<p>The one thing that I will say is that a callback system MIGHT give the less financially able or the late bloomers a little bit of a chance to show their passion; just becuase a child has not realized his passion early doesn’t mean that he is any less…passionate.</p>
<p>snoggie, I have NO doubt that such kids who start later in life are not as passionate as those doing it a longer while or having more training! Unfortunately, in such a highly competitive process where they often take less than 9% (often much less), passion and potential alone may not be selected over passion, potential and skill. </p>
<p>Millie, I have enjoyed your sharing of the UK system. By the way, in a BFA program, it is not unusual for a student to be at school from 9 AM until 11 PM between classes all day and rehearsals all evening. By the way, I wasn’t asking YOU if you thought there was a correlation between having an audition callback system for admissions and the number of graduates a program has on the West End. I was referring to WhyWhy’s post that seemed to be asking or implying such a correlation. Even you say yourself that GSA students are not more or less successful in being cast on the West End! </p>
<p>modernmillie, how does a recent MT grad who coaches perpetuate any “flaws” in the system? I am not sure I understand that. A MT grad supposedly has learned a lot of skills for auditioning that can be passed on. It so happens that my own recent MT grad coaches in NYC (one of several jobs she does), though all her clients so far are either in college BFA programs or have graduated college. People pay her to assist them on auditioning and working on their rep and so on because they value her ability with it. </p>
<p>thecheckbook: I agree with you about the schools providing a live accompanist at auditions. This has been discussed many times over the years on CC. Real auditions in the theater world have live accompanists and I feel college auditions should provide one as well. My kid has been an accompanist for auditions. Clearly these schools can pay someone like her to do this.</p>
<p>soozievt - It sounds like the BFA hours are not dissimilar to drama school hours here in that case. I wasn’t sure how intense the BFAs were in terms of hours. Over here a standard day when not rehearsing for a production would probably be approximately 8am until 6pm, but then these hours can stretch enormously, and then there are sometimes optional classes in the evenings.</p>
<p>I did assume you probably were addressing WhyWhy with your question regarding the correlation between callbacks/grads, but was just sticking my 2 cents in! </p>
<p>snoggie - I am not sure if recalls give any more chance to show passion than first round auditions to do be honest. They are still looking at your technique and your performance, rather than your enthusiasm. Personally I think that dance is the area where people with no prior training struggle the most, as whilst you can have a naturally strong voice, and be a naturally intuitive actor, you can’t naturally pirouette or do the splits! I always find it very easy to spot those with dance training and those without, whereas although some people without vocal training have a lot of technique faults that are easy to spot, some people do just seem to have excellent natural technique.</p>
<p>I guess that I felt that untrained (Because of finances) passionate TALENTED kids could have some moments showing how they could be directed and possibly be a good candidate for growth. Some of the frustration for the kids who haven’t trained all their lives (and I admit mine was one) is that they see college as the opportunity to GET the training that they need… but are denied it in greater numbers. I would have love to have sent my kids to all these great camps, but we just didn’t have the money for it. I sometimes feel that if I could have afforded it then, she would be in a different place now. Though i must say she is happy where she is right now, even if it took her four schools to get there! </p>
<p>Whatever… it is what it is</p>
<p>Yes, I see your point. Monologues being redirected etc happens frequently in recalls here, as they want to see how you take direction - if somebody was incredible doing their monologue when they first presented it, but then just did not take direction at all then they wouldn’t get a place, whereas someone who may not have been as good the first time around, but really responded well to the direction would certainly have a good chance. However, as I said before, I think that natural acting ability does show through regardless, and some schools here actually state that they prefer applicants to prepare their monologues without help from coaches, as they want to see your interpretation, rather than what you have been told to do.</p>
<p>I am new to this…but of any thread I have most enjoyed the discussions on this thread. It has been interesting to see parents hashing out what I have struggled with for the past six months, i.e., what is really happening behind the scenes, what are these people looking for and, as the Playbill readers state, does the school really matter? I have been wondering what parents think about the Unified audition process. I think it is a big money maker for the schools, and it was a place where my daughter felt like she did not receive the same positive experience she received during campus auditions. Knowing what I know now, I would never recommend the Unified option to a parent. She has been admitted and wait listed at good and great programs…but none were from a single Unified audition. I realize that for financial reasons that it is the only option for many. I wish we had done a better job researching schools, narrowed the list, and utilized our resources to travel to those schools. I would also like to see a list which I will never be allowed to see that would have acceptances divided into two categories: “Seen at Unifieds” “Seen on Campus” </p>
<p>Thank you to all of you MT CCers who have been so helpful to me and my daughter in making sense of this crazy process.</p>
