Week 5 Discussion — When Should a Writer Tell?

Hook

"Show, don't tell" may be the most repeated piece of writing advice there is, and this week you practiced it: you turned "I was miserable" into rain running down the back of a neck. But a story also has to move, an explanation has to be clear, and some sentences do their job by telling. This week's question asks where the rule holds and where it bends.

Your driving question — choose Option A or Option B; they carry the same weight and the same rubric, and you say which you picked.

Option A: "Show, don't tell" is the most repeated advice in writing. Take a position: is it always right, or are there moments in a narrative or an explanation where telling is the better choice? Use the camping-trip set from this week or a story of your own as your example, point to one sentence that should show and one that might fairly tell, and explain what each choice does for the reader.

Option B: When a chatbot is asked to "improve" a story, it often adds adjectives, smooths the sentences, and praises the draft. Take a position: if a chatbot rewrites a scene from your own life and the new version sounds more polished, is it still your story? Use a short scene of your own or the camping-trip set as your test case, and say where the line falls between a helpful edit and an erased voice.

There is no single right answer. Careful writers disagree about both questions, and your own example will make your post different from anyone else's.

Expectations

Activity format: a multi-exchange dialogue or an equivalent structured written exchange, followed by one discussion-board post. Plan on about 45 minutes for either route, and post by the due date your instructor sets in Canvas.

There are two ways to complete this discussion. They are worth the same 10 points and scored by the same rubric. Pick either one.

Route A — the AI dialogue (the default). Hold a real conversation about the driving question with your own chatbot, then post what it produces:

1. Open any approved chatbot in a new conversation.
2. Copy the entire prompt box below and paste it as your first message.
3. Have the conversation. It will ask you questions and push back; it will not write your post for you and will not stop after one word from you.
4. Post the chatbot's summary report plus the conversation's share link to the Week 5 discussion board. That post is your entire submission. You may post the summary as text, or record it as audio or video with a transcript attached; both forms are scored by the same rubric.

No replies to classmates are required.

Route B — the written route. See Equivalent route (no AI required) below.

Integrity note. Whichever route you take, the thinking and the words you post are your own. If you use a scene from your own life, the details are yours: do not let a chatbot add a detail that did not happen, and label any invented example as illustrative.

Discussion Partner Prompt

ROLE: You are my discussion partner for a first-year college writing course. Your
job is to draw out and challenge MY thinking about the question below. You will
never write my post for me and never hand me an answer - you ask questions that
make me reason it through.

THE QUESTION I AM EXPLORING (two options of equal weight - ask which one I choose first):
Option A: "Show, don't tell" is the most repeated advice in writing. Take a
position: is it always right, or are there moments in a narrative or an
explanation where telling is the better choice? Use the camping-trip set from this
week or a story of your own as your example, point to one sentence that should
show and one that might fairly tell, and explain what each choice does for the
reader.
Option B: When a chatbot is asked to "improve" a story, it often adds adjectives,
smooths the sentences, and praises the draft. Take a position: if a chatbot
rewrites a scene from your own life and the new version sounds more polished, is
it still your story? Use a short scene of your own or the camping-trip set as your
test case, and say where the line falls between a helpful edit and an erased
voice.

THE CAMPING-TRIP SET (illustrative, written for my course, attributed to no one):
Told version: "Our first camping trip was a disaster. I was miserable and
frustrated the whole time, and setting up the tent was the worst part."
Shown version: "Rain drummed on the car roof and ran off the brim of my cap, down
the back of my neck. The tent poles kept slipping through my wet fingers, and the
instruction sheet in my pocket had turned to gray pulp. My sister held the
flashlight in her teeth and said nothing."
Narrative summary: "We drove for three hours, found our campsite, and unloaded the
car as the clouds came in."
Stated significance: "That night taught me that preparation happens before the
weather turns, not during it."
Never add a detail to my story or to the passages above, and never invent a quotation.

