Advice for Employers and Recruiters
Part 3: As the world interns: The impact of identity and social, economic, and cultural capital on college student internship engagement | Internship Trends, Issues of Access & Significance of Current Study
This is the third of six articles in this series, click here to go to the first article. If you’re searching for a remote internship, go to our search results page that lists all of the remote internships and other entry-level jobs advertised on College Recruiter and then drill down as you wish by adding your desired category, location, company, or job type.
2.3. Internship Prevalence and Trends
Though statistics are difficult to discern, it appears as though the number of students engaging in undergraduate internships has steadily risen over the last three decades. Authoritative data is not available on the subject, because internships are not comprehensively tracked by the federal government or any other entity. The internship climate does feel like it has exploded during the last ten years. Two major motion pictures were produced in the 2010s that highlighted internships (Levy, 2013; N. Meyers, 2015). A myriad of lawsuits has emerged (Suen & Brandeisky, 2014), with unpaid interns claiming that their internships were not educational experiences, but rather exploitative, menial labor without pay. Newspapers have featured headlines about major companies being sued for violating employment law with unpaid internships, including Warner Music, NBC Universal, Viacom, Fox Searchlight Pictures, and Condé Nast (Weissmann & Weissmann, 2015). Internships are a considerable focus of employers, higher education professionals, parents, and students. However, these higher education constituents and the media focus much of their attention on the value of internships or issues of legal compliance, and do not often discuss issues of internship access or availability.
The reason for a heightened focus on internships is perhaps because a postrecession job market has resulted in a more competitive economic landscape (Looney & Greenstone, 2010), which has left more recent college graduates under- or un-employed (Greenleaf, 2014). A post-recession economic depression may have set the stage for more college students to take on internships – to buoy them in challenging economic circumstances and serve as a springboard into permanent work.
Despite being a topic of increased focus, little is known about how many students engage in internships, where they intern, or what proportion of internships are paid. In his book Intern Nation (2012), Ross Perlin summarized the dearth of knowledge in this area: “There are few, if any, experts on the sprawling subject of internships, and little research is available” (p. 225).
Even authoritative sources on internship trends and statistics lack conclusive information. Phil Gardner, Director of the College Employment Research Institute at Michigan State, was interviewed for Perlin’s 2012 internship exposé. Gardner is quoted as saying, “there hasn’t been anybody that’s really monitored it…right now the research capacity in this area is dismal. Most schools don’t even know how many of their students actually have internships, period” (Perlin, 2012, p. 26). During this interview, Gardner estimated that 70-75% of students engaged in internships, based on survey work he has completed.
The National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) began gathering more reliable data on internship participation during the recession, when the they reported that 50% of undergraduates reported internship experience in 2008 (Saltikoff, 2017). NACE’s estimates have increased in the last ten years, with 65% of bachelor degree students in the United States reporting that they had an internship in 2015 (National Association of Colleges and Employers, 2015b). Extrapolating NACE’s survey data nationwide puts the estimated total of student interns in the U.S. at close to 13 million current students (National Association of Colleges and Employers, 2015b; National Center for Education Statistics, 2015). That number is further corroborated by the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). In 2017, NSSE surveyed a total of 22,902 undergraduate seniors at 636 institutions across the United States, and found that 60.4% of respondents were currently engaged in, or had previously engaged in an internship during their time in college (National Survey of Student Engagement, 2017). NACE’s and NSSE’s data are the only nation-wide surveys that collect data on internship engagement.
The fact that internship statistics are difficult to obtain makes internships even more enigmatic. Their importance is covered in the news, and employers increasingly demand this kind of experience. However, even with a heavy media and employment focus on internships, authoritative national data about internship engagement is conspicuously absent.
2.3.1. Paid vs. Unpaid
Some internships offer payment, whereas others do not. Payment will often depend on industry trends, and a company’s need for intern talent. In the same way that high full-time salaries attract skilled workers, competitive internship salaries will also bring in a greater number of applications from more talented students (Sigelman, 2015). Companies in STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) are more likely to pay interns, in contrast to nonprofits, arts-based organizations, the government,
and media organizations, which are more likely to have unpaid internships (Gardner, 2011).