<p>I am puzzled by comments at various points in this thread that the audition process is unfair to students who discovered their passion for theater later in high school or who have not spent many years training, performing locally, taking voice dance and acting lessons. In this regard, a BFA program in MT is no different than a BFA in Fine Arts or a BM in instrumental music. In the latter cases, a student is expected to demonstrate talent and skills (the development of which over time is also a reflection of talent and ability) through a well developed portfolio or instrumental audition which meets the criteria for a professional training program in that art. A student is expected to reflect years of study in their artistic endeavors in order to make them a credible candidate for the program. It’s the rare student who starts painting or starts playing an instrument late in high school who is able to be competitive with the student who has invested many years of involvement in their art and I just find it curious that there is an expectation or at least a perception that the audition/admissions process for a BFA in MT should somehow be structured to “equalize” students with similarly disparate histories. Why should it be any different for a BFA MT program and candidate than it is for the applicant to the Fine Arts and instrumental music program? Why should a student who discovers his passion for MT in 11th grade or who has not spent years involved in performing, voice and dance lessons expect that the audition/admission process in a BFA program put them on an equal playing field with a student who has been performing in one form or another and taking voice and dance lessons since 6th grade? The fact that the audition/admissions process for a MT BFA program does not do so does not make it unfair</p>
<p>Isn’t that, in part, the need and function that a BA program serves, to provide opportunities for those who want to major in theater but who have not spent years of their life preparing for a singularly focused professional training program in the arts? The BA program enables that student to to get college level training that can lead to more advanced training, to participate in performing arts at the college level without needing to meet the same entry criteria as a BFA applicant. The BA program is (and should be) the equalizer between the students with such disparate backrounds.(Caveat: obviously there are students who could be successful BFA candidates who elect to enter a BA program based on educational priorities and obviously there are those in BA programs who go on to successful careers in theater, but those situations are tangental to my point.)</p>
<p>What I find interesting is why there would be these perceptions. Is it because BFA programs have drifted over the years from pure conservatory environments to college and university settings where there is an expectation of educational access? Is it a by-product of all the performing reality T.V. shows which have created a groundswell of desire to be a performer while creating a mind set of a “short cut” access to performing opportunities? I don’t profess to know the answer but I think the discussion on this thread has raised some interesting questions.</p>
<p>MichaelNKat, I think you hit pay dirt in your observation about the expectation of educational access, or access in general. We live in a world where a tv program decides who the next “star” will be, so I suspect consciously or unconsciously those two influences combine to create a set of expectations in the public about access to a BFA program and the performing arts. I think the whole thread and comments about the admission process has been born of the desire to foster individual access notwithstanding the realities of supply and demand ;)</p>
<p>As for parents of late bloomers, I think it’s just hard for folks when you wake up one day in senior year and realize that all those summers have gone by and all those private training opportunities have passed and you regret not re-prioritizing your decisions, which might have had fiscal and convenience components that in hindsight seem comparatively lame. In my case, my son “found” his vocational interest around the end of grade 10, and I had the advantage of having attended a BFA program that was talent-based admissions so I knew what to expect and how to prepare him for the rollercoaster. So we had a little bit of time to put the training structure in place to a higher degree, and he had to that point been pretty self-developed. But I still found myself feeling a little helpless in that I had not devoted resources earlier on to his full artistic development, and truthfully, he has had to do a lot of catch up in areas such as theory as a result. (He, on the other hand, says no regrets, the universe if perfect, God love him ;)</p>
<p>But my take is that yes, BFA programs perhaps have drifted over the years from pure conservatory environments, and perhaps so too has the appreciation for the intense, single focus required. For example, I am endlessly amazed by how many students take the initial approach of wanting to combine a BMUS with another degree such as premed (and in four years!). The thinking is a little contrary to the BFA model in my mind, but schools allow/support it because that is the demand – and some do manage it, although how is beyond me!</p>
<p>Just wanted to jump in on the early start vs. late bloomer debate and say that my S had this desired early start…professional, multiple union performer from age 10, NYC market. STILL got rejected from an audition BA program thought to be a sure thing. Could his experience have actually hurt him making him appear less trainable? Idk. Maybe. Maybe not. College auditions are different from any audition he’s had to prepare for so far in his career. He’s also the oldest child so first one off to college and there’s just SO MUCH info to consider.</p>
<p>Do I think WE made some mistakes with the overall college application/audition process? Yes, but would the outcome really have been all that different if we didn’t? Probably not…he would have gotten in to some programs and rejected from others. We’re not taking the rejection personally and questioning his talent. No need for that. And we don’t see a need to question the application/audition process either. It is what it is. We are fairly certain based on his own feelings from the “work” that the auditor did with him at his audition that the program, while it looked good on paper and sounded good at the campus visit, was in reality not a good fit for him. And far better to find that out sooner rather than later!</p>
