4 ms·

Those students are right. I've never heard of a college admissions board that saw working as a valid extracurricular. I had to work at least a part time job fr

Those students are right. I've never heard of a college admissions board that saw working as a valid extracurricular. I had to work at least a part time job from 15 on, and I was at a big disadvantage to people who didn't have to work. I gained a lot from it, better work ethic, an understanding of workplace professionalism, money management, etc. But college would have much preferred I played a sport, was involved in school clubs, or even volunteered. So if college is in the plans, and a kid doesn't absolutely have to work, then there is no reason for them to do so. And then, of course, there's the economic reality that plenty of traditionally "teenage" jobs have been taken over by 20 and 30-somethings (and even older) who desperately need the work.

saint_fiasco 9y ago
> I've never heard of a college admissions board that saw working as a valid extracurricular. The cynic reason is probably that they are filtering for social class and don't want working class people, but that sounds awful. Do colleges give a better reason, or at least an excuse?
- michaelchisari 9y ago
  I don't think it's a matter of want, as much as a matter of being disconnected from what working class life is like, which I think ends up having the same effect, even if the intention is much less sinister.
  - avn2109 9y ago
    Actually I used my 4 years of high school work as a rural irrigator to get into Ivy undergrad, it worked like a charm despite my preposterously low grades and uneven disciplinary record. The trick is just to spin it as more "sunset over the cornfields/1950's Americana" than "grim middle class suburban strip mall McDonalds drudgery." Basically you just have to accord with the idealized mythos of smallholding independent yeomanry that is built into our culture and that East coast admissions officers so desperately want to believe about flyover country. As the parent comment alludes, they're not working class, they don't know anyone who is, and they have all sorts of silly ideas about mythologizing the dignity of work and the lived experience of the proletariat. Just don't let your application disabuse them of the notion that digging holes in the hot sun for 14 hours a day is a glorious pastime. Fancy school admissions is just like the art world, their whole objective is to avoid association with anything coded middle-class. It's fine to be low or high, just stay out of the middle.
    - michaelchisari 9y ago
      I have to say, that's a brilliant way to spin it.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ryandrake 9y ago
As someone who went to college in the early 90s, this just sounds so bizarre. Have things changed this much? Nobody I knew gave a shit about any of this stuff. We all had part time jobs to buy a video game now and then or a new pair of shoes. I did even more work over the summer, and was able to buy my first PC after 3 months of pretty much full time work. College was just a matter of getting reasonably good grades in high school, applying to 10-20 colleges, and going to the one that accepts you. Done. None of this ridiculous optimize your life along a single "what admissions boards want to see" metric. I mean you kids are paying 10X now what it cost back then, AND you're jumping through all these silly hoops as well? Insanity.
- michaelchisari 9y ago
  For the record, I graduated high school in 1997, and while I don't think working was actively seen as a disadvantage, it was a functional disadvantage (less time for extracurriculars and studying), and college boards didn't see working a part time job as any kind of life experience or extracurricular. I think it's only gotten much, much worse since then, though.
  - mixmastamyk 9y ago
    > college boards didn't see working a part time job as any kind of life experience or extracurricular. So, so wrong. An honest job is what every kid needs. While not neglecting their studies of course.
- Paul-ish 9y ago
  I graduated high school in 2009 and went to my flagship state school (UW), and had a similar experience in that getting decent grades and SAT scores was what counted. I think for the big schools like the Ivys, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, etc... it might be more involved. I think I got a perfectly good education at University of Washington, but I think to some people anything less than something highly ranked by US News is failure. I think we feel hyper competitive to be the best and only partake in the best, because anything less leaves us exposed, and it is stressful to live that way.
- 9y ago

saint_fiasco 9y ago

> I've never heard of a college admissions board that saw working as a valid extracurricular. The cynic reason is probably that they are filtering for social class and don't want working class people, but that sounds awful. Do colleges give a better reason, or at least an excuse?

michaelchisari 9y ago
I don't think it's a matter of want, as much as a matter of being disconnected from what working class life is like, which I think ends up having the same effect, even if the intention is much less sinister.
- avn2109 9y ago
  Actually I used my 4 years of high school work as a rural irrigator to get into Ivy undergrad, it worked like a charm despite my preposterously low grades and uneven disciplinary record. The trick is just to spin it as more "sunset over the cornfields/1950's Americana" than "grim middle class suburban strip mall McDonalds drudgery." Basically you just have to accord with the idealized mythos of smallholding independent yeomanry that is built into our culture and that East coast admissions officers so desperately want to believe about flyover country. As the parent comment alludes, they're not working class, they don't know anyone who is, and they have all sorts of silly ideas about mythologizing the dignity of work and the lived experience of the proletariat. Just don't let your application disabuse them of the notion that digging holes in the hot sun for 14 hours a day is a glorious pastime. Fancy school admissions is just like the art world, their whole objective is to avoid association with anything coded middle-class. It's fine to be low or high, just stay out of the middle.
  - michaelchisari 9y ago
    I have to say, that's a brilliant way to spin it.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ryandrake 9y ago

As someone who went to college in the early 90s, this just sounds so bizarre. Have things changed this much? Nobody I knew gave a shit about any of this stuff. We all had part time jobs to buy a video game now and then or a new pair of shoes. I did even more work over the summer, and was able to buy my first PC after 3 months of pretty much full time work. College was just a matter of getting reasonably good grades in high school, applying to 10-20 colleges, and going to the one that accepts you. Done. None of this ridiculous optimize your life along a single "what admissions boards want to see" metric. I mean you kids are paying 10X now what it cost back then, AND you're jumping through all these silly hoops as well? Insanity.

michaelchisari 9y ago
For the record, I graduated high school in 1997, and while I don't think working was actively seen as a disadvantage, it was a functional disadvantage (less time for extracurriculars and studying), and college boards didn't see working a part time job as any kind of life experience or extracurricular. I think it's only gotten much, much worse since then, though.
- mixmastamyk 9y ago
  > college boards didn't see working a part time job as any kind of life experience or extracurricular. So, so wrong. An honest job is what every kid needs. While not neglecting their studies of course.
Paul-ish 9y ago
I graduated high school in 2009 and went to my flagship state school (UW), and had a similar experience in that getting decent grades and SAT scores was what counted. I think for the big schools like the Ivys, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, etc... it might be more involved. I think I got a perfectly good education at University of Washington, but I think to some people anything less than something highly ranked by US News is failure. I think we feel hyper competitive to be the best and only partake in the best, because anything less leaves us exposed, and it is stressful to live that way.
9y ago