Does the college MT audition process make any sense?

College Majors Musical Theater Majors
1

<p>I have a fundamental question: does the college MT audition process make any sense?</p>

<p>I am not aware of any other situation, either in the general college application process or the professional world where a 5 minute interview/evaluation is used to make a decision of this significance. Think of it: they spend 5 minutes with a kid, have him/her sing 16-32 bars and do a monologue and then a decision is made that they (both the kid and the school) will have to live with for the next 4 YEARS. I am trying to think of similar situations but I can not come up with any. I have read several people equate the MT college acceptance situation to getting a Division 1 (D1) sports scholarship. But D1 athletes are evaluated, analyzed and recruited over dozens of games over 2-3 years. They look at videos, they go to their games, they analyze their stats. The MT audition/decision process seems equivalent to making a decision about an NCAA basketball player after only watching him shoot some shots and do lay-ups on a court all by himself for 5 minutes! I know it will be said that MT is not the same as sports, but auditions for professional (or even amateur) productions have callbacks and the decision is made after evaluating the actors for hours, if not days. And remember in that case the audition is for a show that will only last a short period of time, not 4 year college commitment. </p>

<p>When I see all the postings on this site and read what these kids have to go through, I wonder why the audition process is set up this way. It seems arbitrary and cruel. It certaintly does not appear to provide a fair evaluation of the kids talent and abilities.</p>

<p>Obviously, I am new to this process and I am hoping for feedback from some of the experienced people on this site. So I repeat my question: Does the college MT audition process make any sense?</p>

2

<p>Many professional auditions do not involve hours or days (some might). For example, my D was cast in a national tour. The first audition for it, she sang one song. At the callback, she was given a song to sing, had to do a dance audition, and read the “sides” (script excerpt). All in all, that is pretty much what a college audition involves. My kid auditioned for 8 BFA programs and at most of these, she sang two songs, did two monologues and did a dance audition, and at some, there was some “interview” aspect a well. </p>

<p>The colleges also don’t just audition you. They have a resume, recommendations, transcripts, essays, test scores, etc. They are not just “casting” you but admitting you for an EDUCATION. Typically, they don’t just care if you can sing, act, and dance (though they want that too), but they are admitting a student who they think will do well in their school. At many schools, it is not enough to sing, act, and dance (though that is heavily weighted) but you must be a student they wish to have join the class (not just the cast). Those other pieces also factor in. So, they are not just seeing you for ten minutes but they are gathering all this other stuff about you. But the amount of time spent n the actual audition isn’t necessarily that far off professional auditions. Most auditions my kid attended for a BFA lasted more than five minutes. The dance call alone was long. Each college handles it differently.</p>

3

<p>No matter what system is used, there will always be some deserving students who are left out- maybe they were sick at the audition, maybe they just had a bad day. But I think that the audition process is a fair one over-all. The auditoners (those running the auditions) see hundreds of kids in a weekend, and spend the rest of their time working with students on a daily basis. I think they become fairly adept at picking out the kids who have potential in a very short time. In a professional audition, auditionees (those auditioning) had better get the production staff’s attention in the first 10-15 seconds of their audition. College auditions are much the same, and I think it is very apparent that quickly who has potential as a singer. As for dance, many schools are looking not necessarily for the perfect dancer as much as for the student who can listen, follow directions, and who has that special personality on stage- kind of the same thing goes for acting; it all depends on the school. I think that there are enough different types of programs out there that most students can find a program into which they fit well. There is a wealth of information available on this site to enable future auditionees to research what is necessary to prepare fully for college auditions. As for the cruelness and arbitrariness of these auditions, welcome to the world of theater! I think that by the time students get to the stage where they are ready to audition for colleges, they must already have an indication that they are talented enough for an MT program, and they must have reached a point that they have developed somewhat of a thick skin and not take rejection personally. As long as the student has developed a list of schools that is well-rounded-maybe some are a reach, maybe some are non-audition programs- then he or she should be able to get into a program that fits their talents. Good luck!</p>

