<p>Our school definitely sends out T1 grades to colleges (grades are posted first week in December). Whether or not the grades are considered for early admission seems to depend on both the kid and the school. The grades and rigor of coursework shown on the transcript are most definitely what matter, vs. GPA or “weighted” individual grades for honors/AP courses, for admissions; colleges/universities are telling us that they depend on the transcript more and more, and some don’t even bother recalculating GPA, they just disregard it (this is what we are hearing from a handful of elite schools, so it isn’t universal, just one possibility). Some colleges do base their academic scholarship offers on GPA and may even increase your merit award if the GPA has gone up at the end of senior year. What we tend to see with those fall grades is that if there’s a real red flag, the school might defer the applicant and say “we want to see your midyear grades before we make a decision.” This was one of the reasons my son didn’t apply EA to a couple of places where he was borderline academically–we knew his grades were likely to go up, as he’s a slow starter every fall (as 5boys says about her son). Like everything else about this process, it’s very individualized and there are no longer the kind of clearcut guidelines that used to exist, alas! But I’d say that for a generally strong student, a low T1 grade isn’t going to be a dealbreaker if the rest of the application is good and if that one low grade isn’t a huge red flag. A B- in AP Calc is different from, say, a C- in a more “vanilla” class, which might imply the kid had stopped working.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And I’d like to think they wouldn’t get any more brownie points than the next kid would for those classes. Why shouldn’t we expect our college bound theatre kids to take challenging classes in other subjects? I’d hate to perpetuate a stereotype and I’d be disappointed if colleges actually thought that way.</p>
<p>hf… I agree with you, and I was only half serious… and my S is applying to BA schools anyway, where he most definitely be compared to kids who have taken the most rigorous classes, but I do know for a fact at our HS quite a few kids who are aspiring to go to engineering schools, that don’t have AP Lit in their schedules this year…</p>
<p>Got another app in for admission!!! Scholarship app for big scholarship at same school due 12-15. There is hope. Want to comment on classes too but a little short on time.</p>
<p>I bet there are as many aspiring theatre majors not taking AP Lit as there are aspiring engineers who are not taking it. But I have my doubts that anyone is saying that the engineering bound student who is taking AP Lit should get brownie points from colleges for taking that class. Our society has a bias that assumes anyone who goes into engineering or any of the STEM fields must be smart and that those fields are particularly rigorous. In uninformed circles, the arts don’t get the same respect. But isn’t just as hard to be really good in an artistic field? And doesn’t it require every bit as much work to succeed in an artistic field as it does to succeed in a STEM field?</p>
<p>There are actors who have the academic capacity to be engineers, and there are engineers that also have amazing acting talent. And then there actors that wouldn’t touch a STEM field and all of the courses associated with it with a 10 foot pole as well as STEM majors that would die 1000 deaths if they ever had to go on stage. And there is also everything else, in between.</p>
<p>Which is why I say, I sure hope that colleges aren’t handing out brownie points for rigorous coursework just because they have some preconceived notion about what they think actors might be good at and willing to challenge themselves with. That would bug me.</p>
<p>My son did not take one AP class in high school, and he is at BU. So AP’s may count, but they are not a requirement for a BFA. However, a BA program would surely look at any AP class as a reflection of the rigorousness of courses the student took. And you can tell by the construction of that last sentence, I didn’t take any AP English courses either!!</p>
<p>^^Marbleheader but the reason your son didn’t take an AP class in HS was not because he was destined to be a theatre major correct? He just didn’t because he didn’t. My kids didn’t take any AP classes either. (There aren’t any at either of their schools). But sometimes they took honors and sometimes they didn’t. My theatre kid hmmm… I think she only took an honors level math class one year. I could be wrong but I think that’s right. Admittedly the school already had a reputation for rigor so honors classes were really “rigor on steroids” if you get my drift.</p>
<p>Now I just looked at a photo of the group of seniors in the drama department at her high school. These were the kids she graduated with that took drama as a class all 4 years of high school. (The drama geeks). This is where they are now sophomores in college:
- Wellesley 2
- Harvard 3
- Stanford 2
- Our state university system 4
- Bucknell 1
- Weslyan 1
- Northwestern 3
- Brandeis 1
- Harvey Mudd 1
- NYU 1</p>
