One grows as an artist working with talented performers.
@ClarinetDad16 - I would say that there are MANY ways to grow as an artist - and performing in a show is just one piece. Using the topic from the last few posts (schools that cast early vs not) CMU and Juilliard are incontestably 2 of the most famous/respected places to study theater performance. CMU students cannot appear in shows until 3rd Year, Juilliard students only appear in shows open to public 4th year. Neither of these places seem to have any trouble producing performers who get the “dream career” you mentioned in an earlier post.
I have no personal knowledge (yet), but I would guess that much as HS casting has ZERO correlation to college casting, college casting probably has very very very little correlation to professional casting. Just a hunch…
Also so many of these programs have way more than the several times a year mainstage productions, and have small-scale productions, some directed by faculty, others directed and/or created by students, often in smaller, sometimes black-box performance spaces. At the BFA programs there always seems to be a lot going on, all the time, and mixing it up in terms of venues, directors, etc. can only be a good thing.
At CCM students are required to audition for all shows. Students have to have faculty permission not to to audition or not to be considered to be cast. CCM teaches auditioning as a specific skill and the students get feed back about their audition whether they are cast or not. It is a good thing to have 4-years of auditioning practice with specific feed back and a way of tracking progress from audition to audition.
It is true that some schools with good reputations don’t cast students in productions until sophomore or even junior year, so choosing a school that casts earlier is a matter of preference. At Montclair everyone is cast at least once a year and sometimes more. (I’m not 100% sure that happened the year since they had a larger-than-normal freshman class, but it is usually the case.) But as rampions said, there is a lot of other stuff going on, and they are training in class and performing for their peers. And if a school throws a ton of money at your talented kid and makes it the one school you can afford, that is definitely something to consider. But I would strongly advise anyone to not have the goal be to be the best and always get cast and get all the best parts. First of all, that may not happen, as who gets cast in college can be very unpredictable as has been said, but learning from talented peers and having some competition is part of the learning process too.
I think this thread is implying a wider array of choices than most people get. If you get into one of the very top schools, you should probably go. If you get a great merit/talent package from a mid-tier program, do that. A handful of kids will get into lots of programs, and the rest will have to choose between a few options, none of which may be absolutely perfect for them. At least that’s what happened in our case, and I’m not being negative about it It really worked out okay.
Yep @Jkellynh17
@toowonderful, I suspect you are right and there is anecdotal evidence that suggests not much correlation. Two of my D’s female friends who both graduated from her program experienced the following: one was cast almost every semester of her entire 4 years, and she booked an off B’way show and then a national tour as soon as she graduated. The second was never cast in a mainstage musical, and was immediately cast on Broadway after college. I know this is just two kids, but when you look at other schools/kids, you see the same thing. It really is all over the map.
@Jkellynh17 I think you just summed it up perfectly.
You are right that in the end acceptances are usually limited, but the OP was asking about the application list, which we do have control over.
I totally agree that all this may be moot when it comes time to actual acceptance.
But I also agree that knowledge beforehand is good. So personally I have two kids in two different schools. My D is a senior at Northwestern, and my S is in his second year at LAMDA. LAMDA, like some US conservatories, does not audition. You are cast based on what the faculty feels will stretch you and/or be an educational experience for you. Everyone is cast; if necessary, roles are double-cast so everyone can be on stage. Shows are chosen for a wide range of parts and the type of students in that group. Nor do you do a full show until your second year, although you do a great deal of scenes the first year (as well as other work). Casting, scenes and shows are viewed as highly educational.
At NU, you audition, and you can start whenever you want. There are MainStage and student and grad student-run shows, MT and straight. To be honest, my D hasn’t had much luck with MainStage shows but has been in a fair amount of student shows.
In both schools, the main education is in your acting classes. There you do scenes, character work, voice, etc.
Performing is a lot of fun and a great experience, but it is not the primary focus of many colleges, my kids’ colleges included. It’s not like high school where the main experience is in performing the show.
I’m only saying this as more information in choosing a college. I don’t know if I’d advise choosing a college - if there was a choice - based on performance opportunities as one of my main criterion. Just personally for my kids, what has been more important is first and foremost, fit. Do they feel comfortable there? That’s something that you can get a better sense of when you visit (after you get in). Acting classes and overall education are also important, as well connections during the school years (connections with professional theaters, internships, etc), & connections after graduation (if there is a ‘mafia’).
Of course, price is super important!
It’s complex; just wanted to say that there are many factors to be considered, and when still in high school it’s easy to focus most on the thing you’re most familiar with, performing, when it’s not necessarily going to be the biggest component of the education.