<p>MichaelNKat I guess my perception is that for many the point of university based programs is the opportunity to get the training. If we are honest, we must admit that $$$ plays into this perhaps more so than the general college admission. Also knowledge about the process and how it all “works.” My D goes to a HS that historically does not support the arts. We truly were clueless as to how it all “works”. We were able, like kmccrindle ,to pull together some audition prep and lessons later in the game. D had the grades/scores to help with the academic side (the strength of her “not performing art school”). I found this forum. So I could see even we had some advantages that others did not. </p>
<p>When we were at some university info sessions, some directors made the point of encouraging prospective students to understand the difference between conservatory or non conservatory programs and making your applications appropriate. Didn’t seem to matter to many in the group who had lists of widely disparate programs, with widely differing standards. Suzievt (thank you for all your very informative posts) almost always mentions making a a balanced and appropriate list, but for some (who don’t find CC) that in and of itself can be very difficult with clueless guidance counselors and non supportive teachers or family. </p>
<p>My daughter had teachers who would ridicule her for leaving for auditions, not give assignments for an “unexcused” absence and generally made senior year a nightmare. And this is a NHS student, all honors and APs, not someone who had a reputation for sliding by. </p>
<p>So yeah, she has a lot of drive (perhaps more than some who have been driven to lessons, groomed and taught), a lot of smarts, and a lot of different thoughts and experiences than someone who has been in a studio for hundreds of hours over the years. She also has talent. We just have to trust that the auditioners appreciate her for who she is. </p>
<p>Given her later start, we had a long talk about various outcomes (BA/BFA, rejections, a gap year). It was sad to me to think that she thought at 17 it may be too late for her. That’s where the parental support kicked in and offered to stand by her. Not everyone has that. We need to be honest about that as well.</p>
<p>classact, I am sorry your child did not have a good experience at Unifieds. I just want to say that my kid had the opposite experience at NYC Unifieds: she did a whole bunch of auditions over those three or four days (including some that were not at the hotel but were for schools who come to NY during that time to audition, anyway) and had positive outcomes. In fact, one of her “walk in” schools (Penn State) accepted her and she almost ended up going there. (She chose NYU Tisch in the end and is really happy there, but feels she would have loved being a Nittany Lion had she not selected NYU.) I am saying this not to contradict you, but just to offer another perspective. As they say in the car commercials: your mileage may vary. :)</p>
<p>Michael, I’m in agreement with you in all you wrote in post #127. While I understand the angst of those who have weaker or shorter backgrounds in MT who feel potential should get them admitted, I just don’t see how a school is going to pick potential over someone who can demonstrate the preparatory skills PLUS potential. No, they are not looking for finished products and of course college is the training ground. But MT is no different than anything else. I agree about fine arts and instrumental music. Even take a field not in the arts. A student who wants to enter directly into an engineering program, must demonstrate tougher math preparation than someone who simply shows potential. What if you want to go to Harvard? Better not have measly extracurricular activities with no achievements in them. What is you want to enter one of the combo undergrad / med school programs like PLME at Brown? Better have done scientific research in high school or over the summers and other stuff in the health field first. Potential won’t get you in. What about sports? If you want to attend a college with one of the top ski teams in the country, you better have attended a ski academy for high school. No way coming out of our high school would get you there. </p>
<p>So, YES, if you are attempting to enter SPECIALIZED degree programs, you have to have prepared for direct entry and if these are highly competitive programs, you have to have the skill set to compete. If you have found your passion later in life, you can still pursue it in college such as in a BA program where you are not admitted directly into a major and where you do not have to demonstrate specialized talent to enter. You can discover your talents in college and pursue them there. It is not as if late bloomers are shut out of studying theater in college. I can liken this to my oldest daughter who had an inkling she wanted to go into architecture and did some things later in HS to discover this interest but had not done enough to enter directly into a BArch degree program (which requires a portfolio) and she elected to enter a BA school that offered Architectural Studies and later to go onto grad school to specialize.</p>
<p>bhmomma, as far as opportunities, one can’t rely on what their high school offers. My kid went to a small rural public high school. We have no performing arts high schools in our state. We have no regional youth theater programs one can attend or train at. Our school has no drama classes. Our school does put on one play and one musical each year, which my kid did. And our music program is strong and she was in chorus, select choir, jazz band (piano). But everything else was outside of school and outside our local community. We had to piece it together. Our dance studio is 25 miles away and I was there five days per week and had to stay when my kids danced given the distance. D’s private voice teacher was 50 miles away (had to stay for that). Sometimes she was in adult shows at a theater 50 miles away. The monologue coaching for fall of her audition year, was also 50 miles away. She went away in summers to a theater camp (was never selected with college in mind but simply she loved theater since preschool and that’s the kind of camp she wanted to go to). I agree it has taken money but this money was not “prep for college” but simply we did invest time and money to pursue activities and interests whether they were going to college or not. College was never on our mind with any of these activities (except getting the monologue coach for the months leading up to college auditions). Simply, we provided a life of enrichment outside the school day and outside what our rural school offered. Some send their kids to private school (we don’t have private schools here but I could not afford one anyway…and some locals send their kids to boarding schools, even performing arts ones…no way were we doing that).</p>