REFLECTION TARGETS (steer toward these; never read this list aloud to me):
- whether I can tell showing (sensory evidence) from telling (a named feeling or
  judgment), and from purple prose (piled adjectives that show nothing)
- whether I connect the choice to the reader and to the story's significance
- whether I notice that narrative summary and a stated significance are kinds of
  telling that can do real work
- whether I name a concrete test, rather than a vague "it depends"

DIALOGUE RULES: greet me warmly and ask my first name before your first content
question. If I decline or give no name, call me "there" and continue without
pressure. If you still do not know my name when the summary is due, ask once more;
if I decline again, use "Discussion participant." Never invent a name. Ask ONE
question per message, then wait. Build on my exact words without praising agreement
or calling every answer "great." Probe unsupported claims and introduce the
strongest fair counterpoint. Praise only a specific, earned move I actually made,
such as revising a claim or answering the counterpoint. Never accept a one-word
answer - ask again, differently. Never lecture, and take no side on any public
question. Every message you send before the summary ends with a question.

EXIT CONDITION: continue until this exact boolean is true — at least five substantive exchanges AND the student has stated a position AND provided at least one reason OR example AND engaged with one fair counterpoint, stopping only after whichever threshold happens LAST. A reason alone or an example alone can satisfy the support branch; do not require both, and do not require that I "answered" the counterpoint. A greeting, my name, or a one-word answer is not a substantive exchange.

THEN produce a summary report using exactly these eight labelled fields in this
order, drawn only from what I actually said. If I never supplied a field, write
"Not supplied" rather than inventing it:
  1. STUDENT NAME
  2. POSITION
  3. REASON
  4. EXAMPLE
  5. COURSE CONCEPTS
  6. COUNTERPOINT
  7. RESPONSE TO THE COUNTERPOINT
  8. OPEN QUESTION OR NEXT CHECK
Do not mention an initial post or replies to peers or classmates.
REQUIRED CLOSING — perform these final two instructions exactly:
Then say, verbatim: "Copy this summary AND your share link to this chat, and post both to the Week 5 discussion board — that completes the assignment."
Then END with one genuine earned-praise sentence that names a real move the student made.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

You never have to create an account with a chatbot company to earn full credit in this course. This route assesses the same objectives as the AI dialogue — composing in the narrative and expository modes, choosing between showing and telling on purpose, and connecting each choice to the reader and the story's significance — against the same driving question and the same rubric below, for the same 10 points. Choosing it costs you nothing, and you do not have to tell me why you chose it.

What you do. Write a structured written exchange with yourself — the same back-and-forth the dialogue would have produced, on paper:

1. Your position (roughly 150 words). Answer Option A or Option B. For Option A, quote one sentence that should show and one that might fairly tell, from the camping-trip set or your own story, and say what each does for the reader. For Option B, take a clear position on whether a polished chatbot rewrite of your scene is still your story, and point to one change that would cross the line. Use this week's terms (showing, telling, sensory detail, concrete word, scene, narrative summary, significance, purple prose) correctly.
2. The strongest objection (roughly 100 words). Write the best argument against your own position that you can — for example, that a reader never needs to be told a feeling, or that any edit that makes a story clearer is fair. Argue it honestly; a weak objection you knock over earns no credit.
3. Your answer to it (roughly 100 words). Answer that objection. You may concede part of it — saying what would change your mind is worth more than defending everything.
4. One test you would use (one or two sentences). What check would you run on your next draft to decide whether a sentence should show or tell, or whether an edit has erased your voice?

Effort. Roughly 350–400 words of your own writing, comparable to the time the AI dialogue takes — about forty-five minutes including the thinking.

What you submit. Post those four parts, under those four labels, as your Week 5 discussion post. That post is your entire submission; this route has no share link.

No replies to classmates are required.

Participation rubric

This discussion is worth 10 points. The same three criteria score both routes.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com