<p>Kellster, I'll be rooting for you. When talking of highly selective schools, it is always best to really love several and not put your hopes all wrapped up into one due to the odds. My D loves Brown but when she was applying to college, she truly liked every school on her list and naturally had a small pile of favorites but that was a "pile", not one school. Just something to keep in mind. </p>
<p>Are you graduating after junior year, like my younger D, you mean? You are sixteen? If so, I would recommend sending in with every application, a one page statement about graduating early and also make sure your guidance counselor speaks to that as well in his/her report. </p>
<p>I know nothing about your profile or qualifications but assume your academics are strong given the schools to which you are applying. Brown and Vassar are great BA choices for a strong student wanting to do theater. There are others for strong students too and I imagine your list is longer. Some others are Northwestern, Middlebury, Brandeis, Yale, Cornell, Tufts, UCLA, Conn College. I hope you have some schools that are not as much of a reach such as Sarah Lawrence, Skidmore, Goucher, Bard. While NYU is a BFA program, you'd also have a strong academic component with it and so I can see that school fitting in well with your plans and ambitions. </p>
<p>So, while I will keep my fingers crossed for you for Brown, I am sure with the options you must have on your list, that you will end up some place great next year where you will enjoy and thrive. </p>
<p>Best of luck and keep us posted!
Susan</p>
<p>PS....since you are looking into NYU which is a BFA in Acting, I'm wondering if you ever considered the fine BFA in acting at BU. Just thought I'd mention it.</p>
<p>Susan, I will be sixteen next month and I dont have nearly as much performance experience as your daughter had. haha My father is in the military, we move around a lot and I am graduating early so I wont have to start my fourth high school in three years. My guidance counselor has seen this before and wrote a nice statement about it. I also incorporated it into my essays. This year, I am only applying to schools that I know I would love or are what I have found to be the best BFAs to help get into grad school. My whole list is Brown (ED), Vassar, Tisch, UCLA, Evansville, SMU, Cal State Fullerton and the College of Charleston. I know my chances arent great at the selective schools and if I only get in Fullerton and CoC, I dont think it would be so bad to spend a year at one and transfer to where I really want to be the next year. The important thing for me right now is to just go ahead and start college. Of course, that would mean I would be moving AGAIN after a year but it would be to my second college instead of my fourth high school! haha</p>
<p>P.S. I looked into BU but heard some things I didn't like about the dorm situation and some other things and decided not to apply.</p>
<p>Kellster, it looks like you have well thought out plans. I am sure you are a very motivated person if you are graduating in three years, plus have had to move a lot. Early graduates are often scrutinized more than regular applicants in the admissions process, but as you can see, there are schools willing to take them and even offer scholarships. I am excited for you as you embark on this adventure next year, wherever it may be. There is more than one school that fits a student and where a kid can be happy and thrive. If you keep that in mind, you'll be fine.</p>
<p>Hi Nightfly, I totally agree with your suggestion of Muhlenberg and am actually counseling clients right now to apply and do the optional audition. Kellster, I believe, is going for a BFA in acting, not Musical Theater. Perhaps, however, you ARE talking of acting at Muhlenberg, though I was thinking of Muhlenberg in particular for MT. If so, never mind ;-).</p>
<p>Juilliard for drama has a reputation for being great. I don't know how the loss of the head guy will affect them. They told us that they audition 1000 for 20 spots!</p>
<p>My research showed this about Emersons 2005 admissions:</p>
<p>Each year, they hold 450-500 auditions (and may turn away more) for only 20 places in the freshman class (1:22 to 1:25). The junior and senior studios have approx.16 students each.</p>
<p>I attended the Emerson Open House in October and during the performing arts session it was stated that they audition about 1400 students for 70 spots. These 70 spots are for anyone who would need to take acting classes including: musical theatre, acting, theatre studies (performance emphasis) and theatre education (performing emphasis) students.</p>
