What does "show not tell" mean?

Parents Forum
101

“You better believe it, yucca10! No, I am not advocating that getting a string of 800’s should be sufficient. I think that I have made that clear on other threads. I am just saying that the 800’s should not turn MIT off.”

They definitely don’t, despite any public statements to the contrary, just look at MIT’s actions. Last class, they had 12,000 applicants with over a 750 score of which 9% got in, they got 2200 from 700-740, and 2% got in. So if your chances of getting in are 4.5 times better, it’s pretty important to MIT. Now do they quibble over 790 to 800, probably not. But they definitely care about 740 vs 800. Their acceptance rate was 0% (they took one kid), for scores below 700. Again, there are no misunderstood geniuses with a 600 Math SAT score walking around MIT. You should have a 750 on the Math SAT and a 790/800 on the SAT 2 subject tests if you want to be taken seriously there. Once you have those, then they’ll start looking at the AIME and Math Olympiad to dig deeper into your candidacy to see if you can handle the work.

102

MIT makes a very different claim on their website, as quoted below. Note that this quote is linked from the score page you reference, as an explanation of how to interpret the difference in admit rate you list:

In short it’s difficult to distinguish whether the 740 SAT score is the primary driver for the reduced chance of admission, or whether other admission criteria was the primary driver, and applicants who have that desired other criteria are more likely to also have very high SAT scores than those who do not.

103

^ Not to be confused with “preference” to an IMO medalist.

And we’re creeping off show not tell.

104

Actually, I think this is a great example of show not tell. An IMO medalist does not need a laundry list of math related EC’s, two paragraphs describing how she won her HS’s Math Prize, and a personal statement which outlines how much she really, really loves math.

105

MIT’s website stated

The quote said MIT does not prefer higher scores (above 740) and instead prefers other things that often coincide with higher scores. He lists IMO as an example, but that is far from the only criteria MIT looks for that is often correlated with higher SAT scores. Instead I’d expect the overwhelming majority of criteria MIT looks for to have some degree of correlation, albeit generally much smaller than would occur with IMO or other math-focused ECs.

106

Or maybe that IMO medalist writes a nice little essay about imagining math patterns while riding roller coasters. I read a really nice essay from a kid who got into Caltech (the same year they rejected my kid!) from a future physicist about thinking about physics while enjoying amusement park rides. It was a charming essay.

107

Story telling is the greatest way to achieve show not tell. Give examples that exemplify said qualities!

108

“In short it’s difficult to distinguish whether the 740 SAT score is the primary driver for the reduced chance of admission, or whether other admission criteria was the primary driver, and applicants who have that desired other criteria are more likely to also have very high SAT scores than those who do not.”

Despite college claims (which I usually take with a grain of salt), applicants know MIT"s preference for over 750 math scores, only 10% of applicants to MIT got less than a 750, and 15% of SAT test takers. So if MIT was really indifferent between 800 and 700, wouldn’t you see a lot more applicants in the 700-740 range? Even the MIT blogger says, hey you won’t know if you don’t apply (again, bad advice but that’s another story). But the applicants ignore this, they know you have to be 770 and above to be taken seriously there.

109

Thelonius, I think your logic is off.

Kids who score 700 on Math SAT could be the best math kid in their HS with zero interest in math and engineering, or could be the slowest kid in Honors/AP math who wants to study Renaissance Art, or kid be a kid who is passionate about theater and performance but happens to be a good math student, or a kid with an 800 verbal, 700 math who wants to study government at Georgetown and has zero interest in math.

I would not make the assumption you do- having known a LOT of 720-750 type math students- none of whom had any interest whatsoever in engineering, math, econ, architecture, etc. Why would those kids apply to MIT (and they don’t) given their interests??? Kids aren’t self- selecting out because of their SAT scores, they are self -selecting out because they have strong interests elsewhere.

110

Among applicants who submitted SAT, 25% scored below a 750 this year.

The self-selecting nature of the application pool does not indicate that one needs to “have to be 770 and above to be taken seriously.” There are a variety of reasons why students who score below 750 might not apply to MIT besides just believing they need a 770+. For example, MIT has a reputation for being one of the most rigorous engineering/CS focused colleges in the United States. The small minority of students who want to pursue this challenge and plan to pursue engineering/CS type typical MIT majors tend to score very well in math.

