Colleges For Musical Theater - Part 40!

<p>soozievt--thanks so much for such an indepth anwer to my questions--exactly the kind of answers i was looking for--you are really so helpful--now if only MY case of nerves doesnt affect D#2......!</p>

<p>Hi samia! Chicago Unifieds are a great place to audition. If you're not a dancer, its okay. They do not penalize you because you do not have formal training for years and years! All they look for and expect coming into the program is potential. There are a few transfers as sophomores into the program. Two in the freshman class, actually. One girl is from New Mexico and the other from PPU. Depending on what classes you have taken prior to PSU, you may enter as a freshman over again but be able to graduate in three years, have to start fresh, or enter in the sophomore class. It all depends! If you are accepted, Cary Libkin (the head of the program) will make sure that he works things out with you one on one.
Like most other programs, PSU looks for potential in all areas. You can belt your heart out and they may ask you to sing scales going up or "Somewhere Over The Rainbow". It all depends! I wish I had a more solid answer for you, but after watching two years of auditions, I can tell you this--whatever you showcase, if they want to see more, they will not be hesitant to ask for it. The faculty likes to do some experimenting in your audition. Sometimes the auditioner is thrown for a loop and asked to do a monologue or song in a different way. For instance, last year a guy was asked to sing his ballad to one of the current MT majors as if they were in a bar together. It was pretty funny to watch a beautiful love ballad being sung as if they were in a totally different setting, but it produced a very different result in the acting choices he made. It all depends on what they are seeing and looking for! The most that you can do tp prepare for the audition is to go in with confidence in your material and do your best. Also, be open to change. If the faculty asks you to do something a different way, have fun! I agree with Soozievt in that you should try to show off your range of skills and not worry so much about catering to each individual school, but showcasing what you do best!</p>

<p>"For VERY qualified candidates who have the "package" of very good academics, lots of training, strong skills in all three disciplines of acting, voice, and dance, the "it" factor or stage presence, lots of experience in productions, audition experience, confidence, passion, work ethic, achievements in this field, various benchmarks to assess their talent be it awards, leads, and so forth....these kids who are appropriate or reasonable or ballpark candidates for these BFA programs..."</p>

<p>Forgive me Susan, but I have to resoectfully take issue with you when you use descriptions like the one above to identify those kids you believe are "appropriate or reasonable or ballpark candidates for these BFA programs." I am afraid that you will scare off kids and parents who really DO have a chance to succeed in this process but who haven't devoted every waking minute of their lives up to this point in the pursuit of Musical Theater. I wish it were possible to do a study of the students currently in MT BFA programs and see how many of them meet all of the requirements of your "package." I think the smallness of that number would surprise you. I remember many of the programs my D applied to telling us that for a candidate to be competitive in the audition for their school, they should demonstrate a very high level of accomplishment in one of the three "triple threat" categories, strength in a second and a stated desire and willingness to work on the third. With one exception, I never felt like any of the top programs my D auditioned for were looking for "finished products" or kids with huge resumes and training already up the wazoo. They want students with natural abilities, passion and presence, students they can work with and help refine the skillset that will be necessary to compete in the marketplace after graduation.</p>

<p>I understand that your daughter has this "package" but I have to tell you that from all that you've shared over the last few years, I believe that she is the exception as opposed to the rule. I agree that students and parents alike should do the research to determine the best range of schools for which to audition. Based on their experiences and the feedback they have received to date, some will choose all top tier schools while others will take a safer approach. Once this is done, I would just encourage students and parents to allow the process itself to provide the feedback that while not the final word, will give them some indication of whether or not they have a chance to be successful in a musical theater career.</p>

<p>Please don't take offense at my reaction. I understand that you have lots of experience in counseling kids and your generous support of so many on this forum is always appreciated. I just think that this latest post will be unintentionally intimidating and is not a fair description of what most of the kids pursuing this dream and reading this forum should expect to have in order to be successful in college auditions. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.</p>

<p>I agree wholeheartedly that you need not have this entire "package". You can be good at just one discipline and weaker in the other two. You can have only been in a couple shows. You can have won no awards or no achievements and have never played a lead and get into a TOP MT program. I was not saying you had to have those things to GET IN.</p>