<p>The Tisch rep told me that 60% of the kids taken in the acting studios were originally CAP hopefuls. I have since been told that is not correct.</p>
<p>I have decided not to put too much importance on the stats. They can be misleading and incorrect. Ultimatley, it doesn't really matter too terribly much. It's the fit that counts</p>
<p>Mary Anna, as you are aware that information about Tisch is definitely incorrect and so you have to go to the source and the source (from Tisch) posted here recently to clarify this information.</p>
<p>As far as Emerson, the two posts above do NOT contradict one another. I believe that Eve is giving the number for MUSICAL THEATER BFA at Emerson and it sounds absolutely right from what I have heard having had a child audition there. </p>
<p>NikesEcho is also giving information but a DIFFERENT TYPE of information so let's not get confused here. Nike is giving the TOTAL number of applicants or those who audition for BFA in MT, BFA in Acting, BA in Theater Studies - Performance Emphasis (must audition to get in that too) and theater education. The 70 spots is total for ALL of Emerson's theater programs. The 20 slots was for MT. </p>
<p>While one should go to the source, these two posts are likely correct and do not conflict whatsoever with one another. </p>
<p>Please do not continue to give out incorrect info. on CAP/Tisch because we have already had the Artistic Director from Tisch come and clarify and give the CORRECT information. Continuing to bring up incorrect information, once it has been corrected, is a disservice to the kids contemplating these programs. </p>
<p>While the stats are not what matters, and I do agree with you, wrong information can dissuade others from truly exploring what MAY Be a right fit. For instance, on another thread today, someone brought up the grad/undergrad issue as it pertains to performance opportunities at Tisch and while it was OK to post hearsay that was incorrect, because afterall the poster was asking for clarification and what is or is not correct, that is one thing. But once the correct information is posted and comes from a source or someone in the program, I think we need to no longer post incorrect information. That's simply my view. </p>
<p>Susan,
I am AGREEING with you. We are saying the same thing. We all want the correct information. I am grateful to get it, and it's usually from you!</p>
<p>Mary Anna, I think the key is that if you get the CORRECT stats, they are neither misleading nor incorrect. :) And to say it doesn't matter what the stats are, may be a personal choice of yours, but I think that most kids who are auditioning for these programs would prefer to know how many are auditioning and how many are ultimately accepted. That's a valuable piece of information when making decisions as to what schools to choose to apply to for many of these kids.</p>
<p>Mary Anna, I know you are agreeing that we all want the correct information. I'm simply saying that ONCE the correct information from the source has been posted here, let's not keep posting the incorrect information as it may inadvertantly mislead students/parents reading who are truly wanting that information and unfortunately, may make decisions based on the wrong information. At this point, we DO have the CORRECT stats from the SOURCE on NYU/Tisch. At this point, they are not misleading. So, this one school at least no longer has to have posts with confusing information that may now mislead, even if not intended (I know you don't intend to but it might be best to no longer give information that is incorrect as we have the correct information that can't be disputed as it is from the Artistic Director, Arthur Bartow himself on this very forum.)</p>
<p>My other point was that there was some inference that the two posts on Emerson demonstrated that there is lots of misleading or incorrect information when I saw the two posts as not conflicting but they were kinda talking apples and oranges, reminding me of the Tisch discussions recently where one person was talking CAP, another all of Tisch and there were inferences that the information differed when they were not talking of the same thing.
Susan</p>
<p>I love you guys. You are really great at keeping us in line here. I really mean it.</p>
<p>Even though I don't put much importance on stats for the reasons I have already stated, I will post here the stats I have received lately from acceptance letters since this seems to be the thread for it.</p>
<p>Here goes. Gulp.
