What does "show not tell" mean?

Parents Forum
141

GJ, sometimes kids can grasp the essay style if they can see it as if writing to some trusted adult to recount something. In a letter (ish,) you wouldn’t over-do details, try to recreate the complete reality of every “Then he said…and I answered…” Rather, just enough to set the scene and express what needs to be shared. Nor overstate a position a or look for some grand denoument.

Written storytelling may not be as necessary in many careers. But it does come up as verbal communications skill. In the essay, the story is the vehicle.

Btw, by droned, I meant the rubric is emphasized over other styles, over and over, and they may be graded on it. I guess they feel it’s important, but many kids become too beholden to it, want to start even the college essay with a thesis statement, go on to proofs.

142

Well, my daughter loves proofs! It isn’t surprising that she loves science and philosophy. We’ll find a way to make it all work in an essay somehow.

In the end, I doubt any of our kids are going to be shut out of college because of a less then stellar essay.

I really just think everyone should have a bit of compassion for the kids who find this part challenging. Its so easy to assume that the things you are good at, or that your kids are good at, are easy and that everyone should be able to do them.

143

Remember, it’s only the most cometitive colleges that expect so much from the personal statement. In a way, if you want in, you do need to do what it takes. Ask her how she would feel about trying the essay (drafts) as a recounting to someone she knows, older, more sharing than analytical.

Yes, it’s hard for kids. By 17, most only know the formats and structures in their high schools. It’s ok to take a breath and relax into this, even have some fun.

Personally, I love legal writing, the complexity and precision.

144

I always said my oldest kid’s essay was good for an engineer, and I think that’s how it got judged. But really verbal skills, schmoozing all that stuff - the most successful scientists I know always had those qualities in spades - along with the science piece.

145

I would like to be permitted to post here the comment in full that I made on the Harvard-athlete-admissions thread, please, even though it is not exactly on topic on this thread, because calmom has remarked that I was misquoting and misconstruing the Harvard statement. Here is the entire quotation of mine, from the other thread:

"I took another look at the Harvard admissions link provided by LadyMeowMeow, and again, wow! What baloney! Students “who will be the best educators of . . . their professors!” In physics, at the undergraduate level, that is pretty much guaranteed to be the null set. [Inserted comment: Yes, it does have “of one another” ahead of “and their professors.” That is what the ellipsis represents. But the writer used “and.”]

Not everything has to be about physics–it’s not as if I think that it does. But generic statements ought to be generically applicable, or they ought to be qualified.

The questions [Inserted comment: the questions on the Harvard admissions site linked by LadyMeowMeow on the other thread] would make for an entertaining parlor game for adults, though.

At the moment, the sort of human being I am is “bemused.”

End of quotation

Connection to “show, not tell”: If a prospective Harvard physics major writes about looking forward to being an educator of his/her professors, this will get nowhere with anyone who knows anything about physics. It’s a trap.

The idea that through questions or a different perspective an undergrad could educate the faculty is essentially fiction, with regard to the physics professors at Harvard (with regard to the grad student teaching fellows, it could be possible). I know of a single instance in physics, in which an undergrad did in fact “educate the faculty,” and that was Brian Josephson, who later won the Nobel Prize for the prediction of the Josephson junction–but he did not do that as an undergrad, as far as I know. Rather his undergrad work had to do with the Mossbauer effect (o umlaut).

I grant that in other areas, a student may bring life experiences or a different perspective that may in fact be novel and educational to a faculty member at Harvard. But in the STEM areas, mostly not. In any event, I have never heard any of my Harvard colleagues talk about anything they had learned from an undergrad–nor for that matter from a grad student or a post-doc.

146

And “Amen” to post #141by gallentjill!

147

Also, looking forward’s post #140 is actually helpful.

148

Since my comments have been taken apart by calmom, I would really like to be permitted to add: I did not interpret a student’s being one of the “best educators . . . of their professors” in physics to mean that the student knew more than the professor in any cumulative sense. I interpreted it to mean that there could be any slice of a topic on which a student knew anything that the professor did not, or about which a student could even ask a question that the professor had not heard dozens of times before (by the time the professor became a Harvard Physics Professor).

It’s not as if this comment is buried somewhere on Harvard’s page. It’s right near the top.