Though overall statistics about payment are not available, online internship postings demonstrate at least a portion of available internship opportunities do not offer any kind of remuneration. Companies offering unpaid internships expect that student interns will work in exchange for “experience,” rather than an income. Though some may view this kind of exchange as a necessary evil (new workers should expect to “work their way up the ladder”), working for free is not an option for many college students who necessitate some sort of income while they pursue a degree. Several authors examine the tension that students experience when students feel pulled between a paid part-time job and an unpaid internship, and the financial burden that this puts on students from lower income backgrounds (Allen et al., 2013; Burke & Carton, 2013; Grant-Smith & McDonald, 2017; O’Connor & Bodicoat, 2017; Siebert & Wilson, 2013).
Students who require compensation will only be able to consider paid internships, limiting those students to a smaller subset of opportunities that have more competition from their internship-seeking peers. The internship site Internmatch.com reported an average of 2.5 times the number of views for paid internships compared to unpaid internships, demonstrating the increase in student attention on positions with compensation.
In short, those unable to work for free will have fewer internship options to choose from and will have to work harder to obtain these positions. If some students do not even have access to internships (now essentially an employment pre-requisite), it creates major issues of inequity.
2.3.2. Rationale for Unpaid Internships
Though it is tempting to simply attribute unpaid internships to companies’ desires to save money, there are several complicating factors that favor employers in the employer/intern relationship, allowing employers to demand that interns forego a salary. To start with, the post-recession landscape has led to a challenging employment environment. The echoes of the 2008 financial recession have resulted in a landscape where recent graduates face low wages, mounting student debt, and a hyper-competitive job market (Aronson, Callahan, & Davis, 2015). Additionally, more job applicants than ever now have college degrees, and even well after the 2008 economic recession, new college graduates continue to experience high rates of “under-employment” – being pressured to take jobs that do not require a college degree. The under-employment rate of recent college graduates hovers around 45% (Abel & Deitz, 2016).
Though it may seem like a short-term, minor inconvenience to be “underemployed” due to a recession, it has long-term effects on graduates’ salaries. Oreopoulos, von Wachter, and Heisz (2012) wrote that those graduating during a recession will suffer from persistent decreased earnings. Oreopoulos and colleagues (2012) wrote that “unlucky graduates suffer persistent earnings declines lasting ten years” – long after the recession has passed.
In this kind of hyper-competitive market, employers hold much of the control in the hiring process. There is an over-supply of entry-level talent competing for a limited number of positions, and recent graduates have little power as they seek positions. Costconscious companies thinking about their bottom lines will aim to bring in talent for as little money as possible, and a swath of college-age workers are now willing to work for no pay. In these circumstances, why wouldn’t companies hire unpaid interns?
Despite the fact that internships seem to have dramatically increased in popularity, there is still minimal federal guidance about how and when companies need to pay their interns. Employers are left to rely solely on the Department of Labor’s sixprong test (Reid, 2015), and as I will outline, this guidance seemed equivocal and ineffective even when it was first created over 20 years ago.
The six-prong test established criteria for when an intern can be unpaid, but the criteria essentially boil down to the idea that the internship should be “similar to training which would be given in an educational environment” and that “the internship experience is for the benefit of the intern” (U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division, 2010). Not surprisingly, the hazy criteria have left lawyers, interns, employers alike with an unclear understanding of when internships must offer compensation, and companies continue to take advantage of unpaid student labor.
The federal government has also been reluctant to provide any further guidance or regulation of unpaid internships. In the twenty years since the DoL authored its six-prong test, there have been only a half-dozen high-profile cases where an unpaid internship was deemed illegal, and those were egregious examples of student exploitation. Perhaps due to its finite resources (about 1,000 DoL investigators oversee over seven million workplaces (Brandeisky, 2014)), the DoL does not proactively investigate issues around unpaid internships, but instead relies on workers to bring violations to the DoL’s attention [Brandeisky, 2014]). Relying on exploited interns to come forward may not be the best tactic, considering that unpaid interns are often hesitant to register complaints due to fear that it will risk future career prospects (Greenhouse, 2012).
In short, there are currently few, if any consequences for violating labor laws as they relate to unpaid internships. With such little guidance, employers can hardly be blamed for hiring college students into unpaid internships. Companies trying to save money will take advantage of every cost-saving measure available, and there are seemingly no repercussions for leveraging young talent for no pay.
2.4. Issues of Access: Using Bourdieu as a Theoretical Framework
In this section I will introduce a landmark study in childrearing that uses Bourdieu’s (1986) capital theory to explain engagement in important opportunities like internships. I will demonstrate how students with social and cultural capital learn how to navigate complex systems of internships, whereas those who lack this capital are left out of internships altogether.