<p>My point was in building an appropriate and balanced list of colleges, you assess odds of schools on your list. The more things you have in the plus category or strong qualifications, then your chances at your reach or match schools are increased. So, you build a list of schools appropriately. A student who does not have that package should STILL try for top or reach schools, but must also have some safer and ballpark schools. </p>

<p>Let's forget about BFA programs for a moment. If I have a student who has 1500 on the SATs, a 4.0 GPA, scores of over 700 on three SAT2s, is valedictorian, the most demanding course load possible at his school, significant academic awards, strong extracurricular commitments over a long period of time in which there is achievement or leadership, plus strong personal qualities, that student's odds of admission to Harvard are stronger than the kid who had 1300 SATs, a 3.5 GPA, no Honors or AP classes, 600s on the SAT2s, is ranked in the 15%tile of the class, insigifnicant ECs like misc. clubs and no achievements in these, no passion in interests areas, weak essays, uninspiring recommendations....I'm going to say try for Harvard if you love that school and put it on your reach list. Kids like this DO get in. Less get in with that profile and the odds are stronger for the first kid. But the first kid's odds are still very long because the school accepts 10% of those who apply so it is a longshot even for the most qualified kids....not all valedictorians or kids who score 1600 get into Harvard. Just read the many EXCELLENT profiles of CC posters on the other forums and how many got rejected at selective schools, which is mind boggling, as they had what it takes to get in. But the kids with lesser "stats" or qualifications had longer shot odds but still CAN and DO get in. </p>

<p>Building an appropriate list is important. There should be reaches and realistic ballpark target match schools, and safeties. A student who is strong in each area that I stipulated, can have more reaches on the list and the odds are increased but NOT a sure bet. The students who are weak in some of those areas, CAN and DO get in. </p>

<p>By the way, I do not think my D was unusual at all. The description I gave above...fit NUMEROUS kids I knew in her circle of friends and they all got into BFA programs, many into top ones. In fact, now that my D is in a BFA program, she tells me of the many accomplishments of her peers in her class and is awed by some of their talent and backgrounds. Even my D's roommate from our region had a similar profile. NOT EVERY student in her program or in other programs have that same profile and I know kids who got in who were not dancers or who had never won an award, or had only played supporting roles or who had just an 1150 on the SAT. So, the experiential and skill level of each student in any program is varied, no question, I agree. Talent and potential play a significant part in who gets in. Just saying that the stronger profile kid has increased odds and that I know many who fit that profile who now are attending BFA programs. I see where the stronger kids are going and their admissions results over several years. Even they can't get into all the programs. The kids who do not stand out have not has the same results but some do get into very good BFA programs as well. </p>

<p>It does not take what I said to get in. That was not my point. My point had to do with Sareccasmom's question about building a list, how many reaches, matches, safeties and total number of schools. And in my line of work, the list is built based on an evaluation of a student and their chances at various schools. What is one person's match is another person's reach. Both kids may get into that very same school, however. Schools accept a RANGE of kids. Read any college directory. But the range varies from school to school and so a list must be appropriate for a student and balanced. </p>

<p>I work with some kids who I KNOW are NOT competitive for a top BFA program and I come up with good BFA programs that are more within reach and also strong BA programs. It all depends on the kid. However, EVERY kid should try for reach schools as you never know. Kids DO get into their reaches. It is just that their ODDS are increased at their matches and insured at their safeties which are likely admits. </p>

<p>Can a kid with 1200 SATs get into Harvard? Yes. Do a LOT of the admitted kids fit that profile? No. BFA admissions has a subjective part to it so it is harder to gauge chances but there are some reasonable benchmarks to look at if a student has reasonable schools on their list. </p>

