<p>I'm applying to the School of Cinematic Arts, and although I know that test scores and gpa are not the biggest factors for film school, I still would like to know what the average scores and gpa's were for past accepted students. Anyone know?</p>
<p>In the stratosphere.</p>
<p>The school is probably about as difficult to get into as Stanford.</p>
<p>I'm not sure what the average test scores are exactly, but I know that when I got into the production program two years ago the acceptance rate was 2%. 1000 people applied and 50 got in. Test scores and gpa are really important, because there is such a vast amount of people who apply, so every little bit counts.</p>
<p>I think test scores and GPA are important...but it would be stupid to claim they're on USNWR top 15-level. <em>cough</em>USC is NOT Stanford<em>cough</em>.</p>
<p>That said USC can be called the Stanford of film. I think you would have a decent shot with mediocre stats, and that admissions are probably based WAY more on demonstrated passion, teachability in the field, creativity and on the quality of your application materials (tons of supplements for film majors I hear). I'm not saying the film school isn't selective, I'm just saying it's probably not traditionally selective (i.e. Ivy-league, Northwestern, Tufts, UChic, JHU, etc.).</p>
<p>If your stats fall in the range for USC, I would say they wouldn't pose a barrier to you. Now it's all in the app.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think test scores and GPA are important...but it would be stupid to claim they're on USNWR top 15-level. <em>cough</em>USC is NOT Stanford<em>cough</em>.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Umm...not stupid at all...do you realize how selective the film school really is? The admit rate is something like 5%. Admit rate for Stanford in general is about 10%. Thus, I think it's realistic to say that the film school is "as hard to get into as Stanford"</p>
<p>Not when you pair it with a comment like "the scores are in the stratosphere", implying that the academic achievements of admits are anywhere near Stanford-quality. Anyway if you read my whole post I wasn't denying it was selective :). I just think it is a different type of selective. Not to say USC's scores are bad...on the contrary. They're just not "in the stratosphere".</p>
<p>I think it's a case of apples and oranges. Many people admitted to Stanford could never dream of going to USC CNTV...and vice versa.</p>
<p>the scores of USC CNTV admits are definitely in the stratosphere, comparable to that of stanford regular admits. (which is realistic to say) I don't think they were implying that USC as a whole is on the same level as stanford, only that the selectivity of USC's cinema school is comparable to stanford.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think test scores and GPA are important...but it would be stupid to claim they're on USNWR top 15-level. <em>cough</em>USC is NOT Stanford<em>cough</em>.</p>
<p>That said USC can be called the Stanford of film. I think you would have a decent shot with mediocre stats, and that admissions are probably based WAY more on demonstrated passion, teachability in the field, creativity and on the quality of your application materials (tons of supplements for film majors I hear). I'm not saying the film school isn't selective, I'm just saying it's probably not traditionally selective (i.e. Ivy-league, Northwestern, Tufts, UChic, JHU, etc.).</p>
<p>If your stats fall in the range for USC, I would say they wouldn't pose a barrier to you. Now it's all in the app.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have to disagree here. Along with outstanding supplementary materials. the applicants need to have outstanding academic achievements-probably in the top 25% (at least) of all USC admits. The coursework in the Film School is very rigorous and a 3.8 UW and 2050 SAT will not cut it for the film school, unless you have supplementary materials that blow everyone else out of the water.</p>
<p>With only 50 spots (going from Post #2), the Cinema School can afford to be *very * selective in BOTH supplementary materials AND academic achievements.</p>
<p>You are right that there is a certain degree of apples to oranges comparison here between Stanford and USC, but I think the comparison has validity.</p>
<p>Do you think the fact that I took a Film and Digital Cinematography Summer Course at the Cinema school, and got a letter of rec from my teacher would help at all?</p>
<p>Okay, I'm living PROOF that what you say isn't true here. I have 1950 SAT and the second time I took it, my score dropped. I also have a C in a class both semesters last year. And I definitely don't think my other supplementals blew everyone else out of the water. I have a 3.8 uw gpa, too. So actually, yeah, it DOES cut it. You just have to know what you want.</p>
<p>sfgiants,</p>
<p>One of my best friends did his MFA at USC and was a TA for the undergrads. He said the students he taught were far from bunch of high scoring kids and hillyrae just kinda verified it. My friend did his undergrad at Harvard.</p>
<p>The film school is looking for aspiring film makers or actors with creativity and artistic talents. High score in math means very little to them. They are very different from MD/BS programs for which most applicants have very high test scores. I doubt the applicant pool resembles anything like the MD/BS applicants. As for film school being "very rigorous", well, my coworker took a few classes there (she was an engineering major and her bf was in the cinema school) and she said they were easy. So I don't know which class you were talking about.</p>
<p>Fair enough, perhaps I presumed too much from the low acceptance rate.</p>
<p>Congratulations hillyrae, by the way, for your acceptance.</p>
<p>As far as rigor, I'm loathe to shift my position. I mean it can't be a top ranked film school if the curriculum is a cakewalk, yes? I'm also a little skeptical that your coworker got the exposed to the full film experience, as any non-film can take no more than a few classes. Additionally, she's an engineering major, so anything would probably come easy to her. :)</p>
<p>In any case, higher scores definitely don't hurt and I think it's safe to assume that the higher the stats, the better chance of acceptance...</p>
<p>When I went on the CNTV tour, the guide told us it wasn't necessarily about your scores or how much experience you had-- the school wants you fresh so they can mold you. They want to have some room for you to grow...so if you have a 2400 SAT, how much growing will you need to do?</p>
<p>I was told by a former graduate of CNTV that the personal statement and other supporting material is very, very important. The admissions committee really reads and re-reads your stuff. So scores matter somewhat but if you can blow them away with your writing I think that would be key. I would guess that USC general admissions would prefer to see film school students at least somewhere the middle 50% of admits just to keep their overall stats strong. Not sure about the "molding" part.</p>
<p>The "molding" part I heard from a CNTV student himself.</p>
<p>hillyrae...since you are accepted I am curious...what is it about your application that made you look "moldable"?.... I seem to have similar stats to you, but no word yet....why do you think you got such an early acceptance letter? Was it because you applied for scholarship?</p>
<p>I have similar stats as well, and I already talked to her about it and basically it was your double major: film and archeology, your good interview, and then those travel abroad study programs right hillyrae?</p>
<p>In terms of "moldable," I couldn't say it enough in my essay or in my interview: I LOVE to learn. I have a very innate passion for it, so much so that it's hard to describe. But yes, I think my double-major interests were very unique, and I did have to fly from Atlanta to Chicago and back in one day for my interview. (I was determined to get an interview!)
As for the study abroad program, I guess that helped, but all in all, I think it was the culmination of everything.
I know what I want, and I truly believed (and still believe) that USC is the only institution than can offer me exactly what I want when it comes to my education.</p>