect range of intelligence. Is there a similar hindrance with going over the threshold of 10,000 hours of practice?

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the least important factor to success is relative age because there are options to reclassify to a younger age group in order to have an advantage in maturity.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Paroma that Gladwell cherry-picks his anecdotes/sources in order to further establish his point. I think that the sources he provides do prove his points, but they are very uncommon in the real world. He states instances where people with the right opportunities have succeeded but disregards when people we self-made in their success. There are countless instances where people who weren’t always provided with the right opportunities became successful through their hard work.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with what Finn says about how poorness and if your really want to be successful but to add on, the determination of a person determines more if they want to be successful rather then the opportunities or luck they have at their sport.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with the idea that there is such thing as a self made person. With the factors that Gladwell talks about throughout the book, it makes it hard to believe that the term “self made” is even a true term. Although talent has a part to play into success, you also have to have opportunities, timing, work ethic, and preparation. You usually don’t have all of these factos without someone giving you those factors, making you not self made. Also, Gladwell in Chapter 5, page 105, he contrasts “the working class and poor children” being characterized by “‘an emerging sense of distance, distrust, and constraint’”, meaning that it does matter where you come from, and you don’t make it on your own.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Max that in becoming successful, it is largely reliant on being self-made. I think that there are some outside factors that can either help or hurt you but it is extremely reliant on what work that you put in yourself. Someone could be granted all of the right opportunities, but not have the proper work ethic. You still need to apply 10000 hours of practice in order to achieve mastery.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with Grants claim on question two that there is a self made person because in chapter one Gladwell states that “People don’t rise from nothing” and that successful people “owe something to parentage and patronage”(Gladwell 19). I think that people do not realize the hidden factors that have helped them become successful.

# data[].attributes.body
I found that throughout “Outliers”, Gladwell challenged his audience to reevaluate how parents should raise their children, how employers build workplaces, and how society continues to live out their lives. Do you believe Gladwell provides society hope that change can come as long as they practice long enough, and that they too can be an outstanding example of success?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Jake’s statement of IQ reaching a point of diminishing once it reaches 130. On page 79, Gladwell says that “additional IQ points doesn’t seem to translate into any measurable real-world advantage”. This presents that IQ can only get you so far in life, but you have to have practical intelligence mixed in as well.

# data[].attributes.body
My question was do you agree with Gladwell when he states that “We are too much in awe of those who succeed and far too dismissive of those who fail” and what point was he trying to get across? (Gladwell chapter 1 page 32).

# data[].attributes.body
Does Gladwell have any bias in his work? Did he add any hidden rhetorical choices that shows he has bias towards ideas he is presenting or shows a hidden reason for why and how he is presenting information in a specific way?

# data[].attributes.body
The question posed by jake

Why does Gladwell insist that IQ is not the determining factor in one's ability to achieve success?

Gladwell insists that IQ isn’t the determining factor in success because it also takes practical skills to gain the opportunity to use your IQ. Gladwell suggests that there is a threshold to IQ, a person with a 160 IQ is not automatically smarter than another person with a 150 IQ, making success equally obtainable above an established threshold. This claim suggests that elite programs like law school should use a lottery system for the candidates above the threshold, because they all have the same ability to succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the idea shared by Harmony that Gladwell is not trying to promote equality with Outliers. I also believe that another layer to this idea is that while he is not trying to promote equality, Gladwell is promoting the idea that by disregarding people who do not seem "ahead" earlier in life, society is losing out on being more successful as a whole. In the Matthew Effect, Gladwell explores this idea with the examples of young kids playing hockey that are not chose for all star teams often times quit before they have a chance to become professional, depriving society of success in this field. Also, in the education system, children who are not advanced in early years are often on a trajectory to not be as successful as those who are "advanced".

# data[].attributes.body
Gladwell explains that there are a lot of factors that gop into becoming successful- do you think that there are some factors that outweighs the others?

# data[].attributes.body
After reading Outliers and understanding Gladwell’s claims about success, how do you think Gladwell came to be successful based on his claims?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Braeden and Henry that there isn’t the same type of threshold with 10,000 hours of practice as there is with IQ. I believe that more practice makes a person even better than someone who has practiced less even if both people have practiced over 10,000 hours.

# data[].attributes.body
To answer John’s question on if there is a threshold of how many hours of work can be put in to be a master of that skill. Even if you go over the 10,000 you’re just refining a skill and that will always make you even a little bit better.

# data[].attributes.body
Do you believe that Gladwell’s 10,000 hour rule is accurate in determining what it takes to become elite in a field? Is there more to it than a large amount of hours and can someone gain more success in how they spend those hours?

# data[].attributes.body
In addition to the opportunities one receives, how does the character of a person comparatively contribute to their success?

Gladwell focuses on how external factors such as birthdays, opportunities, social class, etc.  contribute to an individual's success more than sheer talent alone. This leads me to wonder the extent to which a person's character in addition to external circumstances, or alone, contributes to their success.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Evie and Braeden that age and cut off date has a lasting effect. There is lots of evidence to prove it exists and there is a bias to older kids. At first these kids start off a little taller, older, and stronger and then they are given far more opportunities and that makes them more successful.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the idea that the inner circle was discussing that opportunity and luck both play a large role in success. On page 46, Gladwell highlights the examples of Bill Joy’s numerous opportunities which contributed to their success. I believe that other factors, such as talent, genetics, and work ethic, also largely impact the success of a person.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading The Outliers, do you view your success or failure as something out of control? Do you agree or disagree with how he explains it almost as luck?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Max that though a lot of factors to success are dependent on luck, that doesn’t mean that successful people don’t put in hard work. Like how Bill Gates was given many opportunities he did something with them and practiced for his 10,000 hours.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with what Max started with because there really are opportunities, and special cultures and situations that put you in better places for success. You aren’t the person you are without culture, and you can’t get to where you are without opportunity.

# data[].attributes.body
Does Gladwell believe there is a defined true path or way to success? Can somebody guarantee themselves success in their respective fields, or is all success defined by factors outside of someone’s control?

# data[].attributes.headline
Title your Sticky Note with your Full Name

# data[].attributes.subject
Title your Sticky Note with your Full Name

# data[].attributes.body
Add either a thought provoking question for others to respond to OR Add, Link, or Challenge something a peer has said in class.