Steph Curry has changed basketball by showing players and fans what should have been apparent all along: If you practice really hard and get really good, shooting a three-pointer is far more beneficial than taking a two-point shot.
Growing up in the late 80’s and 90’s, I thought the slam dunk was the most thrilling offensive move. But no matter how high a player could jump off the ground–no matter how acrobatic his trajectory–a dunk was only two points.
Of course, three-point shots have been around forever, and there have been many great shooters throughout the history of the NBA. Curry is different though. Not only has he perfected the three-point shot to almost superhuman proportions, he’s changing how other players approach the game. Further still, he’s influencing how this generation’s young people practice. Yeah, dunks still look cool, but the three-point shot is now even more cool. Better yet, you get three points instead of two.
I was thinking about this the other day in relation to education. There are a lot of two-point shots being taken. Maybe even some slam dunks and the occasional alley-oop. Looking at John Hattie’s ranking of effect sizes, these two-pointers could be any number of things:
- use of PowerPoint
- summer school
These three random examples each have less than a 0.40 effect size, so according to Hattie’s research, you’re not getting a lot of bang for your buck by using them in the pursuit for student achievement.
Just as Curry has forced basketball players to strategically think about how they can more effectively make points for their teams, Hattie is helping educators rethink how to be more effective in the classroom. Every strategy has an effect (just like every made shot within the three-point line is two points)–what’s important is using precious instructional time to choose the strategies that reap the greatest rewards. According to Hattie, these “three-point shots” are:
- teacher estimates of achievement (1.62)
- collective teacher efficacy (1.57)
- self-reported grades (1.33)