Though lacking access to internships may seem like a minor inconvenience, remember that internships are often the gateways into particular careers and industries. If certain populations are excluded on the basis on identity, income, or social connections, it means that those characteristics and perspectives may not be represented or considered in our government, media, or businesses.
Indeed, internships are likely unattainable for some populations of students. However, little research has focused on issues of internship access. In his career advice book, Charles Murray (2014) astutely noted that “internships are affirmative action for the advantaged” (2014, p. 93). Though provocative, Murray identified a suspicion that many have about internships – that they are a special kind of experience, reserved only for those with elite connections, financial means, or both. Essentially, internships can serve as an early leg up into certain industries, but few students can take advantage of these kinds of opportunities.
I posit that Bourdieu’s (1986) capital theory provides a useful lens to examine students’ access to internships. Bourdieu outlined three types of capital: cultural capital, social capital, and economic capital. These types of capital describe assets that determine social status and influence social mobility. Bourdieu described cultural capital as the education, knowledge, skills, and habits that one possesses. Examples of cultural capital include a student’s major, GPA, and professional habits (such as the ability to show up on time). Bourdieu also outlined social capital, which encompasses a person’s social connections and networks. When thinking about internships, social capital might come in the form of parents’ connections, or one’s alumni network at their college. Lastly, Bourdieu identified economic capital, which are the property and monetary resources that one has (1986).
To maintain a fair playing field, most people would probably think that hiring should be based on cultural capital alone; that is, employers should hire based on knowledge, skills, and earned credentials like GPA, past experience, and specific knowhow. However, access to opportunities can also be based on intangible traits that are characteristic of social and economic capital. Several studies (Allen et al., 2013; Frenette, 2013; Grugulis & Stoyanova, 2012; O’Connor & Bodicoat, 2017) show how internships require certain levels of social or economic capital that not all students will have. For instance, Allen, Quinn, Hollingworth, and Rose (2013) described the importance of “word-of-mouth recruitment via social networking” (p. 440) and how social capital was a crucial component of finding employment opportunities in creative industries. Without certain connections, students may not have access to employment in the field. Similarly, Bathmaker, Ingram, and Waller (2013) described the necessity of “combining cultural capital in the form of ‘what they know’ with social capital in the form of ‘who they know’” (p. 4) in order to transition into the labor market.
Soria and Stebleton (2012) elaborated on the definition of social capital to include one’s first-generation status (i.e., whether someone is the first in their family to attend college). Those with highly-educated parents inherit specific guidance about how to navigate institutions of higher education, which may offer an advantage over their firstgeneration peers (Soria & Stebleton, 2012)
In her 2011 ethnography Unequal Childhoods, Lareau provided a rich description of the differences between families that had the ability to connect to these important professional networks (those who Bourdieu would say have social capital), and families who did not have the tools to navigate the complex systems of the workplace and school (in a Bourdieuan lens, those who lack social capital). Lareau described how families with more resources practiced “concerted cultivation” and taught their children how to navigate societal systems starting from a very young age. Lareau (2011) explained, “concerted cultivation… plays an especially important role in institutional settings, where middle-class children learn to question adults and address them as relative equals” (Lareau, 2011, p. 2). Students raised with concerted cultivation learned the valuable skills of how to build and leverage their social capital. Lareau described that the other group of children, who Bourdieu would say lack social capital, do not have the tools and resources needed to navigate complex systems or keep up with peers raised with concerted
cultivation.
Lareau also described how parents intentionally foster and groom their children’s talents, skills, and development through organized activities, which Bourdieu would view as the instilling of cultural capital (2011). Though Lareau was writing about primary school-aged children, the same phenomenon of “concerted cultivation” also occurs in college students. Parents and children who come from means and privilege are able to leverage their networks and experiences to continue to take advantage of opportunities, such as internships (remember Gloria in Chapter One). This is an example of privilege
begetting more privilege. Lawrence (2016) similarly noted the reproduction of opportunity, mobility, and wealth that occurs between generations.
In Unequal Childhoods, Lareau described that through their upbringing, students raised through concerted cultivation gain a “sense of entitlement,” whereas students raised with a “natural growth” model come away with “an emerging sense of distance, distrust, and constraint in their institutional experiences” (Lareau, 2011). Those raised in a natural growth model have fewer tools and less cultural capital to navigate the complex systems of hiring and employment. Lacking the important connections and skills can be particularly consequential when pursuing an internship, where connections and social capital can be vital for obtaining these opportunities.