Nor do I use “humble” to mean lacking in ambition. I use “humble” to mean that the applicant does not have an inflated sense of self-worth or accomplishment. I think a truly humble applicant might ask him or herself, “Why would I be better to admit to Harvard than 2,500 other eager applicants?” And a truly humble person would almost certainly conclude that he/she would not be better.

This does not mean that the person is lacking in ambition, just that the person is lacking in the Harvard man/woman’s sense of self.

149

Far too literal.
“a prospective Harvard physics major writes about looking forward to being an educator of his/her professors-” Stop, do not pass Go.

The entire (underlying) focus of this thread is “show, not tell.” Not telling you wish to educate anyone. Not at 17, not for a tippy top, not that lack of thinking, perspective and more. Any academic field. Not good. Not the intent, as a few posters have clarified.

The buzz phrase is that he or she will “add to the conversation.” You can show this potential. Certainly not claim it. Totally off.

Many profs do enjoy that sort of engaged, alert student, who has taken breadth beyond assignments and conventional education. It’s part of the intellectual climate a top U hopes to foster. And, as with many traits, IRL, a compliment to be bestowed on you, not self claimed. Yo!

Same with humility. It’s often a perspective and often accompanied by a willingness to do for or with others. A realistic, mature awareness that you are not superior, not you the 17 year old. Again, it either comes through or not.

It has zip to do with ambition.

@LeastComplicated Ihope you find something in this long discusson helpful.

150

Calmom’s post 137 is spot on. The H ‘what we look for’ is a list of thinking points, not a literal ‘you must be this.’ There is no one "this.’ It’s not a check list. They expect their bright candidates to be able to ponder the points, put them in proper perspective.

Sure, lots of kids can’t. Which brings to mind all this fuss and muss about freaking stats and how stats alone should form the class in this way or that. It doesn’t work that way.

This head banging, looking for formula, is just off.

151

Yes, much of the input has been very helpful, thank you everyone.

My kid is pretty average by CC standards, so the discussions concerning the tippy tops weren’t applicable, but the information will hopefully help her put together a stronger application.

152

In your views, why is Harvard encouraging students to think from the get-go that they will “educate” their professors as well as their fellow students? And what does that imply for the types of personal statements that applicants should write? I get it this much: the applicants can’t out-and-out say that they intend to educate their professors (that would be too much “telling”), but how exactly would they show that they intend to “educate” their professors? And is it a sign of weakness for applicants to take the humble attitude that they would like to “learn” from their professors, as well as their fellow students? I hope not.

There is a famous old saying, “You can always tell a Harvard man, but you can’t tell him much.” It seems to me that the Harvard marketing line–near the top of the admissions page in question–is encouraging that attitude right from the get-go, before the applicant has even been accepted.

Aside from that, I would think that a student who managed to think of a good anecdote that indicates that he/she has learned from fellow students at the high school level, or perhaps in special summer programs, or in other circumstances (debate tournaments, for example) would have a good topic for “showing.” Maybe the key is for the student to be less self-centered, when reading the line that Harvard wants to admit students who will be the best educators of their fellow students, and flip it around to think, “Oh, I could be educated by a select group of fellow students,” and then write the essay from that slant (with lots of showing).

It is an interesting phenomenon to me that quite a lot of the marketing of the top schools proclaims how much a student will learn from fellow students, and rather little proclaims how much a student will learn from the faculty. It makes me wonder whether the collective “Professors Glorious” at the school never teach undergrads. At Caltech, I do know that Richard Feynman taught the introductory physics sequence. Once. (That’s as I understand it–Caltech grads may know better.)

In connection with #148, of course, faculty members do enjoy working with “engaged, alert students” who “have taken breadth beyond assignments.” A student who comes to my office hours intending to “educate” me would be better than a student who comes to ask for a few more points to move a B+ to an A-. But the student who wants the extra points is more likely to accomplish his/her intended “mission,” just going by the probabilities.

153

Quant, you are being very literal in your interpretation of what is meant metaphorically.

I suspect that Harvard is making the point that they are not trying to recreate a medieval “guild” comprised of apprentices, journeymen, senior elders, etc. The hierarchy at Harvard (and any other college) is clear- professors are there to teach, research, preserve, innovate. Students are there to learn. But (and I think this is the point that you are missing) to present yourself as a passive (albeit eager) recipient of what a professor is imparting to you is NOT a winning ticket.

