too wonderful - Hence my “controversial” statement. But based on my experiences, you’ll not convince me otherwise.
@amtc - I don’t think it is controversial as much as it is potentially misleading. As I said above, I do not question the fact that you might know of an exception(s?), and I am not trying to convince you - or anyone else, that it is not a possibility. What I am saying is that Tisch does not state in their published materials the admissions criteria are lower (https://www.nyu.edu/admissions/undergraduate-admissions/fast-facts.html shows some quick averages) And if you AREN’T close to that- NYU MIGHT be an academic long shot, and I would hate to see someone read this site and assume academics aren’t in play for NYU. This is in contrast to CMU- who frequently say that the general university criteria do not apply to their department.
If your kid is really the kind of talent that NYU makes an exception for, you are going to have lots of offers in any case.
At NYU/Tisch, admissions is 50% academic and 50% artistic review (this is unlike a number of BFA in MT programs). These are separate processes.
As with ANY college, there is a common data set of the “stats” of accepted students to the college. Some accepted students are going to fall in the lower 10% of the accepted stats of admitted students. Not everyone who is admitted is solidly in the ballpark of the academic profile of the freshmen class. So, someone might know several students who are at the bottom of the accepted student academic profile for that particular college. The odds of being admitted, however, if one falls into the bottom percentile of accepted student “stats” for that college are definitely a lot longer.
@Jkellynh17 - Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, “talent” is in the eye of the auditor or, in many cases, the pre-screen reviewer. That’s why this process is such a crapshoot and we all have to hedge our bets by submitting multiple applications across a broad range of schools in order to find the best match. I’m so appreciative of the expertise on this site, since it reduces some of the guesswork and gives us a stronger ability to assess across all criteria, including academics, and select the schools that are the best potential fit with the strongest possibility of acceptance. We’d all love to believe that talent will shine through, but it doesn’t always work that way.
Talent is, indeed, subjective, but as you will notice later in the season, that there are a few candidates in which is it so overwhelming and obvious that they get in nearly everywhere. (Though not, as you say, everywhere. There are always some head scratchers, like how did that kid get into MIch/CCM/CMU and get rejected by Elon, etc. Just an example, not a real life case study.) I was just saying that if a kid was great enough to make NYU stretch its academic requirements he or she would probably have multiple offers.
It is important to realize why certain schools require a stricter level of academic excellence for admission. NYU and UMich want to make sure their MT students can handle the rigor of their gen ed requirements. My students who have gone to NYU, although not necessarily at the level of the non performance majors, agreed that the academic component of the school has a level of difficulty that a totally non-academic student might find overly challenging. In the end the schools want their students to succeed and not be set up to crash and burn and I have found that the kids end up with a good fit for many reasons, this is simply one of them. Just my opinion …
I completely agree with you @Pohsmom. If you are not a skilled writer WTE (required English class for all majors) is going to be tough. Even if you DO like to write- it’s a lot of work. Most students have at least 2 “regular” classes a semester- and even the ones with “theater” in it are taught at a challenging academic level. Example, my kid is taking “History of Renaissance Theater” - which has required her to read a wide variety of plays/primary sources in the English of the 1500s (Not Shakespearean English yet- so far lots of Marlowe) It’s challenging. There is a friend of Ds I worked with a while ago to help prepare for the ACT. The kid is a VERY talented performer, but not of an academic bent. To go back to the earlier comment from amtc- perhaps that person’s talent would have made NYU sit up and take notice (they were very successful with admissions) but if they had been admitted (and NYU was never on this person’s list) they would have been MISERABLE, and I would venture to guess unsuccessful.
As SoozieVT pointed out, all schools admit students that below the mean regardless of the major. NYU doesn’t have a lock on that and nor should anyone be surprised if students below the mean are admitted to NYU each year. Does that come as a surprise to anyone or should NYU brace itself for a stampede of applications underqualified academic applications now that the cat is out of the bag? The same happens at the top end. Plenty of students well above the mean are not admitted to colleges and universities all over the country.
Now in the auditioned drama world, the leap is to think people below the mean must have been admitted because of the strength of the audition. But you can’t know if that is actually the reason unless you are part of the admission committee. You can only guess (and it’s still just a guess) that was the reason if you know absolutely everything else about the student’s application which would include academic rigor of the classes they took in HS, test scores, essays, word for word content of the recommendations, the value of ECs, hooks both obvious and subtle, etc. That sort of insight into a specific application belongs only to the applicant themselves and possibly to the parents of the applicant if they review the entire application and test scores etc. first hand before hitting “send.”
@amtc since you are the one who brought it up again about NYU, even if you are speaking from direct experience with one or both of your own daughters applying to NYU, you have repeatedly told this forum and other forums that your daughters automatically would have gotten in to NYU because of who you are. So really, you can’t actually speak directly to the experience of most applicants when it comes to the NYU application process and how it might work for people without that hook. Fully agree that nobody could or should try to convince you otherwise about how things work at NYU. For the rest of the world, it is probably best to keep the “relaxing academic standards for good audition” claim in the proper context. The smart money is still on assuming what NYU says and publishes about their application process is in general how it works.
