Rating Leadership, Clubs, Activities, Community Service, Work Experience, and Other

For more than 25 years, I have tried not to believe that student involvement in a particular activity, or holding a certain leadership position, might be perceived as better or worse than another from an admissions perspective.

Now with the majority of applications coming from the commonapp (a positive evolution that has some limitations) and college help websites actually ranking activities for students, I think it might be interesting to see how people feel today about this topic and whether we can be helpful to families with our opinions.

There are so many things students might do these days and spending time in a productive manner will always have merit - but what are the best ways to spend time? Forget the hooked, the recruited athletes and the similar… what are activities that just plain fall in the top 10% and what are activities that just never will? And why do we feel that way?

Examples just to get things going -

Is class president a top 10%?
Is being the captain of a sport a top 10%?
Is being on the school judicial board a top 10%
How about heading a private school’s tutoring center, or being their head tour guide?
Are there any activities that have become turnoffs?
What about speech and debate?
we can go on and on

1 Like

I am not a believer in “rating” activities. IMO it is more about depth of involvement. As one example at some high schools the class president is a popularity contest and a ceremonial role, while at another school the class president could have an opportunity to make substantial contributions to the school community.

The only turn offs I can imagine would be involvement in an organization that promotes hate, terrorism, etc.

4 Likes

so true, but we are talking admissions - with only so many characters, words and essays…

I don’t think it’s the activity that matters. I think it’s more about what you do within the position, and how that is communicated.

Working part time will always be viewed with very high regard.

3 Likes

That is for sure! I have become especially turned off by “paid-for” experiences.

1 Like

Hopefully essays, recommendations, etc. can be utilized to highlight an applicant’s meaningful accomplishments.

2 Likes

If I am the class president and it is my second activity on the commonapp, and I do not write about it in my essay - is it no longer a top 10%er?

Again, I dont buy into that ranking system. ECs will all be part of the applicant’s overall profile in a holistic review.

I think college Adcom’s appreciate initiative more than title/nomenclature.

So many of the kids I see IRL think they are knocking it out of the park with their involvement in something which is essentially run by adults for students. Yes, a talented writer can turn “My mom got me an internship at her law firm making coffee for the senior partners” into literary gold… but most HS kids cannot.

It is much easier to describe in a compelling way something a kid actually did- on their own- without the “invisible hand” of the HS staff, parents, extended family, etc. doing the arranging and the organizing and what-not.

Kid created a non-profit to prevent online bullying. Dad did the legal filings for the 501 C-3. Mom passed the hat at work to raise seed money for the first event. The uncle who owns several regional newspapers made sure that reporters and feature writers were there to cover the event.

OR- kid wrote a logistics program to schedule food drop off’s and deliveries at the local food pantry when he noticed the lines of people standing in the rain, with babies and toddlers. He organized a meeting- all by himself- of the food pantry staff, local social workers, and the head of the community foundation funded by the biggest supermarket chain in the region. Sold them on why adopting his simple “can be run on a laptop, smartphone or desktop” scheduling software was better for families, better for the food pantry, a more efficient use of the supermarket’s donations of day-old baked goods and produce. Then did the implementation and trained the food pantry workers on how to correctly log visitors.

No, he didn’t “start anything”. He’s not CEO of a 501 C-3. He has no title, is president of nothing, has zero leadership posts or awards. He just saw a problem and figured out how to fix it.

I think that’s the “rating” that matters. Showing initiative.

6 Likes

Any activity where there are tens of thousands of applicants doing the same thing can be good, or even excellent. Or it can be unexciting, boring, and unmemorable, making it not such a great activity.

To me activities that are outstanding are ones that are a little outside the box, or are described in an out of the box way. Ones that don’t have 30,000 people putting the same thing on their application.

Examples are the student who started a crocheting club at a senior center and who stuck with it for 3+ years. To me, it was something authentic, and it made a difference. On a more impressive scale, David Hogg. His crusade against school shootings is/was authentic and it made/makes a difference.

But, in my opinion, the activities don’t have to be THAT impressive to be excellent.

As to describing something in an out of the box way, I helped my oldest with a supplemental question about extracurricular activities. He was president of the school investment club. Nice, but not terribly memorable. I asked him what interested him about investing, and his passion for the news, and how current events affect the markets was the answer. He spent most of that essay talking about how he spent a lot of time engaging with the news (with a lot of specificity). I’m not doing his essay justice here; my point is just that I can see an admissions committee wanting a kid bursting with enthusiasm for the events of the day on campus. To me “news junkie(which is why I’m that club president)” makes that case better than yet another club president.

