Back to cases
Case 15Work & pay4 min

Internship, or someone’s unpaid job?

‘Great exposure’ is a pitch. What is the actual arrangement?

In the conversationCaioPauta
Portrait of Caio, with the same features and styling as the Common Room films.

Who is this work for?

Portrait of Caio, with the same features and styling as the Common Room films.

Caio is with you

A title does not tell me what I’ll spend the summer doing.

The original reference

Peacock: The Office

The Office’s fictional paper company gives us an approachable setting for workplace questions. The internship below is invented; it is not a claim about a particular episode.

Open the original reference

Official page; full episodes may require a subscription and regional availability. The text exercise is self-contained.

Lunch break. The “learning opportunity” has a production deadline.

The title is not a description of the whole arrangement.

Hear what matters to each person. Choose a question. Notice what their answer adds, then check it against the case materials.

Two people to hear from. Start with either one.

Put their perspectives together

Read the work behind the title and the life around the offer. Clear questions can protect a person’s ability to make an informed choice.

A person’s account explains their perspective. It still needs checking where it makes a factual claim.

Follow the explanation

Bring a companion into this.

Six ways to get unstuck
DudaFind the question

Which fact about the actual arrangement would change your first impression?

Try your first take
PautaCheck who decides

Use the Department of Labor source in its stated setting. Which relevant facts remain unknown?

Open the source file
LupaFollow the evidence

Separate the advertisement, written terms and reported experience. Avoid inventing a promise.

Check the original
OndaConsider the people

What might a student hesitate to ask a prospective employer, and how can the inquiry make that question specific?

Consider another view
NexoLook at the bigger picture

If the response is “provide college credit,” what problem does that claim to solve and what might it fail to address?

Read the explanation
VozMake a next move

Draft questions about an invented internship offer. Examine the work and learning arrangement, then explain which facts would matter before assigning a legal label.

Build your response

Follow the question.

For internships at for-profit employers, the U.S. Department of Labor describes a flexible ‘primary beneficiary’ analysis under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Factors include educational training, links to coursework, the academic schedule, the length of the learning period, and whether the work complements rather than displaces paid employees. No single factor decides the outcome. Calling a position an internship, offering college credit, or having someone agree to no pay does not by itself resolve employee status.

Try the situation

The title does not tell you how the work is arranged.

An internship offer can describe learning while assigning work that looks like an ordinary staff role. Look past the title: who supervises, what training happens, how long it lasts and how it fits your education.

The Department of Labor describes a flexible primary-beneficiary test for unpaid interns and students in the relevant for-profit employment context. No single factor automatically decides it, and school credit alone does not settle the question. Ask for written duties, hours, supervision and compensation terms. Your career center can help you evaluate an offer; wage-rights questions may need the relevant labor agency or qualified advice. You do not have to treat uncertainty about pay as the price of being ambitious.

Supervision
Who guides, reviews and supports your work.
Primary beneficiary
The central question about who mainly benefits from the relationship under the relevant test.
Learning objective
A specific thing you should learn through the placement.

Una oferta de internado puede prometer aprendizaje y, a la vez, asignar tareas parecidas a las de un empleado. Mira más allá del título: quién supervisa, qué formación habrá, cuánto dura y cómo se relaciona con tus estudios.

El Departamento de Trabajo describe una evaluación flexible sobre quién es el beneficiario principal para pasantes no remunerados en el contexto correspondiente de empresas con fines de lucro. Ningún factor decide por sí solo, y recibir créditos académicos no resuelve la pregunta. Pide por escrito las funciones, horas, supervisión y condiciones de pago. El centro de carreras puede ayudarte a evaluar la oferta; las preguntas sobre derechos salariales pueden requerir una agencia laboral o asesoría cualificada.

Supervisión
Quién orienta, revisa y apoya tu trabajo.
Beneficiario principal
Pregunta sobre quién recibe principalmente el beneficio de la relación bajo la evaluación aplicable.
Objetivo de aprendizaje
Algo específico que deberías aprender durante la experiencia.
An invented situation to think through

A company offers an unpaid internship running its customer inbox all summer. It says college credit makes it legal. What should you examine?

Choose an approach. You can explore every response.

Your turn. Make it useful.

Draft questions about an invented internship offer. Examine the work and learning arrangement, then explain which facts would matter before assigning a legal label.

Before you call it done: Does the response look past the title “intern” without declaring employment status from incomplete facts?

How the seven fields work together here

These questions shape the same assignment. Work through them in plain language; you don’t need seven separate essays.