That’s it. No deeper meaning. They don’t expect a 17 year old to revolutionize genetics, or an 18 year old to have insights on Tolstoy which completely change the meaning of the canon, or a 19 year old to lead an analysis of census data which up-ends how we think about the Great Society and whether LBJ was successful or not at moving the needle on multigenerational poverty.

But they DO expect students to be more than just passive and quiet sponges sitting in a seminar room soaking up wisdom. That’s how professors learn from their students- the back and forth.

Got it?

And you are totally overthinking the “marketing” on how much you will learn from your fellow students. I showed up at age 17 to college and shared a bathroom with a young woman whose parents were missionaries. That was new to me. The guy on the next floor grew up in a rural coal town and was the first person in his community to go to college- and he raised the bus fare to get there because his pastor ran a series of bake sales in his honor. That was learning. There were kids just in my freshman dorm whose life experiences were utterly and completely different from mine.

That’s the learning. Going off to dinner at the dining hall every night with people whose upbringings were very different and finding common ground, bonding over what you were learning and studying, rather than in HS where you bonded over who went to which junior high and who was a geek vs. a cool kid.

154

My freshman year roommate was a Bengali who had to escape across the Pakistani border. Her mother was German she was living in Paris - there was lots to learn from her. My best lab partner was a from the midwest and was the first person in her high school to go out of state to college.

But you know for my senior thesis I wrote about low cost housing in London and Berlin and Paris. My two advisors knew something about the more famous works in my thesis, but I also spent time in the archives learning about 19th century tenements in London and contemporary projects in the Paris banlieus. I don’t think either of my professors knew as much as I did about it, by the time I was done with my research. I also translated a book about indigenous housing in Senegal for one of my profs - so I knew more about the subject than he did until I provided him with the translation! My senior year roommate did her senior thesis research on immigration from Brittany to Canada and the US - it ended up being the basis for her PhD thesis. No one had studied that stuff before. It’s not all about science.

I agree with Blossom though that you are taking the statement far too literally. You just want students who aren’t boring!

155

I don’t know–I think that it is fair to take the leading elements of a college’s web site at face value, without complaints that it is overly literal to do so. Also, it is my opinion that writers often reveal something about their underlying thinking in what they choose to write. I think Harvard admissions staffers actually expect the students they admit to “educate” their professors. I like my metaphors more literary, more evocative, or at least more obviously metaphorical. (Shields up, Mr. Sulu! :slight_smile: )

mathmom makes a good point, and in fact I have written elsewhere that the first-year students I teach have the prospect of becoming the world’s expert in some topic within five to six years. So it might seem that I think that they can all educate everyone in five to six years. I suppose I am drawing a distinction between adding to the world’s store of knowledge and thus becoming the world’s expert in an area (which is certainly possible) versus actually “educating” someone else, which I would view as necessarily more transformative in nature.

There is a question that appears from time to time on psychology exams, noting that “learning” results in a change in behavior, and asking the students to explain what they have learned in the class, on those grounds.

If a professor took a student’s senior thesis and revised his/her thinking in an area, or started a new line of inquiry based on something that the student had opened up, to me that would be different from just being offered more information on a topic.

Is anyone applying anywhere indicating that he/she hopes to be a passive lump sitting in a classroom? Actually, an essay of that type might be rather humorous.

Learning based on encountering people with different life stories from one’s own–I would think that could be done anywhere, and one would not need to be at a top school to do it. As a freshman at a college that does not excite a lot of interest on CC, my spouse roomed with a man who grew up on a large turkey farm in Japan. We both got to know teaching assistants from Greece quite well. I got to know a man who became one of the Vietnamese boat people. There is a significant international presence at a very large number of American universities. I visited people in Appalachian towns when I was in elementary school, continuing through high school. If one wanted to learn what it is like to be poor in America or outside the US, there are many universities where the other students can convey that more effectively and in greater number than the students at Harvard. On the other hand, if one wanted to know what it is like to be rich in America . . .

We had to go to a rather prestigious university to encounter Benazir Bhutto (or anyone else who became as prominent later) so there is that.

156

QM, you’re a scientist. Don’t assume the first thing or first impression is some magic proof. That’s the first thing Iwas always taught, from hs on.

This thread isn’t about any one person’s continued confusion and assumptions or hypotheticals.