<p>Every student here has a chance to be admitted to a BFA program. You do NOT have to have a certain "package" to get in. But you do need to build a realistic and balanced list of schools and that list would differ from kid to kid. Someone who is not a strong candidate should not have 8 reach schools. She/he should have SOME though. That was my point. The building of the list depends on the kid. However, many levels of talent can and should try for BFA programs. You do not have to have everything on that profile to be admitted. You do need to evaluate and assess your odds and apply accordingly to a balanced list. I did meet kids on the audition circuit who were not appropriate candidates for the particular colleges they were auditioning at. Just like I see kids who want to apply to Harvard with 1100 SATs, I see some who audition for a BFA who do not have a reasonable list of colleges. They should have a range of selectivity that fits their profile. Reaches are fine but all reaches for that kind of profile may result in no or few options come spring.</p>

<p>Susan</p>

<p>Samia - we have a good friend at PSU, and he is amazing. He played Ren in his HS production of Footloose; he was way better than the guy we saw on Broadway. He loves it there and was accepted to many other schools, including Ithaca and Emerson. Good luck!</p>

<p>My d applied to 8 schools last year (would have been 9, but we got fed up with the marathon UMich application and gave up - my bad??) NYU, Hart, Emerson, Syracuse, CCM, Carnegie Mellon, Penn State, and Ithaca. She applied ED to NYU and thus had to cancel all her other auditions since she got in to NYU (goodbye, audition/application money! Only Carnegie Mellon actually refunded the audition fee!) I guess there were no reaches in this list, when I really think about it. She got into CCM and Penn State academically (they were the only ones who let her know before the audition; not sure how the others worked as we withdrew her applications right away). You never can tell who's going to get into where, though. Looking back, we should have had at least 2 safety schools. Wow - how stupid were we! We lucked out, but we gambled on her future..not a good idea.
Suggestion to all applicants - if you're appling ED anywhere (like NYU; one of the only MT schools having that option), try to send out your other application fees/audition fees after Dec. 10-15, as that's when you hear about the decision. I sent all the fees earlier and lost most of them, as stated above. However, SOME SCHOOLS WILL NOT SET UP AN AUDITION APPT. WITHOUT THOSE FEES. So check on the school. I lost about $1000 in fees because I was so scared the applications would be late. But most aren't due until after Dec., anyway! Hope this helps SOMEONE...... :)</p>

<p>rossji, if your friend was better than the guy you saw on Broadway, then he's likely got a great career ahead of him. That 'guy you saw on Broadway' has been Ren in Footloose, Roger in Rent, Radames in Aida, The Rhythm Club, The Who's Tommy, several Broadway workshops, and is now currently touring the world with the 10th Anniversary International Tour of Rent. He also has two cds out of his original music and regularly did music gigs in NYC prior to leaving on tour last month. Not bad for a kid from Winnipeg, Manitoba. ;)</p>

<p>Sorry, I don't remember his name and didn't really want to name him, anyway, since it's just my opinion (but everyone who saw Footloose with me on Broadway, and my friend in the HS production, which was about 25 kids since we went on a field trip to Broadway and a lot of those same kids saw the HS production) agreed. I'm glad he's doing so well, though!</p>

<p>Good luck at the PSU auditions this weekend! My daughter will be assisting Spence Ford with the dance part of the audition. Spence will teach and my D ( and a classmate) will demonstrate the combination. At the next auditions, beginning in January, she and her classmate will also teach the combinations.</p>

<p>So again good luck at PSU; and all your many auditions to come!</p>

<p>His name is Jeremy Kushnier. :) Very talented and he's had tremendous success as you can see. It's funny, Footloose looked like it was going to be a big success but there were real problems with the book which the director didn't work at fixing between the preview in D.C. and its opening on Broadway. Reviews for Jeremy, Tom Plotkin, and Dee Hoty were very good though, even by the heavy-hitter critics but the show just didn't have much of a chance for an extended run, although it did run for almost two years. Some great talent came out of that show, though, in addition to those mentioned, and have gone on to have good MT careers: Orfeh (Saturday Night Fever, Great American Trailer Park Musical), Jennifer Laura Thompson who went on to Urinetown and Wicked, Hunter Foster (Producers, Urinetown, Little Shop), Paul Castree (Saturday Night Fever, All Shook Up), Kathy Deitch and Kristen Lee Gorski (Wicked), Katharine Leonard (Hairspray), Lori Holmes (Taboo), Christian Borle (Jesus Christ Superstar, Thoroughly Modern Millie, Spamalot), Luther Creek (JCS, Urinetown, Rent), Jenn Gambatese (Hairspray, Frog and Toad, All Shook Up), Matt Morrison (Rocky Horror, Hairspray, Light in the Piazza, Naked Girl on the Appian Way). Sometimes the individual talent in a show outshines the show itself and Footloose was a good example of this. Many of the castmembers were launched into very successful careers. It will be fun to see who the core group of actors is in the theatre world ten years from now. I think many of us from CC will look back and say 'we knew them when!' :)</p>