Public relations
What might a student hesitate to ask a prospective employer, and how can the inquiry make that question specific? The idea behind this
Communication strategy
Does the offer explain supervision and learning, or rely on the appeal of a title? The idea behind this
Law and legal concepts
Use the Department of Labor source in its stated setting. Which relevant facts remain unknown? The idea behind this
Policy and policy studies
If the response is “provide college credit,” what problem does that claim to solve and what might it fail to address? The idea behind this
Education and learning
Which fact about the actual arrangement would change your first impression? The idea behind this
Journalism and reporting
Separate the advertisement, written terms and reported experience. Avoid inventing a promise. The idea behind this
Creativity
Create a question list and a comparison worksheet. Test whether a student can spot the same gaps with either. The idea behind this
The research behind this case

These are our teaching applications of the ideas below. For the rule or factual claim itself, use this case’s source file.

Authority and jurisdiction

Cornell Legal Information Institute. Legal reference.

Whether legal authority binds a decision-maker depends on the relevant jurisdiction and legal system.

Keep in mind: This reference introduces a concept. The actual rule, jurisdiction, facts and current primary sources must be checked in each case.

Read the original source

What’s the problem represented to be?

Carol Bacchi. Author’s explanation of a policy-analysis approach.

Examine the view of the problem built into a proposed solution, including its assumptions and omissions. Question your own proposal, too.

Keep in mind: Our entry questions adapt part of WPR. They are not the complete approach or a substitute for evidence about an option’s effects.

Read the original source
Take this assignment to the making studio

Put your reasoning into words.

You can have a view and still have questions. Build a short take you can explain.

This stays in your browser and is not saved or submitted. Keep personal information out.

Voz asks what comes next

Make it specific.

Make an internship questions sheet from DOL’s seven factors and use fictional answers to identify the facts still missing.

Check the sources

Ask for the actual learning arrangement.

  1. Compare the advertised learning goals with a normal week of duties.
  2. Request the supervisor, schedule, pay terms and review process in writing.
  3. Bring unresolved questions to your career center and the relevant official wage guidance before deciding.

How you might tell a friend

I’m interested. Can we clarify the training, supervision, hours and compensation before I commit?
Una forma de decirlo en español

Me interesa. ¿Podemos aclarar la formación, supervisión, horas y remuneración antes de comprometerme?

Use your own voice. Keep the meaning, the evidence and the limits.

Where this example applies

Federal for-profit internship framework. State rules and other organizational contexts may differ; the exercise does not decide a real worker’s status.

Lupa keeps the sources close

The cultural reference starts a question. The other sources support the explanation.

Open the source file.

1

Peacock: The Office

Official series premise and workplace setting.

2

DOL: Internship Fact Sheet 71

Primary-beneficiary factors, flexible test, no single determinative factor.

Sources checked September 23, 2026. General education; no independent expert review is claimed. Source standards

Another angle?

Find another case
Bring this case to your course

English language arts and writing are the main fit. Civics, journalism, communications and sociology courses can add their disciplinary sources. These are selected practice targets; your submitted work shows what you can do.

Common Core targets and evidence

Grade 6

an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework; a revised written product; and a teacher observation or transcript of collaborative discussion.

  • RI.6.1 Cite a relevant source passage and distinguish what it states from an inference. Apply this to title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • W.6.2 Explain the distinctions among title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement in an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework.
  • W.6.5 Submit a first draft and revision; identify a factual, reasoning or audience change prompted by feedback.
  • SL.6.1.c Ask a specific question, respond with detail and paraphrase another perspective.
  • SL.6.1.d Ask a specific question, respond with detail and paraphrase another perspective.
Grade 7

an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework; a revised written product; and a teacher observation or transcript of collaborative discussion.

  • RI.7.1 Cite several relevant source details and explain how they support the distinction. Apply this to title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • W.7.2 Explain the distinctions among title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement in an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework.
  • W.7.5 Submit a first draft and revision; identify a factual, reasoning or audience change prompted by feedback.
  • SL.7.1.c Ask for elaboration and record whether new information changes your view.
  • SL.7.1.d Ask for elaboration and record whether new information changes your view.
Grade 8

an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework; a revised written product; and a teacher observation or transcript of collaborative discussion.

  • RI.8.1 Select the strongest evidence and explain why it is stronger than an alternative detail. Apply this to title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • W.8.2 Explain the distinctions among title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement in an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework.
  • W.8.5 Submit a first draft and revision; identify a factual, reasoning or audience change prompted by feedback.
  • SL.8.1.c Connect ideas from several speakers and qualify or justify your view with evidence.
  • SL.8.1.d Connect ideas from several speakers and qualify or justify your view with evidence.
Grade 9–10

an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework; a revised written product; and a teacher observation or transcript of collaborative discussion.