@Jkellynh17 makes an excellent point. I don’t think there was a single school on D’s list that she would have said was entirely perfect. Not even a lottery one like CMU. The trick, as with so many other things - into prioritize, and when you have choices- go from there. BTW- it’s why I “made” D have 3 safety schools- I wanted to make sure if she DIDN’T get BFA offers, she still had options/choices
Actually, our experience with MT programs was that the schools that offered the most merit aid were generally the schools that didn’t normally attract top talent, either academically or artistically. This is not to say people couldn’t get a solid education at these schools, but just that the top schools don’t typically need to compete for students using merit aid. The picture with need-based aid was often the reverse. This picture might be different for a talented, gorgeous 6’ tall manly man, but I don’t have firsthand experience with that.
Honestly one of my biggest fears was the idea of our kid landing in a school where she was among the most talented students, not because I thought she was mad-talented but because she prefers being pushed and challenged and ALL actors need practice handling frequent rejection. Unlike clarinet players, few actors will ever land the equivalent of a long term orchestra slot, and at least 9 out of 10 auditions will end in “no”.
Fortunately, no one student is the top dog in the program D chose, and in spite of NEVER being cast in a school year mainstage musical (if I recall correctly) she has enjoyed very steady professional success. Her school offered ample performing opportunities for those who craved them (a cappella groups, student theatre, summer shows, etc.) but often D learned the most during the quarters where she focused more on training and less on performing.
I won't say the most expensive schools are always the best, but I can also say with confidence that the cheapest option is not always the best value. Remember these students are not only investing tuition money, but also 4 of the most prime years of their lives, and value does not equate to ROI.
NONE of the above is meant to imply that I’m in favor of student debt for an MT degree, because I’m not.
There are schools like TSU and Montclair that have respected MT programs offering across the board tuition discounts including in-state tuition plus scholarship for MTs and they are also attracting top talent. This is a program-wide policy and is different from a program that offers individually targeted merit or talent awards but for sure in terms of recruiting “top talent” it certainly appears to be working.
@toowonderful I agree with you on @ClarinetDad16 comments! He has stated this point of view on other threads. It is crazy to say that a student’s experience at a given school will be based on the amount of merit $$ given! A student can be given a full ride and not cut out for the program. What matters in success at any school is based on what the student actually puts into it. Once you start school anywhere, the amount of money you have been awarded has little to do with your success. You have to work hard regardless. You will not be successful just because you did really well on your audition. Your student should attend the school that fits best. If your dream school is affordable to you, why would you choose solely based on most merit $$ offered if you have no interest in said school. This has no meaning in terms of success. Success and recognition is EARNED. I do not nor will ever agree with the idea that success is somehow tied to the amount of merit scholarships. Also, why would you want to go into a program where you are the “best” as there is no room for growth/development as an artist. This was a deciding factor for my son in his college choice. He wanted to be in an environment where others were at and above his level of talent so he could grow as a musician. Why go to a music school if not to become a better musician? If you are already at the top of your class in terms of talent, nothing is gained.
I have to respectfully disagree…no student going into any program is at the top of their game. I have friends in the business who are continually training and growing as artists even after they have starred on Broadway or have had TV and film careers. Just because a kid is a big fish in a little pond does not mean they are not growing and learning as artists. I do agree that it is all up to the student and what they choose to take away from their 4 years in college. TOP schools are all in the eyes of the beholder. You can create an environment that is stellar no matter where you land.
I agree @bisouu. My main point is I don’t agree with the comments from @ClarinetDad16! An artist should never stop growing and perfecting their craft. He stated basically that they won’t be successful if not given a lot of merit money which is just foolish! Everyone needs to be wherever they fit and for some if it means being a big fish in a small pond then that’s where they should be. Every person has their own way to grow. My point being why choose a school solely based on merit (monetary needs aside) and being that big fish? Some feel more challenged by being a small fish. If success is determined by the amount of scholarship awarded, most will not succeed based on clarinet dads comments.
I agree with most of what you say, @bisouu, except that every kid is motivated in their own unique way. Our D is not wired to compete with others, but she has thrived on being pushed by teachers and nspired by peers since she was little. She would have dropped out of the program that offered her a full ride after the first semester.
I agree Teacher and peer motivation is so important @MomCares. While I think one can grow somewhat on their own, it most certainly helps to surround yourself by others who are at a higher level.
@rockinmomab schools vote with their $$$ who they want the most.
Admissions are competitive between schools.
You can try and twist it any which way - but the kids the school wants the most they will if they can throw merit money at. Relative deprivation comes into play. Some kids win and others don’t.
Just saying it’s better to shine than be on the bench.