4

<p>Thank you for the quick replies. I have read many of your posts over the last couple of months and really respect your opinion. I guess I think there is still a difference between regular shows and the college audition process because I equate the selection of a dozen kids out of 2000 (what I heard for CMU this year) as equivalent to selecting leads for a professional show. I am certainly no expert on professional shows, but I doubt that they spend 10 minutes making a decision on who will be in lead roles. Even for community or high school theater, decisions on lead roles seem to involve a much more thorough evaluation. I know it is probably impractical, but have they ever done callbacks during the college audition process? Have they considered accepting videos of past performances? Videos are a good standard tool that is used to evaluate people for sports scholarships all the time. I know it would take more time (and money), but again given the magnitude of the decision (especially at schools like CMU, CCM, Michigan, etc) wouldn’t it make sense? It just seems like they could do more make the process better for the students and (equally importantly) the schools…</p>

5

<p>As a parent of a child going through this process all I can say is that the process is flawed. Even the auditors (the good ones) admit that they are at best making an educated guess about each candidate they see. Several we talked to throughout the year admitted that they know they don’t always (maybe even often, don’t) get it right and that many, many talented people slip through the cracks. Although there are several aspects to most auditions (sing, dance, act sometimes interview) they only get a brief snapshot of what a candidate can do. The more coaching, and preparation the student has (students with the financial resources have a huge advantage), the better the chance. Yes, when they get into the professional world they will have only a few minutes or seconds to make an impression but they are auditioning for a school not a show. Hopefully, the college helps to prepare them for that upon graduation. It is not a perfect system to be sure. </p>

<p>(Sooviet, many schools don’t appear to even look at academic accomplishments of students until they get through the audition first–UCLA, Syracuse, CMU, Roosevelt to name a few. Of course, I am willing to concede that there are also those who screen applicants before being invited to audition-- UMich, Wagner) </p>

<p>As a choreographer myself, I can tell you that I can tell in a few minutes who has had dance training, who picks up steps quickly, who has stage presence. What I can’t know from that few minutes is who will really blossom–or who really has the drive. Often, there are students who are great “auditioners” but don’t dig deep in rehearsal and don’t really develop. This is impossible to know in a few minutes. Resumes are deceiving.</p>

<p>I think you bring up an interesting point about the recruiting of athletes vs. performing artists. The scouting, watching film, romancing families of athletes, all speak to the financial backing of college sports vs. college arts programs. It is extremely expensive to recruit high school athletes–there is great return on that investment if that team wins a national championship and improves recruiting for the entire school. That is one of the realities of our world.</p>

<p>I think the colleges do their best to give each auditioner a chance to demonstrate what they can do–as of yet, there doesn’t seem to be another better way to do this. It is a brutal and often painful process but it is also good preparation for what these same candidates will face in the real world after they graduate.</p>

6

<p>But even in professional auditions, they don’t take videos of your past work, and just evaluate you on your songs, monologues and dance call. But I think you are forgetting that almost every college is not accepting you merely on the audition itself. The audition certainly counts a lot but it doesn’t count 100% of the decision. So, they DO garner lots of other information about you and your background. Your resume and recommendations share your artistic background and achievements. Your essays and statements of why you want to attend their program or study MT count. And again, they are not just “casting” you as is the case with a show. They want to know that you can hack the intense training and educational process and so they examine what kind of student you are…grades, test scores, rigor of HS curriculum, and so on. And in fact, when you attend the college program, you don’t JUST take acting, singing and dance classes but you have to be able to handle the college coursework. They aren’t admitting you into a performance bur rather into an educational program. It is not the same as simply casting a show. </p>

<p>Also, this is not all that different than students who audition for music performance or dance performance majors. </p>

<p>Yes, this is all very tough. But so is the real world of theater. I have a kid now who is out there in the professional world and is not much older (she is 21), and at some auditions, for major things, they decide who to cut or consider based on sixteen bars (no acting or dance yet). So, before they even get to see everything about you, you can be in or out of consideration in one minute. I’ll take it a step even further, you may not even get to sing and may be typed out!</p>

<p>Again, these colleges are obtaining more from the student than just what happens in the audition room. But even the audition itself, when adding the three components of singing, acting and dance, add up typically to more than five minutes. </p>

<p>A few schools have a little bit of a callback system. For instance, Penn State does (all on the same day as the audition) and I think UArts started doing that. CMU does not officially do that but it is common for those who they have some interest in, they often ask them to do more or be seen by other faculty. </p>

<p>Please remember that with such low admit rates, far more students are qualified and talented enough to get into a particular program than they can accept and so they will get turned away no matter how many minutes are spent with them. It is the nature of the beast. That is why some kids get into some programs and not others. </p>