  • RI.9-10.1 Use strong, thorough evidence and distinguish direct source support from a disputed inference. Apply this to title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • W.9-10.2 Explain the distinctions among title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement in an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework.
  • W.9-10.5 Submit a first draft and revision; identify a factual, reasoning or audience change prompted by feedback.
  • SL.9-10.1.c Invite a peer, verify or challenge a conclusion, and summarize agreement and disagreement.
  • SL.9-10.1.d Invite a peer, verify or challenge a conclusion, and summarize agreement and disagreement.
Grade 11–12

an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework; a revised written product; and a teacher observation or transcript of collaborative discussion.

  • RI.11-12.1 Use strong, thorough evidence and explicitly identify an uncertainty that the source leaves unresolved. Apply this to title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • W.11-12.2 Explain the distinctions among title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement in an annotated invented offer and prioritized questions tied to the relevant source framework.
  • W.11-12.5 Submit a first draft and revision; identify a factual, reasoning or audience change prompted by feedback.
  • SL.11-12.1.c Synthesize positions, resolve a contradiction where possible and name additional information needed.
  • SL.11-12.1.d Synthesize positions, resolve a contradiction where possible and name additional information needed.

Course variations

Pre-AP English 1 and English 2 practice

English 1: Closely annotate two pivotal wording or design choices in the case records about title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement; write one analytical paragraph explaining how those choices affect meaning, then revise the case product. English 2: Compare three relevant records, develop a cohesive multi-paragraph analysis or supported recommendation, address a competing interpretation and explain one revision.

Turn in: English 1: annotated excerpt + analytical paragraph + revised product. English 2: source comparison + sustained analysis/argument + revision memo.

  • Specific details support the explanation of title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • Commentary connects wording or design to meaning, rather than only naming features.
  • The argument/analysis has a precise focus and relevant evidence.
  • English 2 integrates sources and addresses a plausible competing view.
Official course framework
AP English Language practice

Defend which missing facts should be investigated before labeling an internship arrangement, addressing the employer’s stated rationale. Build a defensible thesis from the case records and appropriate primary-source material; explain how each source supports the reasoning, qualify a claim and revise the argument for the case’s named audience.

Turn in: Source-supported argument + fair counterclaim + audience-specific revision and commentary

  • A defensible thesis takes a clear, qualified position.
  • Evidence and commentary accurately handle title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • The strongest plausible counterclaim receives fair treatment.
  • Organization and language suit the intended reader; qualification reflects an actual evidentiary limit.

Selected course-skill practice; not an official AP task, exam simulation or score prediction.

Official course framework
IB MYP Language and Literature practice

Compare two case texts about title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement, supporting an interpretation of a creator’s choices. Organize the findings with references, create the case’s reader-facing product, then explain how a draft changed for its audience.

Turn in: Supported text comparison + referenced plan + original revised product + audience reflection

  • A: A supported comparison explains a textual choice connected to title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • B: Ideas and references are organized so the reader can follow the reasoning.
  • C: The original product makes intentional choices for a specified audience and shows development from draft to revision.
  • D: Vocabulary, register and expression communicate accurately in the chosen context.

Teacher selects the actual MYP year descriptors. These local indicators do not assign official achievement levels.

Official course framework
IB DP Language A: Language and Literature practice

How do an internship offer’s vocabulary, promises and sentence structure frame work as learning or opportunity? Choose a substantive nonliterary case text and write a guided textual analysis: develop an interpretation, analyze specific authorial choices and evaluate how they shape meaning. Keep a public-policy recommendation separate from the textual analysis.

Turn in: Focused guided textual analysis of one substantial nonliterary text, with precise textual/visual references

  • A: A reasoned interpretation is grounded in relevant references.
  • B: Analysis evaluates how particular language, structure or visual choices shape meaning.
  • C: A focused line of argument connects paragraphs.
  • D: Clear, precise analytical language suits the task.

Paper 1 skill practice only. Not an assessed individual oral, HL essay or Paper 2; those have additional work/body-of-work requirements.

Official course framework
Honors extension — locally defined

Compare two invented offers using the same criteria, test rival classifications and explain why a title or one fact is insufficient. Independently locate an appropriate corroborating source, document its limits and defend which new evidence would change your conclusion.

Turn in: Independent inquiry/decision memo + rival explanation or option + limitations/revision-trigger note

  • Independent evidence is traceable and relevant.
  • The analysis accurately handles title of an offer and actual work/learning arrangement.
  • A serious competing interpretation or option is tested fairly.
  • The conclusion names a material limit and a concrete condition for revision.

No national Honors code or certification is asserted. Add the school’s actual course expectations.

Set the criteria with your local course teacher.

Keep the first draft, source notes, a discussion record and your revision. A solo response does not demonstrate a collaborative discussion standard. AP, Pre-AP and IB routes are independently designed practice, not official program assessments. Honors expectations are set locally.

See the complete curriculum crosswalk