4 Likes

My litmus test is authentic and has impact (or, affects people in a meaningful way).

Your food pantry example has that in spades, and the law firm internship absolutely does not!

3 Likes

Sure on the LoRs, but common app essay ideally should not be a recap of an activity/activities.

Personally I would rather see an essay that doesn’t discuss activities at all, and if some activities could use more detail than characters allow, use the additional info section for that.

This is going to vary by school. I can directly speak to the the [highly rejective] school where I read apps. We don’t think about in terms of top 10%, but do rate an applicant’s activities as a whole.

Activities that can be powerful include service, leadership (defined broadly), paid work, research (via a provider like Polygence is totally ok), family responsibilities, national/international achievements in whatever (e.g., USACO, USAMO, DECA, robotics, ISEF, etc.) This list isn’t exhaustive…making an impact is the key. Students are accepted who make impact in their hometown, while another accepted applicant may be a grand prize winner at ISEF. The whole process is holistic with institutional priorities sprinkled in (as we all know.)

5 Likes

I do not believe in a rating system.

Working in a tutoring center is seen as leadership. Discussing a problem you had with a student, boss or coworker etc, how you came to recognize it, and how you turned it around and learned from it…will be what is impressive. Those transferable skills might also be demonstrated across other activities.

1 Like

I do not believe in a rating system either, but I do believe in putting myself in the shoes of admissions. I am starting to believe they do have a system whether it is official or not.

1 Like

A few free-form thoughts.

First, when I come across someone reporting that they got a hold of their admissions file at the college where they enrolled, I like to pay close attention to what they say because it is often very interesting. And often they express surprise at what really stood out to their readers. Sometimes it is personal/fit stuff that was coming out of essays/recommendations/interviews. Sometimes it is ECs they did not see as particularly impressive themselves. Not uncommonly, it is some sort of interaction between these concepts, like an EC is reinforcing a personal/fit narrative the reader got out of a recommendation or interview, say.

Given this–I am definitely in the camp that suggests people trying to rate the impressiveness of their ECs in isolation may be getting it completely wrong as to how their ECs will or will not end up being helpful when see in the entire context of their application.

Second thought, between those sorts of reports and just what I have seen so many AOs suggest, for sure perceptions of things like authenticity, self-motivation, and so on are critical. They are not necessarily going to punish a kid for doing something that they think the kid was doing to try to get into college, but it is far less likely to be truly helpful.

Third, sort of along the same lines, I think some things just naturally stand out more as almost surely self-motivated, precisely because they are not on the standard lists of things kids tell each other will be good for college admissions. The tricky thing is this concept got warped into the “passion project” concept, which is just another check box/formula sort of thing for some kids/parents. But I think AOs are in fact looking for things which really do seem driven by a sincere passion and not a desire to impress them, even if it is tricky sometimes to tell the difference.

Finally, there is also just true non-academic talent. Real athletic talent, even if it didn’t quite get you recruited at the colleges you want to attend. Real arts talent, performing or fine. Basically anything not just indicative of you being smart and hard-working. And again, that can be tricky, because with enough time devoted you can often get pretty skilled at various things. But I do think there are people with talents that go beyond that, and I think if AOs see such talents, that may be something they can latch onto as a distinguishing factor.

4 Likes

Maybe it is as straightforward as you are starting to think, but perhaps AOs’ thought process is more nuanced? Perhaps their thought process truly is in line with the MIT Applying Sideways article: learn well and deep, be nice, and excel at something. Doing those things, in a way that are authentic to you (the aspiring applicant) will likely lead to solid results from the application process: if not from the applicant’s dream school, then from somewhere else.

As a data point of one, D25 attended a rural Title 1 school. While the school offered fewer opportunities than others even an hour away, opportunities for activities and engagement did exist. She exhausted what was available and did as well in them as she could. As MIT Chris stated in his essay, such engagement by her provided a rich base for her own essays as well as for those who did her LORs.

And, she was a reasonably successful in her applications: 4 of 4 from those that responded, including from the flagships of 3 different states and an ED at an Ivy that required her to pull acceptances and the 5 other pending applications (4 of those were also state flagship schools).