<p>In any case, the nature of the performing arts is such that a background builds up your skill set and an audition is an opportunity to make that all show. Auditioning itself is a skill and takes a lot of practice. This is going to be the way of these kids’ lives if they stay in this career field.</p>

7

<p>I cross posted with CalMTMom. </p>

<p>Applicants “slip through the cracks” but not necessarily due to a flaw in the audition process. Simply, if a program is taking 20 kids, there are more than 20 kids who have what it takes to get into that program. This is not different than say, applying to Harvard, who turns away valedictorians and perfect SAT scores in droves. </p>

<p>When you say that they can’t tell the drive or motivation or even work ethic in the audition room…I do agree…but hopefully, they examine recommendations and essays and such to get some handle on that. Even academic grades give some indication of a student’s work habits. </p>

<p>You say some schools first make you pass the audition portion of the process before reviewing the student academically…this is true at several, but not nearly all, schools such as Syracuse, Ithaca, CMU. But even so, the academic factors WILL be a part of the admissions decision, even if they are first screened artistically. Then, there are schools that have a bifurcated process whereby the student is accepted separately academically to the university and separately artistically to the BFA program (example: Otterbein, Elon, Indiana). And there are schools like NYU/Tisch where the academic review counts 50% and the artistic review counts 50% and are each done at the same time by different sets of administrators. But in the end at all these schools, getting admitted is not ONLY the audition. And even on the artistic end of it, many of the BFA auditors examine resumes and recs and such. They would not ask for these things if they didn’t matter at all, even if the audition counts more. They have more kids with the requisite artistic talent than they can take and so all these other factors come into play when making a decision. </p>

<p>But in a professional audition, other than presenting a resume, there are no recs or essays or other ways to show who you are. You can be cut after sixteen bars of a song before you even do another thing in the casting process. </p>

<p>If a student truly has the artistic talent to get into a BFA program, but not all of them. I believe he or she will if he/she has a balanced appropriate list. But even the MOST talented kids will be turned away from SOME programs, not because the process was not fair but because no single program can accommodate every qualified and talented applicant. That is why I can quote countless examples of kids who got into CCM but not Syracuse, Tisch but not Emerson, Michigan but not Penn State, Tisch but not UArts, and so on.</p>

8

<p>Are you sure CMU auditioned 2000? I honestly don’t know the number that auditioned there this year. But in my D’s year, they auditioned 1200 for both MT and Acting, taking 10 for MT and 18 for Acting. Still quite daunting odds. Let’s remember that among the applicants, there are some kids who are not truly contenders to be considered for admission. That still leaves plenty who are but just saying that at any of these programs, there are kids who are not that qualified or talented to get in. Unfortunately, plenty of them are!! :D</p>

9

<p>Soozievt, first of all this discussion is very informative and fun (I see why you do it). Just to play “devil’s advocate” and be a little controversial: I think the fact that there is problem with the audition process is proven by the real world successes (or lack-thereof) of the MT actors produced by these schools. I look at the bios of the people on Broadway and touring shows and most don’t even mention the school they went to; I guess either because they didn’t go to college or no one really cares. Sure I know the colleges have the lists of people who “made it” on Broadway, but I am always surprised how few of the big Broadway leads went to any of these top MT schools. Just to give a parallel from the business world, if you look at the top business leaders (Fortune 500 CEOs, etc) most come from a handful of top-tier Business schools (Ivy league, etc). If you look at the scientific world, most top scientists come from a handful of top-tier science/engineering schools (MIT, Caltech, etc). Why is not the same case for MT schools? Sure, I know people will say that MT is totally different. But is it really? In many cases the Ivy league MBA is no smarter than the other job applicants, but he gets the job because of the school reputation. Maybe if these MT schools had a reputation equal to an Ivy League business school the graduates would be getting more lead roles on Broadway (we all agree the selection process is arbitrary anyway). So the question is why is a MT degree from CMU or Michigan not as powerful as MBA from Harvard (when in fact it is probably harder to get into MT at CMU than Harvard)? Well, it could be because the “product” (i.e. MT actors) produced by the top MT schools is not as good as the “product” (MBAs) produced by Harvard. Or at least people in the MT industry don’t think it is, and that is the most important part. Maybe one reason why the MT actors are not viewed as good is because a MT degree from CMU (unlike a Harvard MBA) does not provide a guarantee that he/she will be really-really-really good. Maybe this all stems from the fact that the audition process is fundamentally flawed and they are not getting the best talent to begin with. I know this is a controversial post, but I think it at least makes sense to debate the issue at an intellectual level.</p>