<p>You guys are the greatest. I just love the give and take of opinions and experience on this list. It's an amazing source of information for all of us, especially use newbies whose kids are early in their high school careers and are just beginning to think about college and MT programs.</p>

<p>I read Susan's post about kids who present with the whole "package" (good academics and test scores, talent and competence in acting, voice, and dance, and a lot of theater experience) and it made me think:</p>

<p>Community and school theater productions vary wildly, from those that are very high in quality and professionalism to what one mom I know would call "absolute trainwrecks." So how can a college MT admissions department really judge whether one student's experience in that regard is really "better" than another's? </p>

<p>I am not saying this well. Let me try again. I just attended a local public high school (not a PA school ... just a good regular comprehensive high school)'s fall production of a well-loved holiday classic. Overall, the production was weak in a lot of respects. (The audience could hardly hear the actors, for one, and the blocking was confusing, etc. etc.) The students who had lead roles in that production certainly can put that on their resumes, but how is the college to know about the quality or lack thereof? Even including photos of shows with amazing sets doesn't say much, because the overall quality of the acting and direction may have been dismal. Of course, you can't tell that from photos.</p>

<p>Now, clearly, if a student's resume contains reference to lead roles at well respected programs such as Interlochen or NYU's or CMU's summer programs, well, that says something. </p>

<p>So, my question is: does having a lot of production credits on a student's resume really matter as a measure of their success to that point and their talent, or does it mostly tell the adjudicators and admissions folks that the student is passionate about theater and has spent hundreds of hours on it? </p>

<p>For the record, even though I am asking this, my daughter is all about theater and musical theater. She not only attends a PA high school in drama and theater, but is constantly auditioning for and participating in musicals in community theater settings. But it's clear to me, even as a bystander whose biggest job is to drive the car to get her to and fro <g> that the quality of those productions varies. Some of them help her build her skills. Others she comes out of saying "Boy, I had fun. I did not get any better, but I had fun."</g></p>

<p>She's just now reaching the point where she has enough options to begin to be choosy, and that's probably a good thing.</p>

<p>I would like to hear you more experienced MT parents' opinions on this, if you feel like offering any.</p>

<p>Ciao!</p>

<p>LD</p>

<p>My personal opinion is that the resume means very little. At some schools, almost the only thing that matters is what you show them in the audition. At other schools, I think the academics and essays are considered in addition to what happens at the audition itself. I wouldn't stress over the experience. Instead, go for training in all areas! I say this even though my son has an extensive resume, because I think that resume will mean nothing without a good audition.</p>

<p>If the purpose of a HS student doing a community theatre show is to have fun - great! Do shows you want to do, do them with groups your friends do shows with, etc.</p>

<p>If the purpose is to build a more impressive resume - that won't help, if you can't deliver at the audition. In fact, if your resume is extensive, and your audition poor, the auditors may well assume your resume is padded.</p>

<p>If you are serious about pursuing MT as a career, then the rules change a bit.</p>

<p>If doing a string of shows gets in the way of your training, I say go with the training every time. </p>

<p>Do shows with groups with good reputation, who are respectful of students' schedules, and who exhibit good rehearsal and performance etiquette. Do shows that allow you to grow as a performer. Do shows where more attention is paid to the art of acting / singing / dancing, than to shows with big-budget production values. (Not that there's anything wrong with great production values - just when they are more important than the performances themselves!) Do shows with groups who have adult performers who can be good role models and mentors.</p>