I stated that last part to reflect that she spent a lot of time in choosing the specific schools to which she applied - did her background speak to what the school offered and what she was seeking? Invariably yes. And this gets to the third aspect of the Applying Sideways essay: do something.

Outside her her direct school engagement she also had several ECs that had a common thread from 8th grade that tied in some visible way to her prospective major. I do feel that this was compelling.

On the ratings issue, it might be helpful to reflect on what Yale said in their podcast. So here is one of their earlier statements on this:

[Hannah] All right, so you’ve probably noticed that we haven’t talked much about scoring applications. We use write-ups in our work cards to keep track of what we’re reading. And we use some ratings, but not really in the way that you would think.
[Mark] Yeah. I think most people imagine that the process is really quantitative, and that there’s a rubric that we’re using, and that, as an applicant, your goal is to maximize your score on each of these different sections. And you are thinking about dividing the application up into these different segments and trying to score the most points in these different areas.
.And that’s really not how it works, . . . because they’re not going to be added together at any point. It’s not going to be split into an algorithm, and we’re not going to rank candidates like we might rank you know gymnast floor exercises, where Simone Biles is obviously going to be at the top because of her largest combined score.
[Hannah] Right.
[Mark] So how are you using the ratings in your process?
[John] Yeah. I think the way that we– or a lot of us think about ratings are indicators to not only ourselves, but other people that are eventually involved in the admissions process for where strengths of the file lie. And so I think the main takeaway, when I’m rating parts of a file, is that they will never be standing alone as a number or a digit in a vacuum. These are ratings that we use to help us better understand the way a file has been read, the way a file may be presented. And none of those ratings are ever looked at independent of a full conversation with so many people in the room.

In a later episode, they elaborate some more:

[Hannah] This [the Activities section] is actually one of the first things that we see when we read an application, and it’s really helpful to lay a foundation for the read, to understand where a student’s presence is felt. And it’s one of the first things we share when we read a work card to the committee. You’ve heard about our committee process in prior episodes, and our read and presentation of these things is pretty cut and dry. We say what you do, sort of maybe the level of commitment, and what kind of impact you’ve had.
[Mark] And we use a rating system. It is sort of a shorthand, though. I want to make clear, this is designed to help us communicate with other members of the admissions committee. It is not being fed into some sort of rubric somewhere.
[Hannah] Right.
[Mark] And we do not have a formula that’s going to award a certain number of points for being a varsity athlete or being the lead in the school musical, or something like that. It is a nine point scale, but the overwhelming majority of applicants, including admitted students, cluster right in the middle. We’re using it to communicate quickly to the members of the committee when they’re looking at our printed slate. So we talked about this in an earlier episode about committee. We can look down a sheet of paper at a series of applicants and get a sense of where the strengths lie in a particular application. It’s like I said, a little bit like reading the matrix, and this can be one of those things, where if we’re about to talk about an applicant and I see a really high value on this extracurricular rating, I know, oh, the student has really distinguished themselves there. But that is not the case for a lot of applicants, including a lot of our admitted students.
[Hannah] Right, right. So just so you know, if you completely left this section blank, you might get a one on that scale. A student who is active in a typical collection of activities without a whole lot of distinction might get a five, and someone who is extremely unusual in their commitment or distinction would get a nine, but that might be an Olympic athlete or a Tony Award winner or something like that.
[Mark] I have never seen a nine.
[Reed] Yes.
[Mark] I don’t know if you have, I have never seen a nine. I have never given a nine, I’ve never been in committee with a nine. I know they exist, but–
[Hannah] Yeah.
[Mark] It’s very, very rare.
[Hannah] Right. Maybe one or two a year.
[Mark] Yeah, I would say probably 99% of our admitted students are rated somewhere between a four and a seven on the scale. And you heard that correctly, right. We admit students who haven’t really distinguished themselves with their activities outside of the classroom. It might be for some students a really important part of their application, or it might not be very important at all. There might be other parts of the application that are really making the case for the student. Remember, it’s not part of a formula.
[Reed] While this place is indeed a place to brag a little bit about yourself, I think it’s important to remember that this is only in service of a bigger goal, which is to help us understand who you are. The context that you’re coming from, and help us see how you’ll engage on our campus. College students are super, super engaged, active people outside of the classroom. Many people are going to tell you that they learned so much from their extracurriculars and their college activities, as sort of compared to their courses. They’ve learned lessons in leadership and collaboration and creativity. And so we want students who are really going to be engaged outside of the classroom here. You’re coming to learn, yes, but you’re also coming to live and to engage in a community.
[Hannah] Yeah.
[Mark] And in most cases, this kind of evaluation we’re doing, it’s not about matching up a specific applicant and their activity with a sort of Yale analog to that activity, right? There are more than 400 organizations on our campus. That’s going to be true at any place that you’re applying, and it’s not our job as the admissions office to make sure that every single one of those organizations has members who are interested and have experiences in those areas.
[Hannah] Right.
[Mark] So in a nutshell, to answer this question, what are we looking for here, I would describe it as we’re looking for students who are seeking to maximize opportunities around them and contribute to their communities in the process. I’ll say that again. We want to find students who are maximizing opportunities and contributing to their communities in the process. As we try to evaluate how your activities in high school might demonstrate this, we have to incorporate a ton of context.
[Hannah] Yeah.
[Mark] Right? Just the number of activities, the kinds of activities that are available, very dramatically from school to school, from community to community. For some students, their individual opportunities are limited because of maybe family commitments or work commitments. And let’s make very clear– those kinds of things can be just as valuable, or even more valuable, than traditional school-based extracurriculars.
[Reed] I can certainly think of many times when I’ve been deeply impressed by applicants and what they’ve done outside of the classroom, but so often, that is from the amount of hours that they put into a job or into taking care of a younger sibling, not just research accomplishments or music accomplishments or other things they’re doing that might be more in a traditional sort of academic lens.
[hannah] Yeah.
[Mark] Yeah, so the types of choices that students have available to them vary dramatically, and even just how much choice you as an individual applicant, is going to vary dramatically. When you have choices, though, what we hope is that this activities list reveals something about you. We hope that it shows how you’ve chosen to spend your time. We hope it reflects your interests, your values, and the kind of contributions that you’ve made to one or more shared experiences with others. And I think that’s a really important point. We are not just thinking about this in terms of your Individual achievement and sort of how you’ve gone along your own individual vector. We are very, very interested in how these kinds of activities have involved your work with groups of other people and your contributions to shared goals.
[Hannah] Yeah, which, by the way, is why it makes no sense to spend your time doing things you don’t enjoy only because you think it’ll help you get into college.
[Mark] I really dislike when I hear students sort of complaining about, oh, I’m doing this, and I’m doing this, and I’m doing this, because that’s how I’m going to get into college. It’s like, no.
[Hannah] Right.
[Mark] You’re approaching it completely wrong.
[Hannah] Yeah.
[Mark] You need to be doing things that you like doing. If you’re not doing things that you like, you’re making it harder for us to figure out who you are, right? If your activities list is full of things that don’t reflect you honestly and openly, we’re going to be scratching our head wondering, who is this person? This just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

OK, so (very) long story short, this is explaining how on the one hand, yes they might put down numbers, but on the other, any attempt to reduce that to a formula is doomed, because this is all embedded in holistic review concepts.

And obviously by the end, the Yale folks are in fact sounding just like the MIT folks in terms of what they are advising kids to do. And I don’t think they are lying. I think they are really trying to express how their readers think, how they discuss things in committees, and so on.

3 Likes

Yes, exactly.

And back to MichaelCollege’s initial question, at least regarding my D25, she was not an AIME qualifier or Robotics champion; she did not have a passion project nor did she start a non-profit. But she did engage deeply in the school throughout her HS career. She qualified for state in music, in sports, and in speech / debate. She did found a club, but did so with two other students and the about 2/3 of the school became members of the club. She also engaged in various ECs (which included internships at 3 different companies, a summer class through the Vanderbilt PTY program and a 3 week summer session at UChicago) all related to the major she has targeted.

All the above is to state that, if the schools to which she applied cared about such things (and presumably a school that would rate such things would care about them), they would see that she is an applicant that would reasonably be expected to engage on their campus and utilize all the many opportunities a college campus offers. Further, as to her major related ECs, I don’t suspect that they ranked those either. However, I think they help tell a story as to how she would fit in and contribute on their campus.

In fact, if she had submitted her same applications, with the only difference being a different major, it is likely that her results would have been different.

2 Likes

I did alumni interviewing for over two decades. There were two stand out students with amazing ECs that I still remember, and both were rejected.

6 Likes

tell us more