My daughters never applied to NYU, they had no interest in that university, my knowledge is not from my daughters.
The numerous kids I know who have been admitted to NYU Tisch fall into that subjective talent pool (as mentioned by Claire74) and their grades are below what anyone on this forum would think would be acceptable to NYU. I think it is important for those kids interested in NYU to apply and not to be scared off by less than stellar grades. It is not unrealistic and if you don’t apply then you definitely won’t be admitted.
And that is why I make this statement repeatedly even though I know it upsets some people.
I think schools break their “policies” all the time; from offering more than one studio choice, to grades, to low test scores, giving scholarship monies to some and not others. It all depends on the audition and how badly they want a kid. Those who are given these special compensations are usually more talented than the average kid (or at least that university thinks they are). And the university wants to entice them to choose their school. I think theatre is like athletics. My colleague’s son is at Cornell. Has no business being there. Did not have the grades or test scores to be at an Ivy league school but they wanted him to play football. So he’s in.
When you say their grades are below what anyone on this forum would think would be acceptable to NYU, that is not really the criteria. Anyone can examine the “stats” of the admitted freshmen class at NYU (or any college) and see the ENTIRE range of accepted stats. It is not unheard of that kids are accepted into a university who have below the ballpark of “stats” of that particular college. However, the student’s stats fell within the range of the data reported on the accepted freshmen class profile. But the facts remain that those who fall in the lowest range of accepted academic “stats” for that school’s admitted class, have VERY low odds of being accepted, lower than those who fall into the ballpark more solidly for that school. But SOMEONE has to fall in the lowest end of the accepted profile of the freshmen class. Further, “grades” don’t tell the whole story. NYU uses holistic admissions and grades are just one data point. There may be other compelling factors that stand out in the entire application.
I would not want to scare off any student interested in attending NYU and think if someone wishes to throw their hat in the ring, they should. But I think (perhaps due to my role as a college counselor) that giving a realistic, honest assessment of one’s academic odds at a college is prudent. I have a current advisee who wants to apply to Tisch for Film and his academic profile puts him at very long odds. I have said so and provided the data to back that up. So, he can go into it with eyes wide open. Students with his academic profile may be admitted, but the odds are WAY worse than for an applicant in the ballpark for NYU. The statistics prove that. The percentage of the freshmen class with that academic profile is extremely low. Add in factors like not having taken Honors or AP classes and combining that with a low GPA, for starters. Students with “grades below what anyone on this forum would think would be acceptable to NYU” do get accepted, but they are in the minority, as the freshmen class profile at NYU bears out. This data can be found in many places, but I have used what is reported on US News and World Report (I have a subscription).
And of course, others have pointed out that it is one thing to be admitted, and another to be able to keep up with the significant amount of academics at NYU, as well as even enjoy that type of program and curriculum. I had an acting advisee last year who at first was interested in NYU, but besides not falling into the academic ballpark for NYU, he really didn’t want many academics in college and so NYU would not be a good fit.
Another real life example, one year I was working with a BFA in MT applicant who had NYU on her list. Her math SAT score was 400. Her reading score was 500. This is not even bringing in her low GPA with a very easy high school curriculum lacking any rigor. If one visits the profile of the admitted freshmen class at NYU, I believe 0% are accepted with those SAT scores alone (not counting any other factors in this student’s profile and she was, in fact, a talented MT performer who attended a PA high school). So, the statistics show that her chance of being admitted was nil. I think applicants should be aware of this sort of thing when creating a college list and not just finding MT schools they like without any clear picture of their academic odds of admission to those schools. This student ended up at Roosevelt where the academic bar is not nearly as high.
As @halflokum pointed out yesterday- I don’t think ANY of us (Soozie being an exception as a college advisor who might see the application, read the essays, letters of rec etc) can really speak to an experience our own kids didn’t have. I am not saying it is a problem to use examples and anecdotes- I have written many posts that describe experiences from the kids I have known go through the BFA process (and we have known a lot of them). But the only place I can speak with certainty is what happened with MY kid. So if AMTCs kids didn’t apply to NYU - it makes me think she might be less of an expert on the NYU process than someone who did go through it. Hearing about how things worked out for someone else is not the same as experiencing 1st hand. After all, people may not be sharing the full story. If you want to apply to Harvard and you have a 2.0 GPA - go for it, but I would hope that you have other options too. If you want to apply for NYU and your grades are low- go for it…but IMHO, it would be wise to have a backup plan
Don’t mistake upset for comedy. Speaking only for myself, I actually get a kick out of these incessant sprinklings of hearsay pixie dust. It has been a while and I was starting to worry you had fallen asleep at the wheel. On behalf of NYU which seems to be the only school worthy of your rapt attention, I thank you. Stay diligent as I have come to rely on you to properly set my watch.