Go back, if needed, and check calmom’s and blossom’s posts. The H WWLF is thinking points. Are you the sort who will enhance the classroom experience for all. (It does not literally mean lecturing, bringing a slide show, making handouts or showing up with cookies.)

If a kid doesn’t understand, the liklihood they don’t get the rest of it, don’t match, is high.

It doesn’t matter where a roomie comes from. The examples were given to show how various interactons can enhance our experience. The implication is that we, in turn, can do the same for others.

The examples were meant to get oine to think a bit analytically, not literally or reactively.

The whole pointis it’s hard to get into a tippy top. It’s not high school. H shares some of it’s approach. Again, not formula. Not to have anyone micro-focus on one phrase.

157

“That’s it. No deeper meaning. They don’t expect a 17 year old to revolutionize genetics, or an 18 year old to have insights on Tolstoy which completely change the meaning of the canon, or a 19 year old to lead an analysis of census data which up-ends how we think about the Great Society and whether LBJ was successful or not at moving the needle on multigenerational poverty.”

Research clearly shows that the greatest output happens during adolescence, i.e.16-26, when the brain has the highest processing power. They may get recognized in the 40s or 50s, but their ideas came in the late teens, early 20s. Einstein published relativity at 26, so he probably had a pretty good idea at 21-22. Mozart, Lennon, McCartney, same thing. Steve Jobs revolutionized user design in his early to mid 20’s. We’re talking once in a generation, maybe once in a century figures, but that’s whom Harvard wants. Also, these people were not really the humblest of people, they had an edge for sure.

158

“Learning based on encountering people with different life stories from one’s own”

That’s overrated in stem, you learn by solving problems (as coloradomama and other posters point out), and maybe looking at problems a different way, but that’s not going to be dependent on different life stories. Dividing by zero is bad, you’re not going to sit around a classroom arguing that regardless of your background. You can argue that different life stories can help learning outside the classroom.

159

The issue with top selectives looking for students to know that they shouldn’t take the college’s published marketing literature literally and that they should do the work to discover the secret handshake is that different students have different resources and backgrounds. A process that uses in essence a secret code to weed out the “unfit” is only reasonable and fair if all parties have a reasonable shot at discovering the code if they are smart enough and do the work. Poor kids, kids who go to failing schools, kids who don’t have good GC or parental help, foreign kids, heck - even kids from certain regions of the US aren’t even aware there is a secret code so they don’t even know to be doing the work to figure it out.

No wonder so many of the top private selective colleges are becoming playgrounds of the wealthy, athletes and children of the connected - they’re the only ones who even know there is a game to be played much less get assistance learning how to play it. The rest of the kids - no matter how smart/unique/hardworking - are just keeping their heads down, getting good grades, getting good test scores and like dummies following the literal advice and BS pontification of the elite schools and then wondering why they don’t get in.

The way top selective schools use a mysterious process to preserve the secrecy of their inner workings is elitist and distateful. Even worse, they use their reputation to justify the process and rely on the ignorance of the masses to employ techniques that cult leaders use and keep people believing in something that is clearly untrue. It’s BS to rig the process to favor one group and then sadly explain that although they’d truly love to admit more outsiders those darn outsiders just aren’t a fit, don’t get it, aren’t stretchy enough, didn’t believe…

It is well within the rights of private colleges to select students using whatever legal basis they choose. But it is extremely hypocritical, elitist and frankly dishonest to employ a secret process that clearly produces one result while publicly exclaiming their desire for another. The shoe fits - they should wear it instead of acting like they have no idea whose ugly thing that is.

160

BTW, it’s an interesting exercise to see how hypocritical the colleges are by substituting subjects in the responses posted in this thread.

The methods and standards the colleges use to judge applicants are clearly not what colleges themselves are following in their work product. Students are required to show not tell, every small point on their brief app is scrutinized, small inconsistencies in an app can get that app tossed in the reject pile, statements that don’t make sense are viewed as flawed thinking… yet colleges can imply, colleges can make statements that are not consistent with the college’s actions, colleges can state things that are patent nonsense yet expect students to parse them for some deeper meaning.

Again, private colleges have the absolute right to admit who they choose as long as they don’t use illegal criteria such as discrimination. The issue isn’t the right of the college to choose, the issue is the incredible hypocrisy in how the colleges expect students to act versus how they themselves act. It’s an issue of character. Veritas indeed.