<p>I believe 1 of the Northwestern students, at least 1 (maybe 2) of the Harvard students, and 1 of the Stanford students are majoring in Theatre (BA). The NYU student is getting a BFA in Drama. I think 6 of them are studying engineering. The rest I really don’t know. In any event, they all took challenging classes in high school and I would assume got into the schools they were attending as a result. But they were, and many still are, the theatre kids.</p>
<p>I get where people are coming from in wanting to make sure nobody thinks theater students are dumb. But I did not find most BFA programs to be particularly interested in stats, let alone AP’s. That was annoying to me and it’s just the facts. Not at all schools, but most is probably true.</p>
<p>The other thing is the theater kids at high schools are generally not headed for college theater programs. A couple maybe, but not the whole so-called drama kid group. I was barely even in that group since I took two years of drama at HS before realizing it was not all that useful. I did outside theater and had a lead in the musical but skipped a lot of the little drama activity at school. I did get into a few pretty good programs.</p>
<p>I think there are probably plenty of dumb, unmotivated theatre students. I’m just saying that there aren’t any more of them as a percentage than one should expect to find in any other field. </p>
<p>I also agree that as far as admission goes, many programs don’t look beyond the theatrical talent that you demonstrate for how they decide on admission. I was really talking about something else entirely.</p>
<p>"dumb theater students’ LOL!! I think that is an oxymoron if I’ve ever heard one. It would be hard to be a theater student and not be somewhat intelligent, IMHO, but IDK? At my Kids HS, a very rigorous private prep, hardly any kids aspire to a BFA, most are at the same colleges on HF’s list, and most, but not all, take the the most rigorous classes in all subjects. I always encouraged my kids to do the very best that they could academically, but also do what you love. Academics aren’t everything in this world, and I can back that with personal stories. Anyway… I get where you are coming from HF, I think 'brownie points"was really said in jest, didn’t mean to ruffle any feathers. On to nagging my K about his AP’s that are about killing him right now:(</p>
<p>Am I missing something? Are BFA’s not considered academically challenging? Are acting, movement, script analysis classes (and whatever else goes into a BFA) not considered academics? Is a BA given more kudos in the real world? I thought that a BFA is just a more specialized degree but still highly respected. My BA is in French Lit, my Master’s in Education…I did not take a single math class and the only science course I took was not even in the department but was geared for non-science majors so not even sure you could call it a real science class. I know that not all BFA’s are created equal, but I guess I am having trouble understanding what the definition of what an academic course is…</p>
<p>The main distinction is between arts courses and academic courses. Some theatre courses can be academic, depending on the content (theatre history, for example). Performance courses are not considered to be academic courses.</p>
<p>I don’t think the “real world” cares much about those letters. The overall school reputation probably matters more to the real world than BA vs. BFA but people will bicker about that, too. If your really looking for an academically challenging BFA that’s harder. Performance based classes can be extremely challenging but not so much academically. Artistically. Does that make sense?</p>
<p>Yes it does…in my teacher training we were always taught that students who are “doing” rather than sitting and listening are engaged in higher level thinking and are firing more synapses. I bet kids in a movement class or an acting class are being challenged “cerebrally” as much as a kid in a math class or history class. JMHO</p>
<p>BFAs are more geared toward the art courses, and BAs have more liberal arts courses as part of their degree programs.</p>
<p>Halflokum - my son didn’t take APs because he was busy with shows and a cappella. He would have struggled with APs but could have ultimately completed them with good grades, if he wasn’t so busy with the arts. We decided early on in his high school career that APs would not be the right choice for him so that he could continue participating in shows, which we felt would be more applicable to his pursuit of a BFA. So, yes, he was destined early on to be a theatre major - and our focus was more on gaining experience through shows, rather than taking APs.</p>
<p>5boys my feathers are not ruffled. On the contrary, I was inspired by the joke comment. You are also not the only person on this thread that said it and nor will you be the last in the forum. I’m trying to make a point. </p>
<p>I think it is an opportunity for us all to say, “hey, there is as much variability in ability amongst the theatre kids as there is in any other interest group.” Just because the admission criteria in many BFA theatre programs doesn’t always test for abilities outside of the artistic field in their admission evaluation, doesn’t mean those abilities aren’t there. And it also doesn’t mean that all of the kids who can’t (as an example) do math, flock to applying to things like theatre as a major. That’s insulting both to the kids that decide to major in theatre that are really good in math (example) AND it is equally insulting to the incredibly talented theatre kids that also happen to suck at math (example). </p>
