A professional college counselor advises that “pay to play” activities sort of turn off admissions officers and should be minimized or avoided. I.e., all those summer academic programs or summer camps/ specialized programs of any type (even if they are highly selective to get into) that cost money, and anything else that a student without parental help to pay for it would not be able to do. No matter how great the activity/program is. Based on that college admissions officers recognize that those things cost money and kids who do them are “privileged”; while admissions officers are concerned with socio-economic diversity and admitting kids who pulled their own weight without parents financing them through. The college counselor says that this especially applies to summer programs. (It’s a little devastating to hear this for the first time when the student is now a rising senior and it’s too late to go back and change what they did in all their summers!) Any thoughts or experiences with this?
What was the context in which the word “play” was used? “Have fun” or simply “participate”? The meaning of the phrase “pay to play” is very different in those contexts.
I can certainly see why some activities might not come across so well (say an expensive scuba diving trip to the Caribbean as an example of interest in marine science) but there are also some that are relevant to admission and absolutely should be listed (for example the audition-based summer dance programs that my D18 did before applying as a prospective ballet major).
So I’d think about whether the criteria for participation were more than whether you could afford it and whether there was a tangible academic benefit from the program. S18 did an academic summer program at one college that was related to his interest in political science but it wasn’t selective. He mentioned it in his “why us?” application to that college (showing he liked it there and would consider attending) but didn’t highlight it elsewhere (it wasn’t listed as a common app activity because he had plenty of others), though he didn’t try to hide it either.
I’d add that S18 did highlight his internship which many adcoms might assume was gained through parental connections (though in fact it wasn’t at all). I think almost any activity a “privileged” kid does can be in some way attributed to parental support if that’s what an adcom wants to do that (eg kids need to get driven to sports/music practices, parents may go with them to help at the homeless shelter, etc.). But it’s not going to help if you leave all that off either.
Curious why it’s “a little devastating to hear this for the first time when the student is now a rising senior and it’s too late to go back and change what they did in all their summers!”. This would imply you simply did these activities for the resume and not for the experience itself.
Nonetheless, I would hope your child was in fact interested in these activities so I would definitely list it/them. I like what Twoin18 said about including that in the “why us” section.
@eb23282 , I am the parent , not the student. It’s devastating to me because if those things aren’t listed, it would look like my kid didn’t do anything during any summer!- lol. The things were in fact chosen by the kid due to interest in them. I have a kid that refused to do anything or take any classes in high school for their value in college admissions, and was extremely authentic in only pursuing what they were genuinely interested in.
@Twoin18 , this included highly selective academic related summer programs that are difficult and challenging and not vacations at all, and that result in real accomplishments…but that need to be paid for in order to participate.
This professional college counselor was an admissions officer at one of the Ivy League colleges for several years and she is adamant about this issue. I commented back that, well,then, for other kids who attend private high schools, isn’t their entire schooling “pay to play”-- and her response was something to the effect that it’s the summer programs that this issue mostly applies to and not school-year programs (?).
Did any of these programs offer scholarships or financial aid for participants? When you say highly selective, do you know the percentage of students who applied versus the number accepted? (Roughly)
@suzy100 selectivity of maybe around 30% of applicants get accepted? yes, there are even full rides for very poor kids. but most participants have to pay and we always had to pay full cost.
I will believe this when only 1% of the freshman come from the 1%ers.
Perhaps true in general, but nonsense in relation to some of the most selective STEM camps. If you can get into Canada USA Mathcamp or Summer Science Program, go for it and don’t be discouraged that they cost money. Of course, you need to be off the charts to get into either.
Agreed that it will be viewed in context, so it really depends upon what the activity is, and more to the point, what the student learned from it and contributed toward it.
As a very simplistic example: the student writes, “I am very interested in wildlife and environmental conservation and spent the summer in the Galapagos” would probably raise more of an eyebrow than “I am very interested in wildlife and environmental conservation and volunteered at the local zoo.”
Pay-to-play is too broad a term, IMO. Many sports, e.g. ice hockey, lacrosse, golf, are in effect pay-to-play.
Attending a summer college program with high admissions rate (and equally high tuition) can have validity if aligned with the students interests. It’s certainly better on a college application than the student sitting on the couch all summer with an Xbox.