<p>I couldn't agree with Ericsmom and MusicThCC more. I believe that a GREAT audition trumps an extensive resume for college admission. Even as you move out into the professional world, QUALITY credits may help you get an audition, but it's the audition that gets you the role. I also agree that training opportunities should always trump performance for fun - train, train and train some more. </p>

<p>This brings up a facet of some college programs that has been discussed on this forum before but it relates to this current discussion. I have to say that I now have a greater appreciation of those college programs that ask students to defer performance for anywhere from one semester to two years. The pressures of performance have a way of causing young perfromers to fall back on old and sometimes bad habits. Making sure that adequate class time is devoted to strengthening technique before venturing back on stage is, I believe, a responsible and professional approach to training. I know that many students - AND parents - hate the idea of the college "no performance" clause, but I now think that it is a really good thing. I have the most respect for those programs that treat performance as an extension of the educational mission. It's tempting to give the kids a gazillion performance opportunities because that's what they all want. But is it really good for them? I'll confess to being hooked on watching my child perform, but I also love hot fudge sundaes and I'm not sure how good they are for me. Not the perfect metaphor but I hope my point is clear. I'm sure there is a variety of opinon about this subject but I think it's something to think about and perhaps a good question to ask of the programs your child is considering.</p>

<p>Hi, the resume itself is not going to get the student into college. Talent/skills will be what is judged in the audition, and not what is on the resume. So, no, they may not know the level of the shows the student did but that is not what they are judging. They are judging the singing, acting and dancing talent and potential, those skills, and also stage presence and other aspects of an artistic review. A kid with less stage credits or ones in less challenging theater productions can get admitted, just like a kid who did more of these. So, it rests more on the talent. </p>

<p>Earlier, when I was talking about some of the aspects that make a strong candidate profile, I never meant that a student had to have all these things in order to get in. The stronger a candidate is in more areas, the odds do increase. </p>

<p>When talking about this, it came up as to who is an appropriate candidate for a well regarded MT BFA program and some times, this is hard to tell but you can try to self assess, get opinions of others in the field about your talent and also look at any benchmarks or achievements the student has had locally and beyond in a stronger field of talent. Now, I am not saying that if the student is accomplished that way, then he or she will be admitted because they are not judging the resume itself. But often, when someone is standing out or achieving in the field, it is for a reason. And therefore, as a benchmark, if that is the case, that person might stand a stronger chance in the pool of applicants from a wide area of strong talented kids. The achievements themselves won't get them in (ie., state and national awards, leads in productions, etc.) but if they are achieving these things, it is sort of a benchmark that they might have a chance among a group of talented kids who are auditioning to get into a BFA program. </p>

<p>You do not have to have played leads to get into a BFA program. What you CAN do, however, is get a fair assessment if you are competitve as an applicant. Let's say two kids audition for the same 8 productions.....say this is at a school, or a local youth theater program or at a summer program filled with even a higher pool of talent. One kid gets 4 leads, 3 supporting roles, 1 ensemble role. The other kid gets 8 ensemble roles. If you judge it on any one single production casting, that would be inaccurate (even the most talented kid has played ensemble or supporting roles at times) but in the overall picture of all 8 casting auditions, if a kid did not get anything ever but ensemble, then amongst other talented youth, this student did not stand out. Kids with more skill or talent kept winning out in casting over a long period of time for a REASON. Again, you can't go by one single show but if the second kid is put in an audition situation, time and again, other kids are picked over this kid. So, what can you infer? That when put into an even more competitive pool of auditioners, kids with more talent will stand out and win the spots. BFA auditions are rather similar though even more competitive. If you can't be the ones being chosen for parts in a smaller pool locally, how will you be chosen in auditions when amongst the top kids cast in their respective hometown areas in one audition? Predictably, not as likely. </p>

<p>Do you have to have won awards to get into a BFA program? No. For those who have, then they have another benchmark as to how they have fared on a state, regional or national level when amongst other talented kids. If the student has some of these achievements it likely is for a reason...the student has the talent and skills that show in auditions. </p>

