I truly believe that while they are in this period of their training, students need to feel free to try things that are outside of their comfort zone, to take risks, and to have some things that don’t work out for them. You learn as much (or more) from your “failures” as you do from successes. How on earth can a student comfortably take chances and do those things which really push their growth envelope if they are always concerned about being eliminated from their program? Similarly, cut programs rarely can develop a true sense of teamwork and camaraderie when students feel they are competing against one another to stay in a program. It just seems that the culture this kind of “retention audition” program, as well as quota based cut systems would engender goes against what is considered best practices in an arts education environment. I understand that some students don’t succeed in a BFA program for a number of reasons, and it is right for a school to “redirect” a performer who is no holding up their end of their training responsibilities, but that is not what the email from the OP seems to describe. It pays to ask a lot of questions once the power dynamic shifts and you end up being the one who gets to evaluate the programs that you have been accepted to. I think it is easy for students who have been through this highly selective, ultra-competitive process to just be happy that someone accepted them, without looking hard at what they are signing up for.