If you leave it off, you’ll get no benefit. If you include the activity, the AO can at least weigh the value of it to an activity another student might not have been able to participate in because of the cost. Not every student can afford to go to Antarctica or even Duke camps, but for those who can they are going to learn and experience something.
In California, most of the activities at public schools are ‘pay to play’, including theater productions, sports, debate, band, MUN. The cost might not be much, and there might be a way for those who can’t afford it to get a scholarship, but most students are paying for each activity.
It would be pretty hypocritical for an AO to turn their nose up at “pay to play”. Exactly how did they think the majority of their recruited athletes got so good at their sports? They’ve been in the “play to pay” club-to-college pipeline since they were six to eight years old! Elite high school “feeder schools” are most definitely pay-to-play! I don’t know about your school bands, but while our school makes every effort to get loaner instruments into the hands of every kid who needs one, it’s the kids taking private lessons and paying to be in honors bands who get first chairs and get into the music programs at colleges. Isn’t that “paying to play”?
Recognize these students and their talents are a result of privilege, do some soul searching, and adjust the judging process accordingly. Reward students not on opportunities available, but what they made of those opportunities. Move on. I’m not defending pay-to-play, but the fact is that hamster wheel is going to be around for as long as colleges seek out the best talent, which is to say “forever”.
If we take this to the extreme, most ECs should be left off. Private music lessons, gymnastcs or dance classes, karate, little league … they are all “pay to play.” Perhaps the real issue is how the student shows how the activities fit the narrative of who they are. Being a Girl Scout or Boy Scout means one thing, what you accomplished as a scout (not just awards) is more important. The same applies to summer experiences. Maybe this particular adcom doesn’t like these activites, but I would think it shows a student taking advantage of the opportunities afforded them, no different then the student who takes dual enrollment classes, when others don’t have that option.
For people who care, CalTech used to list on its admissions pages the camps that (by implication) it saw as most valuable.
See here in this page for the reference, and use the Wayback Machine to mine the dead CalTech link.
https://summerscience.org/about/affiliates/
The MIT list of camps still live linked on that SSP page is also interesting.
OK, I can understand why that college counselor said that. I’ve seen post after post here from students asking if some expensive summer programs will help them get into College X, Y or Z. Those programs are out of reach for those who can’t afford them but don’t qualify for aid. We were in that boat.
That being said, I’d probably include them for the reason you said, OP: I wouldn’t want a total blank for those summers. Does the counselor have a suggestion as to how to handle that?
My daughter got into Summer Science Program. We were thrilled. We were full pay. She graduated from Yale with a BS in Astrophysics. So take that as you want. Both kids went to CTY type summer “schools.” (Other kid just graduated from Swarthmore).
“this included highly selective academic related summer programs that are difficult and challenging and not vacations at all, and that result in real accomplishments…but that need to be paid for in order to participate.”
Right, so it’s how your child talks (writes?) about it that’s more important than the actual activity. It can be paid for by the parents and still be difficult and challenging. And a typical college will have half its class full pay and these kids all have done what would be termed “pay to play”. I would’t worry about the activity, again work with your child on how to position it. Good luck!
One of the more misleading phrases is “former Ivy admissions officer.” What’s this person’s true experience, how long and how recently?
Of course you can put down pay-to-play. But a top college isn’t just looking at the list, they’re looking for the kid’s thinking behind every aspect of the app. Just don’t make a big deal of something not as unique as you think. An example is the programs that solicit students, telling them they were specially recommended and what an honor to pay $$ for the privilege. In reality, a number of those are bulk mailings.
Can you describe these “highly selective academic summer programs” for us? Many that are uber selective aren’t a tip in themselves, don’t replace activities at home or that are some level of work (some internships or long term vol work.) Are they non-profit? But you can list the valuable experiences. Sure.
Oooooh, good catch @lookingforward .
As I have said many times on this site in reference to the former Ivy AO who has written a book quoted often: she has not set foot in an admissions office since skidad was a college applicant. Admissions has changed drastically since she was an AO; so what she said may have been valid back in the day, but that does not mean it’s still accurate.
The AO that the OP is referencing may be a different one, but the statement still applies.