10

<p>Might I ask if you have a child who is considering Musical Theater or who has been rejected from a MT program? Just curious…</p>

11

<p>It seems odd to say that the MT audition process is unfair and then relate it to business schools like Harvard or a few select engineering schools. It seems to me as compared to these that the MT selection process for colleges and the profession is decidedly more democractic and open to allowing more people to be successful than the Harvard business crowd. Do we know for sure that it is the training and education ar Haarvard that produces CEOs or is it the network and connections made? harvard has a very low admit and they must certainly miss out on many, many talented young people who do not know to apply, cant afford to apply, or a multitude of other reasons. So I am not at all sure how this process makes that system nore fair. I would take an open audition, everyone has a chance to prove yourself in 10 minutes to a who is your social network system.</p>

<p>As for time of auditions, D has been at auditions for leads when everyone was asked to walk under a line. If you were not under you were dismissed with out opening your mouth. She was at a dance audition for a kids summer program where everyone was asked to do a tendu, two groups were made from that and one group was never looked at again during the audition class. So even if they peformed beautifully later in the class, it made no difference.</p>

<p>On the time, cost, success continuum from a universities point of view, I think 10 minutes to make your case as a performer is rather generous.</p>

12

<p>Whywhy - I understand what you saying and I appreciate the analogies you are trying to make. But unlike a top law school or medical school which would have the most brilliant faculty to put out brilliant lawyers and doctors this field is driven by different variables. Talent, stage presence, that “it” factor - I don’t think any college can create that. A big part of the business is who knows you and some colleges are better connected and better at getting you in front of an agency or seen by agents. </p>

<p>If you attend a cattlecall with 100’s or 1000’s of people you can be singled out strictly by looks or “type”. If lucky you might get to sing 16 bars and further eliminations. The college audition mirrors what happens in the real world of performing - actually they see you a much longer time than say a real Broadway audition. So to answer your question from this standpoint to the college I do think to them the MT audition process makes sense.</p>

<p>I have found that you can drive yourself crazy in this world if you don’t recognize that it is indeed “art”. Time and again I have seen one casting agent not like someone’s voice and another casting agent will love the same voice. One person will view the person as an ingenue and another sees her as a character actress. It’s the same person - what is the difference? The difference is in this artistic world it is subjective. It’s the same as one person loving Picasso and another thinking it looks like a painting by a 3rd grader. </p>

<p>You are correct that after college no one will care where you went to school, what you majored in or even if you went to school. You are also correct that it is alarming when you think of the number of people trained at these colleges and so few successful names among the alumni. The reason is in this field there are 1000’s of talented people yet only a few actually make it. </p>

<p>I, too, like to read Playbills. There usually is at least one performer from CCM. I often see graduates of BOCO. Is that because these places train better than other places? Or because they have better connections? Or because they are better at spotting someone with that “it” factor in their admissions? Or is it because the actors who choose a conservatory are more determined? Not long ago I saw a brilliant performance, looked at my Playbill and they graduated from Illinois Wesleyan. I’ve also seen great performances from someone listed with a BA in History.</p>

13

<p>If you take a look at the Ivy League admissions portion of CC, you will see that every year there are students with perfect SAT scores, 4.0 + GPA, and outstanding extra curricular activities who are rejected from Harvard, Yale, etc. This rejection is often made after reading the application and essay. No personal interview and no opportunity to appeal. I would rather audition and have a chance to show personality and skill than have to rely on a written application.</p>

14

<p>I think the key difference between a professional audition and a college audition is, as stated by CalMTMom, potential. A professional show (especially Equity) is not interested in your growth and development as an actor, they have a need to be filled immediately. Many colleges auditors state that there is little or no way to determine who will blossom and who will stagnate in their four years at college. That is one reason why some schools have students re-audition during their four years.</p>

<p>There is also so much more to succeeding in this business than talent. It is afterall, a business, and many actors don’t understand that. There’s also perseverance and stamina, you are constantly looking for your next gig and you’re only as good as your last; some people think you’re wonderful, some think you should find another job. There’s also an awful lot of luck involved but you must know when that luck comes your way and how to take advantage of it when it does come.</p>