Though Lareau’s observations of childrearing did not directly reveal issues of economic capital, this is another type of advantage that impacts students’ ability to engage in internships. Allen and colleagues (2013) described how economic capital factored into college students’ work placements, saying that unpaid opportunities “led working-class students to self-select how many and what kinds of placements they undertook on the basis of their financial situation. This included taking shorter-term placements, choosing placements near home, or only undertaking one placement” (p. 442). In short, when some students must choose between an unpaid internship and a paid part-time job, they may not actually have a choice. Lehman (2012) echoed these sentiments, explaining that students from lower-income backgrounds have a greater financial need to work in off-campus employment, making it difficult to find time for other extra-curricular activities.
Though internships are a form of experiential learning that are popular from a variety of perspectives (employer, student, faculty, parent), it is important to examine the demographics and breakdown of those who participate in them and those who do not. If internship participation is actually based on an applicant’s social and economic capital, then internships should not be viewed as a vehicle for social mobility, as they simply serve to reproduce existing structures of wealth.
2.4.1. Limits to Bourdieu
Several researchers and theorists (Lin, 2000; McDonald & Day, 2010; StantonSalazar, 1997; Yosso, 2005) noted the often-overlooked connections between identity (particularly race) and Bourdieuan social capital. Critics of capital theory (Lin, 2000; McDonald & Day, 2010; Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Yosso, 2005) explained that it is centered on those who are White, middle-class, and male, and does not take into account the experiences and networks of those who hold marginalized identities.
Indeed, Bourdieu’s (1986) explanation of social capital is contingent upon one’s connections having societal power. McDonald and Day (2010) pointed out that people tend to socialize with those who hold similar identities, called “homophily.” Those who hold dominant identities (e.g., White, male, cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied) will likely build social capital with others who hold dominant identities, and these connections and insider knowledge will help them succeed. However, those with marginalized identities (i.e., those who are not White, male, cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied, etc.) are likely to build social capital with those who have similar experiences and demographics, and who will not hold as much power in a society that attributes more power to those with dominant identities.
For a real-life example, a Black, gay woman may build most of her connections with others who are Black, gay, and who identify as women. Let us compare her to a White, straight man who has the same number of social relationships. The difference is that the White, straight man will have more White, straight, and male-identified connections, who will be likely to have more capital and power in our society. That being said, there is also a richness in relationships and capital within the network held by the Black, gay woman. However, soley using a Bourdieuan perspective would fail to recognize the support, community, and sisterhood that woman gains from those around her.
As Yosso (2005), Lin (2000), McDonald and Day (2010), and Stanton-Salazar (1997) recommended, it is important to take social identity into account in addition to Bourdieu’s (1986) categories of social, cultural, and economic capital. While Bourdieu’s theory provides a useful framework, it does not adequately account for well-documented inequities, such as economic opportunity that varies by gender (Blau, 2016), sexual orientation (Sears & Mallory, 2011), and race (Reardon & Bischoff, 2011). For these reasons, I also examined identity and demographic information in the current study.
2.5. Research Questions
To investigate issues of equity for internship engagement, I propose the following two research questions:
- Do students’ identities and/or economic, social, and cultural capital indicators differ depending on participation in an internship?
- What are the factors that significantly relate to undergraduate students’ participation in internships?
2.6. Concept Map and Significance of the Current Study
The concept map (Figure 1) shows the theoretical/conceptual model of the identities and capital required to engage in an internship. The top purple box shows identity and social, cultural, and economic capital (Bourdieu, 1986) that impact whether a student engages in an internship. I hypothesized that students of dominant identities (men, able-bodied, straight, and White students) and with higher levels of capital engage in internships at higher levels than their peers who have subordinate identities and/or lower levels of capital.
— This is the third of six articles in this series. Click here to go to the next article. This series of articles are courtesy of Amanda Chase. Amanda Chase is the director of strategic engagement for the collective impact organization Advance Vermont, where she works to increase access to postsecondary education. She also has a private consulting business, and previously worked as the internship coordinator for the University of Vermont. Amanda has worked with a wide variety of businesses to support their hiring goals, from one-person grassroots organizations to Fortune 500 companies. Her hundreds of individual career counseling clients have included high school students applying to first jobs, adults making significant career transitions, retirees seeking encore careers, and everything in between. She received a bachelor of arts in psychology from Hamilton College, a master’s degree in counseling from the University of Vermont, and an Ed.D. in educational leadership and policy studies from the University of Vermont. Her work has always centered on issues of equity and access in education and career development. To learn more about Amanda or to get in touch, visit her website.