<p>The strongest theatre applicants choose theatre as a path… just because above all else, that is the path they were meant to follow and willing to dedicate themselves to, come what may – period. No different from any other major. So THAT is why I challenged the joke about brownie points. Our theatre kids don’t deserve brownie points for rigor just because they are pursuing theatre. Our ANY major kids deserve brownie points for rigor if that is part of the evaluation which at many schools, and most BA’s it is. </p>
<p>PS 1: Marbleheader, I think you’ve proven my point. Your son didn’t take APs because in the greater scheme of his goals, it didn’t make sense for him to take them. But he didn’t NOT take AP classes because he couldn’t get through them. You said he would have struggled but gotten through them with good grades in the end. He is exactly one of the examples I’m talking about and look at him, he is at BU!</p>
<p>PS 2: if I could erase my post #87 I would. It’s kind of obnoxious. I didn’t mean it to be but reading it over it’s pretty easy to read it that way. Apologies.</p>
<p>Jumping in a little late, aagh on those who consider theatre students a step down from a STEM major. Doubt we have any on this thread but puhlease to whoever has that point of view. Second, I think kids going for non STEM degrees should get brownie points for taking stuff like AP physics, Calc. etc because they do not need it for their field. A hs kid leaning towards a STEM major is wise to get some of those courses under their belt before college to be better prepared. For our kids, going to a summer intensive program, being in extra shows, or helping backstage is far more valuable to them from a career standpoint than AP physics. plus they have demanding schedules as it is so adding on AP or honors in a non-related field is to their credit. Similarly, i’d be very impressed with a STEM kid with high school classes that reflected that who is also the team captain in a sport and has some drama background or is in the choir. I’d see that kid as a kid who challenges themselves in several areas and if they can pull all that off and still get an A or B in AP …, wow, that looks good. </p>
<p>And back to the academic snobbery. I had a college professor tell me in writing that drama was not academic and basically since my kid excelled in that, it was no evidence as to whether he was gifted or not. I about went ballistic, was tempted to forward that letter to her university’s theatre department, and see what they thought on that topic. I truly was furious. Sorry, my take on the matter is that if a certain subject is offered in college, it’s academic and if a person can get a doctorate in that field, than it is most certainly academic. Taking her theory out to a its logical outcome would mean that a kid who could write a great paper on a Shakespeare play was more talented academically than one who could play a convincing role on the same play on stage. Ridiculous.</p>
<p>Many kids in the arts are as academically able as anyone else, but you can’t get a PhD in performance, that I know of.</p>
<p>In academia, an MFA is considered a ‘terminal degree,’ equivalent to a PhD. That is, you can’t go any higher up, and you can be a professor in a university with an MFA. For my own MFA, I had to write a rigorous thesis, go before a committee, be vetted, etc. So the MFA for actors would be considered equivalent to a PhD.</p>
<p>But I agree that there’s a difference in styles of learning and achievement. For an MFA you have to demonstrate skill in your craft (writing, acting, art). Rigorous intellectual analysis - the sort that is required for a PhD - is also necessary for an MFA, but it’s not as important as creative thought, craft and implementation of the craft. One isn’t necessarily better than the other but it <em>is</em> different, and students should know that for BA and BFA programs as well. For instance, my own daughter likes being immersed in intellectual analysis (and was one of those theatre kids who took around 9 AP courses, including Calculus!). So a BA program was better for her. So the most important things are to know what you love and how you learn best and what your goals are.</p>
<p>Yes, there is often a distinction between “academics” and “the arts”. And there is often a prejudice that people who do “academics” are somehow smarter than people who do “the arts”. This can take a lot of forms. Intelligent young people may be told they must do academics and can’t do the arts (that’s certainly what happened to me). Some young people may go into the arts thinking it will be easier.</p>
<p>The fact is that overall, on average, the arts uses much more creativity. And creativity is in no way correlated (neither positively or negatively) with IQ. But there are many high IQ people who go into the arts (and bring an intellectual rigor), while many creative people can bring their creativity into academics.</p>