<p>Most casting directors can tell if you’re right for a part within the 16 bars. There is much more that is involved in casting main roles however, that’s why there are numerous callbacks, mixing the different characters for looks and chemistry, etc. for lead roles. So much is involved.</p>

<p>The college admittance system is flawed to be sure, most agree, it does favor the student who has always wanted to be an actor and has parents willing to get them training. What about the student who discovers acting as a junior or senior in high school, or the ones who want it so badly, are so hungry for it, they work at it without parental support? That’s life though, and I’m not so sure that those who are hungriest aren’t the ones who truly do succeed in the end. No college audition can tell you that.</p>

15

<p>This has been a very interesting discussion, and I have to say I agree with the points everyone has brought up: it is an unfair process, although I think the schools do their best to choose students who will do well in their programs. Sure, it would be nice if the auditions lasted longer, or if there were callbacks or more personal interaction. Unfortunately, that’s pretty impractical. Don’t forget, the faculty members who conduct the auditions are also actively involved in teaching and directing the students who are already attending the university. When your child has been accepted to a school, you will certainly not want the faculty to be absent for long periods of time conducting auditions – you want them to be focused on teaching.
Unfortunately, this business itself can be arbitrary and unfair. The college admissions process is only part of it; and as has been mentioned, it is not necessary to have a college degree to be successful.</p>

16

<p>At the risk of being repetitive of what I’ve said in the past and what others are saying on this thread…
There is no way of attempting to understand the audition process - there are so many variables that have been documented many times over on these pages and elsewhere. There are the many false-positives and false-negatives that occur at every audition - profession or for program admittance. To worry about such things is just unproductive fretting over that which you can have no effect.
Just a point of information, as has been already stated, most programs give you much more than 5 minutes. Many schools give you 10 minutes between songs and monologues, then another half-hour in a dance audition, they read resumes, teacher recommendations, most often they record your audition and have several people pouring over hundreds of videos for hours while coming to a conclusion about acceptances. Also, again, I know this has been said in many ways, if you think you get more consideration in a professional audition - you are so wrong - you may not get seen at all, you may get typed-out after 10 seconds, you may never get the read from the show. Actually, none of that is important.</p>

<p>What is important is that you arrive to your audition for MT as prepared and comfortable as possible, ready to sing, dance, and act. It matters how you present yourself and your materials (resume, photo, maybe an essay for some schools, recommendations, clothes you were, good attitude and demeanor) perhaps a follow-up thank you card. You need to give it your best shot - you cannot worry about if life is fair. You need to prepared to hear “no” - and be excited if you hear “yes”. You need the courage to go again and again - usually you will be rejected - until you hit the few auditions that will say “yes” and possibly change your life.</p>

17

<p>WhyWhy:
I don’t agree that the admissions process for MT programs is “arbitrary.” I don’t think that is the best description. Same with Ivy League admissions (I also have a child who went to an Ivy League school). The nature of the beast of applying to very low admit rate colleges or MT programs is that excellent candidates will be turned away, and thus should not take it personally. Harvard will tell you that they could fill their class a second time over and it be as good as the class they accepted. That leaves all the other candidates who really were not quite qualified. But there are qualified people turned away. Same with MT admissions. It is not simply a talent contest to be admitted. YES, you MUST have the requisite talent to be admitted. But since more have it than they can accept, they must whittle that “has the talent” group down somehow. There are all the other pieces submitted…essays, recs, transcripts, scores, resume, etc. that show other things about the candidate and who they think will succeed in their program. Then, there is the make up of the class and they want a mix. They don’t want all blonde ingenue sopranos. They don’t want all character actors. So, your kid is not even vying for every spot open in the class. As well, more girls audition than boys but many programs take equal numbers of each gender. CMU accepts more boys than girls. </p>

<p>Anyone entering this field MUST deal with numerous rejections. They cannot take the result of one or two college MT auditions or five professional NYC auditions as the commentary as to whether they have what it takes. The best talent will still get rejections in this process. It doesn’t mean the process if flawed. But it means it is highly competitive and rejections go with the territory. On top of that, it is very SUBJECTIVE and not black and white when it comes to judging talent. </p>