<p>You don't need the lead roles or the awards to get in. For kids who have these, they got to that point in casting or award selection by possessing the skills or talent needed to achieve that. So, while the things on the resume do not get them into college, the skills/talents that were necessary to achieve those things, are likely going to be favorable in an audition amongst a wider pool of talented kids vying for BFA admissions. You do not HAVE to have these things. But if you are not faring well in such auditions over time for either show casting or juried awards type competitions/selections, then you have to look at if your skills are on par with the talent of those who are achieving those things. </p>

<p>AS far as the level of the production, it is different to stand out in a small pool than a larger or more talented one. Again, it is not important on the resume for admissions but more of gauging where you stand relative to the talent pool in terms of assessing chances for standing out in a talent pool from ALL OVER that will be strong for the BFA auditions. So, it is one thing to stand out in school. Then if you audition for something regional, you get another idea. Another pool of talent is often in a summer intensive that draws talent from around the country where sometimes you have the kids who all play leads at home all in one program and you see how you are doing in that setting. </p>

<p>But ALL that aside, it is not what is on the resume as much as what it took to achieve whatever is on the resume. So, training is very important. Ideally, to have trained in voice, acting, and dance would be advantageous. Productions can't subsitute for training. I believe it is good to have a balance of training and production experience because much is learned in both situations. Training builds skills and production experience let you apply those skills, embody a character, learn all the elements of putting together a show, working with other actors and directors, building stage presence and so forth. I also think it is valuable to do both youth productions and adult productions. Often in youth productions, you may be able to play a significant role and gain a lot of experience in doing that role. In an adult production, there may be less significant roles for youth, but the experience can SOMETIMES be more professional (though not always and some youth shows are more professional than some community theater shows) and if the adult show is on a challenging scale, lots can be gained from the level of the show, the challenge, the professionalism, the work ethic to be a part of that, working with professional staff and also with adults, and so on. They all have value. A student need not have done all these things but much is gained in these production experiences and in the training and through ALL of that, the student has grown as a musical theater actor and likely has attained a level of skill to be competitive in a strong applicant pool. The resume credits did not get the kid to be admitted but what he/she did to achieve the credits and the years of training created a talented student ready to enter the audition circuit for college. Kids learn from the training and from all the production experience. It makes sense that when someone has done these things, they've grown in skill and presence and even have done a bunch of auditioning (a skill in itself). It just helps them be a candidate who is ready and skilled. The resume is not really it, but what it took to do those things that enhanced the student's background and skill development. </p>

<p>It is sort of like with anything. I have a child who is a ski racer (actually my theater kid was a ski racer for 7 years too). But if she were to be ready to enter the state championships or nationals, it is not so much which races she won to get there but more that she had years of lessons and programs, lots of races under her belt locally and then regionally. The skills learned in her training, coupled with plenty of race experience, achievements in those races, then made her competitive to be in the state championships or to race for a college team, etc. </p>

<p>As far as the level of the show experiences, your child can decide if the challenge is sufficient or not, and if not, to look for other theater experiences that are more challenging. For my own child, she would MUCH rather play ensemble or a small part in a higher level production that is challenging than play the lead in a production that is fair. It is more about what is to be learned then in the part itself. I know lots of kids who feel this way. They want to continue to keep learning and training. The productions themselves are more satisfying if they are learning in them than simply just doing them. </p>

<p>It is not as important to build the resume as it is to be gaining skills through training and through challenging production experiences. Through these two things, the student often achieves a level of skill/talent to be competitive in a strong pool of applicants. So, don't worry so much about what is ON the resume but what it took to do those things and what was achieved and learned that took the student to the next level of talent. </p>

<p>Susan</p>

<p>i agree with the statements here. I don't think the resume matters much in light of the audition. I would like to comment that one weak public high school production is certainly not a representation of them all. Many, many public high schools have excellent theatre departments as well as a talented group of students and put on first-rate productions.</p>

<p>So then how important are high school academics on a resume? For instance, when I graduate from high school, I plan to have at least a 3.5 GPA with seven AP credits. My SAT score is also very high. Does this give me any advantage?</p>