111

MIT had said anything with a 7 in front and they know a kid can do the work. BUT, that was said before the new SAT, where some top schools saw scores go up.
And obviously they want more of the non stats things.

But I’m not sure what this specific stats matter has to do with show not tell. Unless, that is, you want to tie this to what’s shown in other challenges, accomplishments, and the traits they want.

It’s not just stats. And just having top stats doesn’t mean you have the rest of the ability/savvy to show it.

112

“Kids who score 700 on Math SAT could be the best math kid in their HS with zero interest in math and engineering, or could be the slowest kid in Honors/AP math who wants to study Renaissance Art, or kid be a kid who is passionate about theater and performance but happens to be a good math student, or a kid with an 800 verbal, 700 math who wants to study government at Georgetown and has zero interest in math.”

I’m not talking about non-stem majors, I’m talking the stem majors who score between 700 and 740, they’re not applying to MIT but less selective colleges, MIchigan, RPI, Berkeley etc… BTW, MIT’s verbal SAT average is higher than Georgetown and many non-stem colleges and LACs, it’s one of the highest in the country at 720/770 and 35/36 (ACT English) for the middle 50%.

113

“Among applicants who submitted SAT, 25% scored below a 750 this year.”

You’re right I forgot the 690 and below group, I was referring to the 700-740 band but I did not specify that.

The self-selecting nature of MIT’s applicant pool is based on the info of the sat averages they publish and the admit rate by score range. If they did not publish those, a whole lot more would apply, thinking they had a chance. Now they know not to apply if the math is below a 700 unless you have some hook and even then the acceptance rate is zero.

MIT has said that all they care is you score above 700, yet only 2200 people applied with scores from 700-740 in Math, with 12,000 in the 750-800 range. And the number of Olympiad and ISEF and other prestigious award winners are not a lot, maybe 500 if you include semifinalists, certainly not 12,000.

114

There are indeed some students who look at score ranges and factor them in to application decisions, although the score ranges that students saw when applying this year were significantly different than the ones you mentioned due to the redesigned SAT. However, published score ranges are far from the only resign why MIT’s applicant pool is self-selecting towards strong math students. I expect that if MIT removed all published score information their wesbite, CDS, and other sources; MIT’s applicant pool would still be primarily composed of very strong math students. It’s also not a given that if some students believe they need a score of 780 for their application to be taken seriously or whatever, they know better than MIT admission officers who have published conflicting information on MIT’s website.

Correlation is not the same as causation, and the different tests and subtests all show somewhat different correlation relationships. For example, the admit rate for ACT Math 34-36 was 9%, while that admit rate for ACT Math 31-33 was 6%. 31-33 corresponds to 710 to 750. That’s a relatively small difference in admit rate that I expect could almost be fully explained by other components of the application that are correlated with ACT score, rather than the score itself. These other criteria that MIT values and components of the application that are correlated with score includes far more than just “Olympiad and ISEF and other prestigious award winners.” The new SAT design this year contributes to the apparently larger difference in admit rate for SAT bands than ACT bands, but does not from fully explain it. It’s possible that MIT favors less than equivalent of 7x0 scores on ACT more than SAT, but I think it’s far more likely that submitting ACT rather than SAT has some degree of correlation with other traits or admission characteristics MIT values. The reasons correlations exist are not always obvious.

115

I, then an immigrant to US for 6 years, had 790 in SAT math and did not like math at all, and did horribly in engineering in college, until I transferred to English Lit major and then I got almost all As at an Ivy without trying hard. My college advisor thought I would flunk out from English Classes when I began, and it did take me one English Lit class to figure out how to write “A” level essays. SAT math is horrible at measuring how good you are in math.

I learned to make creative, persuasive arguments from English Lit classes, and despite my 3.0 college gpa, I argued on my law school application that I would have gotten 4.0 gpa had I started off as an English Lit major but I explored various classes to find out what I was good at instead of focusing solely on grades, and this trait would enable me to make a good attorney; and behold, I was accepted to a top 5 law school but passed that up for a free tuition economic scholarship from a top 25 law school while staying at my parents’ house. What gpa did I get from law school? 2.9 gpa. And I went to become a good attorney who did pretty well for my clients and myself.