<p>While there are definitely Broadway actors who either have no degree at all, no performing arts related degree, have a BA (not BFA), etc., there are plenty who do have a BFA (I read playbills as well). A BFA is not required to be cast. But good training will give you a chance to be well prepared for the industry. On the other hand, since the industry is so competitive and so few “make it”, it is not a guarantee if you have a BFA from a top MT program that you will get work. But by the same token, there is a better chance of getting work with excellent training, than without it. It is no shock, therefore, that some who do make it, have gone to a very good BFA program. </p>

<p>Another aspect to going to a very good MT program is the contacts you make and the future networking. This is not all that different than your mention of the Ivy League or the top business schools. As well, very good MT programs get agent interest in their showcases which can be a transition to getting an agent and so on. My kid is really just out of the gate, having graduated Tisch last May. She has an agent, is Equity, and has been working every day since graduation day in the theater world in some capacity. I venture to say that almost everything she is doing now, has some “connection” of sorts to having attended Tisch. While her casting on the National Tour had no connections, she did get the audition through her agent who saw her at the Tisch MT showcase. But lots of what she is doing now, has been through connecting with either other Tisch students/grads or faculty and one thing often leads to another. As far as casting goes, getting the agent was a little easier due to the showcase. But right now, my kid knows a lot of people in the industry due to her four years at Tisch. </p>

<p>While where you went to school to study MT is no guarantee with how successful you will be (you can be a success even with no degree), it is often a boost in that you get very good training, a good education, and meet and network with many people. The degree will not get you cast, however. Still, casting directors do ask for a resume (and don’t just audition you) and it can’t hurt to show you have had solid training on your resume as it stands for something. I do think pros in NYC take notice of grads from certain programs. Doesn’t mean all grads will get cast but it certainly is a plus to be able to show you have solid training. And casting agencies do have a tendency to attend showcases from well regarded programs and the like. Again, no guarantees for any actor in this industry, no matter where they went to school, but it CAN help to get very good training. It can never hurt. </p>

<p>It is also my belief that for those who truly have the requisite talent and qualifications to attend a BFA program in MT, they WILL get in SOMEWHERE if they have a well balanced and appropriate list. I have rarely seen a top talented kid shut out of college all together. There are some who do not have a realistic or balanced college list and this will affect their outcome. But those who truly are qualified are rarely shut out of college programs. They will get rejections, but they can only attend one school. There are some kids who are on the college audition circuit who don’t quite have what is necessary to get in. As well, I run into people who do not have realistic or balanced college lists and so this all can prove problematic. This is a highly competitive process (as is Ivy League admissions). I see the same mistakes with Ivy League applicants…some applicants are unrealistic…some do not have balanced college lists. Also, with MT college admissions, I see time and time again, people who create a list of colleges they have heard of “because they offer MT” without any regard to the academic qualifications to get in. Those still count at most colleges. I have had families ignore black and white facts when shown the statistics of what you need to get into UMich and where their stats are very very very far out of range for ANY accepted students to UMich and they insist on applying anyway. There are kids with very little artistic training or achievements in MT, who aren’t competitive artistically but insist on applying to CMU and CCM, for example. The right college list for each student is crucial and where big mistakes are made every year among applicants. If you have a college list that is appropriate to YOU and is well balanced and realistic in terms of odds, you should not be shut out of studying MT at a college.</p>

18

<p>I forgot to mention, but I think “luck” plays a factor for actors too. </p>

<p>Also, while you have to be able to sing, dance, and act, there is a fourth factor…the “it” factor. Some have the “it” factor and some don’t. I don’t think the “it” factor can be taught. Go to some HS show and your eye is drawn to certain kids on stage who light up the stage in their stage presence. </p>

<p>Another thing is that lots of kids can sing, act, and dance, but not all applicants are good at auditioning. Auditioning is a skill itself. It takes lots of practice to get good at auditioning. It takes self confidence too to put yourself out there. Those who don’t fall to pieces at every rejection and can keep to their goals and game plan, have an edge. This field is rife with rejections and is not for the faint of heart. </p>

<p>Another thing is you can’t control certain aspects of an audition such as your looks. Your looks are what they are and this field involves casting by type and by look and you either match what they want or don’t. That is not a factor nearly as much in the business world. Your skill set in business can take you far. In theater, a skill set is also needed but looks/type also play a part in being “hired.” The best talent at an audition doesn’t necessarily “win” the job. I am happy my kid learned this at a young age. I recall she was seen five times for the National Tour of Annie. Once she was in the final pool for an orphan. A smaller girl got it. Then she was called back in for replacement for Annie. They were down to the final three and my D was one of them. The casting director told her in the end that she had the talent but they were gonna go with one of the other two girls as they were fair skinned and blonde and would look better in a red wig than she would (she is neither fair skinned or blond) and that was the deciding factor. It was a great experience, I felt, for her to have so young as that is how it is now in the real world past college in NYC auditions. And there’s nothing you can do about that aspect. Who is cast is not the same as a talent contest.</p>