<p>
[quote]
You do not have to have played leads to get into a BFA program. What you CAN do, however, is get a fair assessment if you are competitve as an applicant. Let's say two kids audition for the same 8 productions.....say this is at a school, or a local youth theater program or at a summer program filled with even a higher pool of talent. One kid gets 4 leads, 3 supporting roles, 1 ensemble role. The other kid gets 8 ensemble roles. If you judge it on any one single production casting, that would be inaccurate (even the most talented kid has played ensemble or supporting roles at times) but in the overall picture of all 8 casting auditions, if a kid did not get anything ever but ensemble, then amongst other talented youth, this student did not stand out.

[/quote]

That's not entirely true. Maybe this is just common sense and I say it coming from a performing arts h/s background where EVERYBODY is talented … However, if you have 2 soprano Nicole Kidman look-alikes in a talented h/s ensemble … yes … The more competitive one probably got the leads. However, if you have a tall soprano Nicole Kidman look-alike and an equally or more talented mezzo belter Rhea Pearlman type, it is pretty obvious that the leggy one will get more of the leads depending on which shows were done though the Rhea Pearlman look-alike might really have as much or more value to a college ensemble and long-term steady working pro potential as the other. That’s not even considering the minority actor factor ...</p>

<p>Razorback,</p>

<p>Just wanted to clarify: I am very aware that many high schools do very high quality productions. In fact, I have to say that I have been quite impressed by the overall excellence of a number of middle and high school productions I have attended in the past five or six years, since my daughter began doing theater.</p>

<p>The only reason I used the production that my daughter and I attended recently as an example was precisely because it was so poor, yet the kids involved can still (and will still) have those leading roles on their resumes. My point was that most college MT admissions people are not going to know if a lead role in a production of (for example) "It's A Wonderful Life" at Anytown High School means something good or not. (Clearly, it means that whoever played George Bailey in that production was better than whoever else auditioned, but that's it.) My point was that it must be difficult to impossible for an admissions team to ascertain from a resume packed with productions whether those productions were good quality or not.</p>

<p>However, soozievt makes an excellent point, which is that a resume of productions can show a trend over time. If a student has taken part in a number of school, community and regional productions and overall, gets good roles, that would likely show the admissions people that the student stood out. </p>

<p>I agree with those of you who stated that the emphasis should always be on training, and if a student has to choose between a poor quality and very amateurish production or training, the training should win out. I had this argument with a local drama teacher, who insisted that my daughter would get more out of participating in extracurricular productions than she would in the various classes (dance, acting, voice, movement, etc.) that she gets at her PA high school, where she spends four hours a day doing those things. (They do not put on productions until senior year. Junior year they do scene studies and "scene nights," but no full productions. Their approach is that anyone admitted is talented: whtat the kids need is intense training to challenge and direct and develop that talent.) As it turns out, my D is having the opportunity to do both -- the classes in school (with some dance and voice outside), as well as selected community productions. But nothing I said could shake this person's adament stance that colleges would be more impressed by seeing, on a student's application/resume, a high school production of "Chicago" than they would training and selected outside productions. I am glad to hear that some of you agree with me.</p>

<p>Lisa</p>

<p>Susan & PSUcat - Thanks for your great respones. I have to clarify though. I didn't mean I would only show off belt or only show off legit at any one audition. Here is my problem specifically: I do well at belting, belt mixing, and legit singing. The problem is that I feel like I have to have one legit song at every audition, meaning I can only show off my belt or my belt mix with the other song. Now, my belt and belt mix are very different - it's like the difference between Idina Menzel and Carolee Carmello. Both gorgeous sounds, but completely different, and it's hard to show auditioners that you can do both without cutting out the legit song. See what I mean?</p>

<p>Also, I can't really choose which I do best between the two, because I do both equally well. My belt is more impressive to the normal non-MT person, but my belt mix is what got the vocal professors at U of A to notice me, because no one else could do it. But it lacks the sassiness of my belt, does that make sense? Eek. I'll just ask my audition coach in NYC when I get one. It's hard to explain over a messageboard.</p>