116

The math SAT covers simple and basic (by MIT standards) multiple choice questions in algebra, geometry, and understanding data. In the most recent exam, if you made 3 careless errors, you’d get a 720. You need to be consistent and relatively fast on this type of simple multiple choice question to get a top score. This type of exam is of course nothing like the MIT math placement exam or likely any math exam that is given in any MIT class. MIT math instead emphasize a small number of challenging and complex questions that are not multiple choice . Many classes emphasize proofs. While it’s important to know basic algebra/geometry, and being consistent without careless errors is a good skill; the score alone is a not a good measure of how prepared you are for MIT classes. Instead I expect it more flags a minority of applicants who may lack some basic (by MIT standards) math skills.

The MIT application has a spot to list AMC/AIME scores (or at least it used to). These exams at least have a higher ceiling, so it’s less about consistency. However, they still are very different from MIT exams. Instead the traits that predict success at MIT and beyond involve far more than any combination of scores. As such, it’s not surprising that MIT looks for far more than scores in their admission decisions, and claims to not have an extremely high score threshold that requires near perfect consistency. This fits in to the whole idea of “showing not telling”… showing might involve accomplishing something impressive in field of interest out of the classroom. beyond just getting a high score on a simple test. These accomplishments might show a variety of criteria values, including character ones described at http://mitadmissions.org/apply/process/match – collaboration/cooperation, risk-taking, initiative, creativity, etc. IMO is one example, but it’s far from the only one that MIT values.

117

It doesn’t need to be accomplishing something particularly impressive.

The link buzzwords are vision (which is much more than your career goals or seeking some big contest win,) activation, collaboration and some testing of the usual limits. And more.

A quality candidate can “show” that, it’s more than stats and awards. It helps to realize ordinary in-the-box/tops in my high school isn’t enough. At their level, how you think comes through in choices over the hs years. Or not. And then how you pull together your app. Or not.

118

Useful post, lookingforward. I appreciate your listing of vision, activation, collaboration, and limit-testing. Next, applicants need to think about how they can highlight one or more of these in their personal statements, without having paragraphs that obviously boil down to 1) introduction, 2) vision, 3) activation, 4) collaboration, 5) limit-testing, and 6) conclusion. I would imagine that a pretty effective personal statement that “shows” could be written by keeping these points in mind. This assumes that the applicant can come up with something to show, of course.

119

"It doesn’t need to be accomplishing something particularly impressive.
The link buzzwords are vision (which is much more than your career goals or seeking some big contest win,) activation, collaboration and some testing of the usual limits. And more.

A quality candidate can “show” that, it’s more than stats and awards. It helps to realize ordinary in-the-box/tops in my high school isn’t enough. At their level, how you think comes through in choices over the hs years. Or not. And then how you pull together your app. Or not."

I disagree with this, awards mean a lot to MIT and Harvard and Stanford as well. These awards are not best in HS, they’re best in the country, if not the world. When MIT looks at an applicant’s grades and ECs, they predict from that, what the applicant can do or contribute. When they win an award, no prediction is needed, they have direct evidence of talent. This from their page for suggestions to kids in high school:

From MIT:

“If you are seriously interested in MIT, you probably think math and science are serious fun. We offer this abbreviated list of some remarkable competitions, fairs, summer programs, organizations and websites that will challenge your imagination and powers of analysis, connect you with other young people who dare to enjoy science and math, and help you prepare for the rigor and excitement of MIT.”

International Science Olympiads and qualifying competitions

Science & Invention Fairs/Competitions

Robotics

etc…

MIT says, these are remarkable, what more evidence do you need that these are really really important to them. ECs, essays are less important, really they are.

120

Awards are NOTwhat gets you into MIT, Harvard or Stanford. (The exception being those few hundred Bright Minds H will take with less of the usual vetting.)

No. “…this abbreviated list of some remarkable competitions, fairs, summer programs, organizations and websites that will challenge your imagination and powers of analysis, connect you with other young people who dare to enjoy science and math, and help you prepare for the rigor and excitement of MIT.” is NOT a hint at formula.

Not at all. It’s a list of some enriching experiences. In NO way does it say it is determinative, on its own.

In fact, don’t count on science fairs advancing one, if that’s one of the highlights.

ECs are ongoing choices, commitments that represent thinking. The essay is a big part of showing one can think and be relevant. Really.

“Remarkable” isn’t it. All sorts of things are remarkable, without offering any pull.