19

<p>I have a suggestion for those who are reading this interesting thread and have children (or are students themselves) who have not yet applied to college for MT…</p>

<p>One really needs to assess their talent before applying to these highly competitive programs. There are various ways to do that. It is really not enough to only know how you do within your own high school setting (though if you are a stand out there, it certainly is an affirmation at the school level!! and if you don’t stand out on the school level, that may give you some pause as to if you can stand out in a larger and more concentrated talent pool). But it REALLY helps to assess one’s talent beyond the high school level. </p>

<p>One way (not the only way) is to attend a summer theater intensive where there is a slew of talent from around the country. How do you fare in that talent pool? (some summer programs involve casting in shows or else some involve an audition to be admitted) Self assess against the best talent you see there (these are who you’ll be up against for BFA admissions). </p>

<p>Another way is if you know students who have been successful in BFA in MT admissions, try to assess your talent and skill set against theirs. Do you feel you are on a similar level? </p>

<p>Another important way is to get an assessment of your competitiveness for a BFA from voice and acting teachers who have had other students who have gotten into such programs and have a perspective of the level of talent who has gotten admitted in the past. But those teachers must be familiar with students who have gone to BFA programs. It is not the same to ask a voice teacher who has no familiarity with other students who go onto BFA programs. </p>

<p>Another way (not essential) to ascertain your competitiveness is to enter adjudicated events (which differ depending where you live to some degree)…in some places there is All States, state scholarships for artistic talent, NATS, thespian festivals, and various other competitions or adjudicated events. There is NFAA Arts Awards and such. You do not have to garner big awards to get into a BFA program but if you have been “tested” in this way and done well, it is one way to know you are competitive in a broader talent pool beyond your high school or local community. </p>

<p>I’ll say as a mom myself, that we all think our kids have talent!!! Nobody could argue with our assessment!! :smiley: But from a personal experience, I will share that my kid grew up in a tiny rural town and went to a regular public unknown high school that did put on plays and musicals, but didn’t teach any drama, nor were there any youth programs for theater in our region. Yes, she did stand out at our high school and when cast in adult shows in the region and so on. But that would not have been enough to know if she was competitive for BFA programs. But I feel we had other “measures” that gave us a “clue” as to whether she could “compete” in a national talent pool for very selective college MT programs. She went away in summers to a theater camp filled with very talented kids from around the country (many who have attended the top BFA and BA theater programs in the country and many who have gone onto professional success) and we were shocked the first summer when she was getting cast very well there. It gave us an idea pretty early on. She was further tested in other ways…winning state and national awards, and auditioned in NYC several times. By the time she applied to college, while we were very worried at the very low rates of admission to BFA programs and knew she’d get rejected at some, we did believe she was competitive for admissions (plus was a very good student) and so had some confidence that she’d be admitted to at least one school. Her results were much better than that, but we were being realistic as to the odds even though we felt she was competitive. </p>

<p>But we went into it having some inkling as to an assessment of her competitiveness for this and so I think that is important to assess. Being interested in MT and doing well in HS is not enough to ascertain if you would be admitted to a BFA in MT program. You might be admitted and have few achievements, but you’d be guessing as to whether you could get admitted. In other words, you don’t have to garner awards or do the things I mentioned above in this post in order to be admitted, but if you DO those things, it gives you some idea of whether you are a contender in this strong applicant pool and that helps to ascertain so that you can build an appropriate list for YOU. It is not enough that us moms and dads think our kids are very talented. Some form of outside assessment beyond the local realm can help to see the picture better.</p>

20

<p>Hi SoovieVT~</p>

<p>I just posted on a similar topic on the MPULSE 2010 thread on the University of Michigan page…we have similar thoughts on this. Actually i mentioned that perhaps you would give your expert opinion…i wonder if you might paste your above response to that thread too? Yours is just one with a lot more to back it (im just starting this process with my kid!) than mine is…</p>

<p>thanks!</p>