Offers/stats </p>
<hr>
<p>Written offers are beginning to arrive to my students via email and snail mail from those schools who called them back.</p>
<p>from Cincinnati Department of Drama letter. They take 18-20 out of approximately 600 audtionees.</p>
<p>OU School of Drama Recruitment team auditions over 1000 for about 30 places for the acting track.</p>
<p>SMU audition about 850 takes about 12 for acting and another 12 or so for theatre studies.</p>
<p>I will post more info as I get it from the other offers.</p>
<p>Just a philosophical point here, but does it really matter whether a student's chances are 1% or 2% or 3%? I doubt my D has any idea what the actual percentages are, she just knows the competition is fierce for a few spots and is responding accordingly!</p>
<p>People like Susan are very good at percentages and can dissect all this and analyze the stats like a statistician and I appreciate that, I really do. Not to take anything away from those like Susan who know the ACCURATE stats. Someone needs to know that stuff! </p>
<p>But what the kids understand is "this is a reach and this is a safety and this is a fit" and just move on to, hopefully, focus on their audition which is the part that matters most </p>
<p>All the stats in the world won't change the audition. That's why I maintain to get bogged down in the numbers is not that important in the grand scheme of things. It is a factor, yes, but that's all. Just one factor in many. </p>
<p>If you have a dream, follow it, no matter what the stats say. This whole process is subjective and who knows what may happen. I have been surprised over and over again.</p>
<p>Chris, I actually agree with you! My kid did not pay attention, nor did I, if it was a 5% admit rate or a 9% admit rate. We just knew that with all her schools, the admit rate was less than 10% so very long odds that could not be counted on. And that was that. We knew how big each program was in terms of how many freshmen they take. I don't need to know more than that, at least within that same range of schools. The admit rate to almost ALL BFA programs is LOW LOW LOW like this. Does it matter if it is 4% or 10%? Not a whole lot. As I have mentioned on other threads, when I have to gauge my advisees' chances, there are SOME BFA programs where the odds may still be low but the applicant pool may not be as strong and so there are some BFAs that are not as hard to get into that way but still have low admit rates. Then you have to look at the academic odds and requirements to get in and assess accordingly per individual. </p>
<p>The ONLY reason I have even entered into any of these admission rate discussions is when OTHERS bring them up and when I observe any posts that are NOT correct or NOT accurate and then I have chosen to respond to help others to clarify what I do know on the topic. I do not attach importance, however, to the topic. If I read wrong stats about Tisch, as I have on here, I am going to set the record straight so no prospective students will have incorrect information if they are seeking that sort of information. Earlier, I was commenting on the perception that there were two sets of Emerson "numbers" as if there were some question as to that there are so many "versions" out there. I did not see it THAT way at all...I felt both posts were accurate and both were not in conflict because they were NOT talking about the same thing. One was talking of just MT and one was talking of all of Emerson's theater programs. This exact same "mix-up" came up when talking of Tisch recently. So, I am merely pointing out that it is not the same when talking of one subset of a program and an entire department. To imply that these are all incorrect or misleading or "depends who you are asking" is simply not the case. The Tisch info. given here IS now correct and verified by the director of the program. The Emerson information above, while not from the direct source, is information that several people have heard when visiting. That's all I am trying to respond to. The notion of the exact rate by this or that percentage point is not important to me. </p>
<p>When someone looks into a college, they have to assess their chances and look at many factors. They have to also examine fit. </p>
<p>Most people who are reading this forum have quite a bit of knowledge of what this process is about. But I do run into folks who have NO clue how competitive it is, have no inkling that their VERY low academic stats won't fly at certain schools, and also are not that competitive in terms of artistic qualifications or background but simply like MT and have done a little bit of it at school and so forth. There is a school for all kids. Finding the right match, and one where you have a chance of being considered or admitted, is what I do as a college counselor. Information for those very new to this process is important. Many of you guys know how selective it is so you really do not need this information. Some have NO idea. I meet these folks all the time!</p>
<p>As a scientist I appreciate and value accurate statistics, for sure. I also know when calculating a certain statistic is a waste of time. And my only point was that calulating the odds of getting into an MT program is just that kind of wasted effort and time. For those who know it is difficult. I do take your point that some people have no idea how difficult it is, and for them, citing a 5% admit rate might bring them to earth. </p>
<p>I'll never forget the exact moment my D and I had the "ah ha" moment. We were sitting at one of these colleges and the theater rep threw out one of these statistics. Until that point we truly had no idea. We walked to the car afterward in total shock. Feels like about 100 years ago. </p>