Pay to Play Summer Programs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

As long as the summer program has financial aid that potentially covers the cost for students who need it, it’s not an indicator of wealth anymore. I find it mildly annoying that counselors will call anything that costs $$ pay to play when there’s such a huge variance in both costs and experiences. (Not sure that yours is doing this!) I still love free summer programs, like Gov School, but there’s definitely room for both over the 4 years!

[Anonymous]

Our college counselor said to only include it on the activity section of your application to the university that you attended (so only list the Georgetown pre-college program on your Georgetown application). Other schools will take that as an indication that school x (Georgetown in this example) is your first choice. CCO said pay-to-play is an overall negative on the application. Totally my opinion, but I think the pay-to-play programs should not be hidden next cycle because the schools are all going to want those of us that have $6,000-$11,000 to spend on a summer program. The indicator of wealth that was a bad thing last year is suddenly looking pretty appealing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

I think this is a case of "wishful thinking" on our part. They don't help anything except the bottom line of the offering school.

A summer program can help the application tell a credible story. If the applicant says they want to major in X, and they did a summer pre-college program in X, then that program is helpful to the application. They also help your kid get a better understanding of whether or not they really do want to major in X.

Yes yes that gives you plausible deniability that you are just wealthy and lighting money on fire.

You can take classes at a CC, or online (OCW, coursera) classes, yadda yadda. come on people, be serious.

dp.. no, cc does not provide classes in all areas of interest. And even if they did, they offer one class, the same class every summer. What if the kid already took that class, and the next summer wants to do another more advanced program in that specialty area of interest?

goto a nearby four year college then. If you can afford to send your kid to teenage summer camp, fine. But let's not pretend there's no equivalent local alternatives, especially in DMV

? a program at a nearby 4 yr is still pricey - like over $1k. There is no rec or cc program equivalent. I've looked everywhere. Believe me, I was not happy to shell out $2000 for a summer program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

What are you quoting as "fact"? Not every college counselor is discouraging kids from participating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor said to only include it on the activity section of your application to the university that you attended (so only list the Georgetown pre-college program on your Georgetown application). Other schools will take that as an indication that school x (Georgetown in this example) is your first choice. CCO said pay-to-play is an overall negative on the application. Totally my opinion, but I think the pay-to-play programs should not be hidden next cycle because the schools are all going to want those of us that have $6,000-$11,000 to spend on a summer program. The indicator of wealth that was a bad thing last year is suddenly looking pretty appealing.

I don't get this. I thought even before Trump colleges did not care if you were wealthy or not, and some actually wanted wealthy students so that they could provide more FA to lower income students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

What are you quoting as "fact"? Not every college counselor is discouraging kids from participating.

OP here. My friends' kids attend different, very highly regarded private schools that send multiple kids to top colleges and their in-school private college counselors explicitly told the parents to avoid "pay to play" programs. Also, Sara Harberson of Application Nation discourages these programs as well, as does the guy who does the podcast called "The Game." So, obviously not every college counselor, but either way, most of the advice from all of the foregoing has made sense to me except for this one so I'm just asking for more thoughts/insight into the reasoning behind it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

What are you quoting as "fact"? Not every college counselor is discouraging kids from participating.

OP here. My friends' kids attend different, very highly regarded private schools that send multiple kids to top colleges and their in-school private college counselors explicitly told the parents to avoid "pay to play" programs. Also, Sara Harberson of Application Nation discourages these programs as well, as does the guy who does the podcast called "The Game." So, obviously not every college counselor, but either way, most of the advice from all of the foregoing has made sense to me except for this one so I'm just asking for more thoughts/insight into the reasoning behind it.

Our private school counselor said absolutely not to do these programs as well. It is a huge indicator of wealth and privilege. I find it odd too, since parents are both law firm partners and kid attends $55k+ a year private school. We are obviously HHI. It is sort of hard to hide wealth, but the CCO encourages community college classes or free internships/shadowing experiences instead of pre-college programs.

[Anonymous]

Is it possible there are two different kinds of summer programs?

Pre-college summer programs are not helpful because they are not selective, i.e., pay to play.

Selective summer programs in which participants conduct research tied to their intended major could provide some advantage albeit participants still pay for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

I think this is a case of "wishful thinking" on our part. They don't help anything except the bottom line of the offering school.

A summer program can help the application tell a credible story. If the applicant says they want to major in X, and they did a summer pre-college program in X, then that program is helpful to the application. They also help your kid get a better understanding of whether or not they really do want to major in X.

+1

Do you have a kid who got into a school because of this program?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

What are you quoting as "fact"? Not every college counselor is discouraging kids from participating.