<p>Very interesting thread… My daughter made the decision to audition and apply November of her senior year when a back injury looked like it might prevent her from following her dream of a becoming a classical ballerina. Thank goodness for the NY unifieds!!! Winter break was spent prepping her audition material and off she went in Feb 08. She was rejected to some accepted to several and is very happy at Point Park. I think my point is the unifieds worked for us when time was an issue and her talent did come through her lack of long term training. Of course looking back we think wow… but it worked.</p>
<p>classact - I echo notmamarose. My D did unifieds in 2009 and she also did 2 on campus auditions. She had more success with acceptances at the unifieds auditions than she did at on campus auditions. Unifieds can be a very successful endeavor. We could not have handled (money or time) doing 10 auditions at 10 campuses. My D also liked doing several auditions in one day - she felt like there was a momentum that wasn’t attained at the on campus auditions.</p>
<p>I’m bored. Why are we still talking about this? Whether it’s for MT, acting, music, undeclared or any other major/school. It’s not like the application/audition process could ever be tailored to meet each individual’s needs, wants and desires anyway so isn’t it enough that the needs, wants and desires of the schools/programs are apparently being met? Some people will get in. Some people will not. Is it fair? Is it unfair? Yikes!!! Have fun, people. See you on another thread! </p>
<p>Yeah, I know I’m still talking, lol. :D</p>
<p>Just another experience…my daughter worked very hard to prepare for about 18 months with a fantastic monologue/audition coach(s). It was an expense, but we thought she needed to give it her best shot, being from a small town where no from her school had ever applied to BFA programs. As prepared as she was (and she cetainly felt completely prepared), as a mom, I felt a little bit overwhelmed by the level of talent at unifieds even though I expected it. She was completely confident, and just said, “Everyone here is SO talented, that if I don’t get in, I won’t wonder “why”, I’ll know why. Everyone is THAT could and they can only pick a few.” She was forunate enough to get one callback and two acceptances from Unifieds (one was a walk in). From on-campus auditions, she has 4 acceptances. She did not get in to her #1 Absolute Dream School, but the director gave her a lovely personal complement after her audition, and she said “that was good enough for me if I don’t get in.” So, she did have success at Unifieds. However, from those acceptances we now have to visit the campuses to see if she wants to live there.
One more note, at a recent campus audition a group of parents were talking to the Director of the Program. She asked him what are the kids suppose to do who can’t get in to a bfa program who really want it. It didn’t seem like there were enough programs to meet the need. He said something to the effect, “If everyone who wanted to, could go to a BFA Program, there would be nothing special about having a BFA. And, in an already crowed profession with limited jobs, we would be doing the students a disservice. Also, I’ve been around a long time and have worked with people with no degree, BFA degrees, BA’s, and Theatre Minors. There all kinds of paths to success, once you determined was success means to you.” He was much more eloquent, but that seemed to be his main point.</p>
<p>sandkmom, LOL! If you didn’t find this thread interesting, you wouldn’t still be over here. Just sayin’! ;)</p>
<p>I always said I would love to be a fly on the wall and really hear what the regular admission committees consider and how much weight is given to various parts of the application. Throw in the performing arts auditions and it just gives rise to even that much more speculation. </p>
<p>Don’t take anything I’ve said in a negative. My D started late and we knew that. We purposely did not apply to conservatories as she knew she did not have the training and she also has very strong academic interests. There are university based BFA and BA on her list. She was fortunate that we could put some money toward audition prep and travel. She may even have been lucky that I was unable to find a job this year! </p>
<p>Yes, those that have trained for years should have that acknowledged! They have been lucky to have been born into a family that could either afford the time and money or were able to make informed decisions and sacrifices to enable that training.</p>
<p>I would be curious if the MT programs would ever do a study to see if they could correlate application components i.e academic credentials, resume, summer programs etc, to success in the program as well as success in the field. Perhaps even a longitudinal study of graduates satisfaction no matter where they ended up.<br>
Did those very well trained and prepped continue to excel and grow. Conversely were the more raw talents able to thrive and grow and succeed. Who surprised the faculty and who merely confirmed their judgement? I am sure given the differing emphasis of each program these answers would both overlap and diverge. Perhaps that is data the OP (who seems to have left us) would like to digest.</p>
<p>Even if programs compiled the data, making it public is a horse of a very different color!!!JMHO.</p>
<p>Bahahaha sandmom… so sorry to “bore you” but that is the nature of these chat rooms.
We discuss things sometimes ad nauseam because it just might shed some light for someone and moreover…we can.</p>