[tshibley]

"Parents are pushing kids to volunteer and sign up for extracurricular activities instead of working, to impress college admission counselors."

I think this is one of the reasons I see most often (I graduated from high school 2 years ago). Many students think that taking a minimum wage job for the summer won't do them any good, and their parents push them to believe that "education is their job", so they opt for things outside of working to fill their summers.

[michaelchisari]

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]

> 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]

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]

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]

I have to say, that's a brilliant way to spin it.

[ryandrake]

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.

[lotsofpulp]

As wealth and income disparity grow, there is much more to gain and lose by choosing the right school. It's not about the learning, it's about the network you will have for the rest of your life. Getting this right will grant you access to people wealthy enough to invest in you, people who know people who can get things done and move things along when you hit a wall (politicians/lawyers/doctors/etc). This is probably worth a lot as it all compounds over ones lifetime and translates to advantages even for their children and their children, hence the intense competition.

[michaelchisari]

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]

> 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]

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.

[WalterBright]

I had a min wage job one summer. The work was grueling, and taught me that getting an education and working with my head rather than my back was worthwhile.

[mooreds]

I had the same experience (but worked all through high school at non grueling jobs).

Still remember that summer well--was a great motivator (built trails).

[lordnacho]

But it's reasonable, isn't it?

I've washed dishes and cleaned toilets. I don't think it did anything to improve my knowledge of engineering, programming, economics, and so on. I don't think it helped me start businesses later on. I don't think there was anything learned that wasn't known already: it's physically and mentally tiring to wash dishes and clean toilets. Eventually my parents decided my time was better spent studying and let me off my duties.

If it had existed back then, I would have been better off spending my time studying programming. Or making a radio.

The admissions officer argument is an American thing, it's not a huge deal in Europe. But it's hard to see how a kid who is headed for college, and probably something technical, is better off doing menial work than just studying, anywhere. If you can do something to boost your earnings in a few years, do so. What's the big deal if you miss out on a few grand when you're in your mid teens?

[dnadler]

I think the big deal comes when lower-class teens work to help support their families. The fact that work doesn't matter to admissions officers only exacerbates their disadvantage.

[mixmastamyk]

It likely improved your appreciation and motivation.

There are many posts here describing the valuable lesson of holding down a job, showing up on time, and appreciation for the benefits an education can bring. Some kids desperately need this, especially those not able postpone gratification.

[webwanderings]

A professional webinar I attended (as a parent of a high schooler) had opposite view. The college admission counselors treat real work, volunteering, extracurricular, on equal footing. Finding yourself running a business as a high schooler, is obviously better.