OP here. My friends' kids attend different, very highly regarded private schools that send multiple kids to top colleges and their in-school private college counselors explicitly told the parents to avoid "pay to play" programs. Also, Sara Harberson of Application Nation discourages these programs as well, as does the guy who does the podcast called "The Game." So, obviously not every college counselor, but either way, most of the advice from all of the foregoing has made sense to me except for this one so I'm just asking for more thoughts/insight into the reasoning behind it.

Our private school counselor said absolutely not to do these programs as well. It is a huge indicator of wealth and privilege. I find it odd too, since parents are both law firm partners and kid attends $55k+ a year private school. We are obviously HHI. It is sort of hard to hide wealth, but the CCO encourages community college classes or free internships/shadowing experiences instead of pre-college programs.

Yeah, that's bizarre. Being a private school student, absent a few token kids who get significant financial aid, already signifies that your kid is rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible there are two different kinds of summer programs?

Pre-college summer programs are not helpful because they are not selective, i.e., pay to play.

Selective summer programs in which participants conduct research tied to their intended major could provide some advantage albeit participants still pay for them.

Why does it matter if a program is "selective"? If a program makes sense to do, why does it matter if only X% of people are accepted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

What are you quoting as "fact"? Not every college counselor is discouraging kids from participating.

OP here. My friends' kids attend different, very highly regarded private schools that send multiple kids to top colleges and their in-school private college counselors explicitly told the parents to avoid "pay to play" programs. Also, Sara Harberson of Application Nation discourages these programs as well, as does the guy who does the podcast called "The Game." So, obviously not every college counselor, but either way, most of the advice from all of the foregoing has made sense to me except for this one so I'm just asking for more thoughts/insight into the reasoning behind it.

Our private school counselor said absolutely not to do these programs as well. It is a huge indicator of wealth and privilege. I find it odd too, since parents are both law firm partners and kid attends $55k+ a year private school. We are obviously HHI. It is sort of hard to hide wealth, but the CCO encourages community college classes or free internships/shadowing experiences instead of pre-college programs.

Yeah, that's bizarre. Being a private school student, absent a few token kids who get significant financial aid, already signifies that your kid is rich.

They don't want you to flaunt it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

I think this is a case of "wishful thinking" on our part. They don't help anything except the bottom line of the offering school.

A summer program can help the application tell a credible story. If the applicant says they want to major in X, and they did a summer pre-college program in X, then that program is helpful to the application. They also help your kid get a better understanding of whether or not they really do want to major in X.

Yes yes that gives you plausible deniability that you are just wealthy and lighting money on fire.

You can take classes at a CC, or online (OCW, coursera) classes, yadda yadda. come on people, be serious.

You sound bitter and jealous.

just because I can afford to, doesn't mean I will go around lighting money on fire.

There is no shame in being too poor to afford summer programs for your child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible there are two different kinds of summer programs?

Pre-college summer programs are not helpful because they are not selective, i.e., pay to play.

Selective summer programs in which participants conduct research tied to their intended major could provide some advantage albeit participants still pay for them.

Why does it matter if a program is "selective"? If a program makes sense to do, why does it matter if only X% of people are accepted?

Many of the expensive programs are selective. These applications require letters of recommendation, transcript, test scores, essays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are college counselors dissuading kids from participating in so-called "pay to play" programs on the basis that they signal wealth and privilege?

Private school, club sports or other expensive ECs - not to mention the parents' professions and zip code - also signal wealth and privilege but no college counselor is discouraging those types of things. Also, isn't "full pay" suppose to be an advantage in college admissions so, for example, it would be good for my public school kid to participate in an expensive program to signal that we are "full pay"?

People say that "pay to play" won't give your kid an advantage in getting into colleges, but from what I've seen from the current seniors, a good number of them did do a pre-college program at a college and also got into that college. I can think of specific kids who did pre-college programs at Brown, Duke, UChicago, Northwestern, U. Michigan, Georgetown, and were accepted to those schools senior year. They probably did leverage that "pay to play" summer experience in essays and activities lists to show "demonstrated interest."

What are you quoting as "fact"? Not every college counselor is discouraging kids from participating.

OP here. My friends' kids attend different, very highly regarded private schools that send multiple kids to top colleges and their in-school private college counselors explicitly told the parents to avoid "pay to play" programs. Also, Sara Harberson of Application Nation discourages these programs as well, as does the guy who does the podcast called "The Game." So, obviously not every college counselor, but either way, most of the advice from all of the foregoing has made sense to me except for this one so I'm just asking for more thoughts/insight into the reasoning behind it.

Our private school counselor said absolutely not to do these programs as well. It is a huge indicator of wealth and privilege. I find it odd too, since parents are both law firm partners and kid attends $55k+ a year private school. We are obviously HHI. It is sort of hard to hide wealth, but the CCO encourages community college classes or free internships/shadowing experiences instead of pre-college programs.

Your private school counselor is preposterously stupid, and it's unfortunate that you are paying for that.