I bet we can all think of some not-so-intelligent people who have been admitted to Ivy League schools over more qualified candidates for any number of reasons including athletics, presidential parents, “development” prospects, URM, family working at the school, etc. I also bet most of us know of some less-talented kids admitted to top-tier MT programs based on theatre royalty connections, an aberrant audition, bombshell appearance, URM (which in theatre might even include tall hunky males), an “in” with the auditors, etc. Life isn’t fair, and theatre seems even less fair.
The number of reasons a candidate might be admitted to an ill-fitting program are numerous, but I don’t think many of us would wish that on our kids. I bet most of us want our kids to land where they can flourish, and recognize that a school that really “fits” is better than a fluke admission to an extreme reach program. As has been said above, schools where MTs are required to complete academic courses generally have the academic standards they do for good reasons.
I’m going to jump in with an example re: NYU. My older D graduated from Steinhardt VP with MT concentration. The summer before senior year of HS she attended Steinhardts MT pre-college program. The classes were taught by their full time faculty including the program’s (current) director. Before the end of the program the students were told that they would be notified in September about whether their performance during the summer would lead to acceptance into the undergrad program on a talent level. In other words, if these students applied to NYU, they did not need to audition. About a dozen students were offered this automatic talent acceptance.
D was in this group and we were arranged a meeting with the program’s director in the fall. He made it clear that this was not an automatic acceptance and asked about D’s SAT score. It was at least 1350 at that time and she was planning to retake the SAT the following day. The director told her not to bother, so obviously he knew she met the academic criteria he would need to get a student an academic acceptance. He never asked her gpa, but since it was a 98+ I knew we were in good shape. He explained how acceptance was 50% talent and 50% academics. If a student is accepted talent wise, they may not be on the list of academic acceptances sent to the department. The lists are cross- checked and there may be some back and forth negotiation on behalf of very talented students, but the director said that over the years there have been many students that he could not get in and many who he knew were below the threshold for NYU’s academics to the extent that he would not fight for them.
One of D’s friends from the summer program was an extremely talented male, but just did not have great grades and GPA. Although he had that talent acceptance and the director fought for him, he was not accepted academically. He had a low 80’s average, no honors/ AP’s and SAT scores below 600. It was a rejection. And thus was for a student who had attended a 3 week program and succeeded.
As it turned out the student attended Temple for undergrad and was accepted to NYU as a VP grad student.
So I do think there is some wiggle room, but certainly only up to a point. NYU is a demanding school academically and I am on my second student there. There was the same 50-50 criteria for my studio art D. The art department is extremely academically oriented and that is without the gen ed requirements. I would advise students who are at or below the 25th percentile for a number of criteria on the common data set to think twice before applying. The school just might not be the correct match.
As Soozievt and others have said, for schools that don’t admit purely on perceived talent, I think it’s important to look at this statistically rather than anecdotally. Anecdotes can be misleading. Where does the admitted average lie in SATs and GPA in each school? You can look this up. (Naviance is also a great tool.) In any school that considers more than talent, the more of an outlier you are in stats, the lower your overall chances, period. Sure, you can be in the bottom 2% in stats, but your overall chances of getting in are far lower than someone who is in the top 98%. This is true of NYU and any school that considers academics in admission (nearly all schools except for schools like CMU, Juilliard).
Other factors impacting admission are: ethnicity/race, gender, region, type, whether you need financial aid, whether you are legacy, whether your parents are potentially major donors and/or have connections in the industry. These other factors are certainly part of the overall package, as well. It’s just how it is. If your kid is like mine and needs financial aid, you have no industry connections, you’re not a legacy, you’re not an under-represented ethnicity/race, you’re a girl–then stats will play a larger role in your admission (in addition to talent, of course). It’s an overall package. And since you don’t know what the pool is for the college that year or what they’re looking for, you can’t really know if you’ll get in to any school, even a safety. This is why it’s super important to apply to a range of colleges in which you are a match, reach and safety.
Maybe part of this debate is glass half full/glass half empty thing–different perspectives on taking chances. One person thinks a 30% chance of an event is high; another thinks it’s low. One person thinks, “Sure I’ll apply, why not? I won’t get in if I don’t apply.” Another thinks, “I don’t want to apply when my chances are so low and maybe the classes will be too hard.”
But because admission factors in multiple factors, it’s almost never a cut and dry thing. I myself am usually on the side of “apply and then see” unless it’s blatantly obvious it’s impossible (Soozie’s example). But that’s my own philosophy. As long as you have a range of safeties, matches and reaches. Bottom line: academics/stats are an important part of the information in telling you whether a college is safety, match or reach for your kid. This is true of any school that factors in academics.
^^^Great post.
You mean like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZYg4ZbcOPQ
@halflokum :))
Anybody who needs “good odds” or “guarantees” might want to stay away from a theater career in the 1st place. But that’s not news. And getting into any school is only step one.
But wait… there are “good odds” that you’ll get to apply for lots of jobs, and one can almost “guarantee” that you won’t get most of them. 