coming from PA high schools versus not

<p>All the discussion on the other thread about whether one should pursue a BFA in straight acting versus MT sparked some questions in mind mind that perhaps some of you can answer.</p>

<p>Namely, can anyone here comment on whether students who come out of conservatory-style performing arts/arts high schools with intense actor/musical training generally feel challenged enough in their freshmen year acting/musical theater classes at most MT programs?</p>

<p>I realize there are a lot of generalizations in my question, from the quality of various PA high school programs (in my own area, there are two such schools: one offers four hours a day of acting training and the other offers 90 minutes a day, and is much less intense) to the abilities of students to the rigor of the BFA programs in question. </p>

<p>I recall fishbowlfreshman talking about this somewhere on this forum, but it came up in another context. Fish? Any comments here? </p>

<p>I guess what I am wondering is whether students who have studied acting for four hours a day for four years in high school would find the pace fast enough and the program rigorous enough in college, at least at first. </p>

<p>I apologize in advance if this is a dumb question or if I have not expressed myself well. </p>

<p>L</p>

<p>At my school we study acting 4-6 hours a day. When alumni come back and talk about their experiences in college they usually say that they are ahead until their sophmore year, then everyone is kind of on the same playing field.
Alumni from cmu, um, nyu, juilliard, etc., it really does depend on how good the training you are receiving in your highschool.</p>

<p>BRbway, do you mind me asking what school you study at?</p>

<p>I think it would depend on prior music and dance training. That could definitely be a challenge if you’re rawer in those areas and don’t have good music theory skills, etc. I don’t know so much about acting at the MT programs per se, but I can say that the only places I’ve heard of first year acting being a real challenge for those who’ve already had a bit of serious training are the “big boy” acting conservatories and you'll be ahead of most even at those. The rest can be pretty slow first year unless a majorly different approach than what you’re used to is employed. Of course, in the midst of all that, there will always be new cherries you can pick and maybe something being taught could dawn on you in a new light. You have to also assume that the teachers will be at least a bit better or at least approach some things differently than the ones from h/s or at least approach things differently, so you’ll always be picking up new things. It can be a good time to get one’s academic house in order, too, as long as you have non-boring subjects with good profs. Besides … Boredom is the fundamental non-awareness of life, right? :)</p>

<p>Actually boredom can be a major learning experience in any venue. I worry sometimes that today's kids are so scheduled that they don't have the long stretches of, well, unscheduled downtime (and subsequent boredom) that people my age learned to deal with. Boredom teaches you how to create your own fun, amuse yourself and even -- and forgive me for being so blunt -- learn the important skill of looking like you are alert and paying attention when your mind is really a million miles away. :) Laugh if you want, but that is an important skill you can use in many ways later in life. That said, I wouldn't want my D (who does attend a high school for the arts and spends four plus hours a day doing acting training) to be seriously bored for a large percentage of time. Fishbowlfreshman, at the risk of starting the age old debate, I wonder if you mind giving a few examples of which are the "big boy" conservatories: CMU? CCM? NYU? UMich? Am I in the ballpark?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I wonder if you mind giving a few examples of which are the "big boy" conservatories: CMU? CCM? NYU? UMich? Am I in the ballpark?

[/quote]
I'm not going there on this group. LOL If you have your PMs open, I'll tell you what I think there.</p>

<p>My D attends a public performing arts school. It is grades 4-12 and she has been there since 4th grade. For us one of the problems I see with PA schools (last year we were looking at moving so I researched several in the areas we were interested in) is they rarely have an MT program, so kids have to select one of the 3 areas to focus on. At least as they get older and become more committed to an area. D dances 3 -4 hours a day at school depending on rehearsal schedules, which leaves little time for other arts courses in her schedule. Since 4 grade, when she could do all 3 she first had to drop drama and this year choir will go. She does not have a lunch period so has to eat in a class with an understanding teacher.</p>

<p>So there seems to be a big trade off and some areas still have to be supplemented outside of school. One reason we she continues in dance (classical ballet) is this is the most difficult to supplement for us. She can pick up summer drama programs, and private coaching for drama and voice, but high level ballet is hard to cover. She considers herself building for parts in things like 42nd Street, A Chorus Line, Cats, and other dance heavy shows(she does also tap and do jazz) where solid dance technique is essential.</p>

<p>I don't thnk you can assess if a PA school makes or breaks a student in auditions, sometimes I wonder if it may work to her disadvantage. She has a long resume and training and I wonder if college auditioers will look at that and say "with all that training and she is only at ___ level, looks like she has maxed her potential." I have no idea if this is the case, but it is a nagging worry.
I do knw at D's school there are many AA and lower income students who get brought into the arts that are unlikely to do so in another situation. For hem I think it proabably does make a difference.</p>

<p>I was really nervous when I got to school and half of my peers were from a PA school. I think PA schools are great because they allow people to work towards their dreams and goals right away, and they also help A LOT when getting into school, because they actually know about the schools out there, most high school teachers/conselors do not.</p>

<p>But once you get into school, I believe all of the advantage is done. I even discussed this with one of my acting teachers once, and she told me that it didn't matter once you got here, because the conservatory needs to strip you of all of your past bad habits. You can get a LOT of bad habits from a PA school. It was like if you didn't go to one, you were a clean slate and could just run with it, but some times if you did, it might take you a while to get going. </p>

<p>So basically in my experience PA do help a lot to get in the school, but didn't when it came to getting cut. For example there were 5 students from PA's or magnet programs from a certian southern state, and only one of them got asked back. That's an extreme example but probably 1/3 of the PA people got asked back.</p>

<p>I think that if you are really far ahead at the conservatory, than it's not the place for you because you should be learning constantly, not waiting for others to catch up (hey, wasn't that part of fishbowl's bowl?)</p>

<p>Forgive me if my original post on this thread made it sound as if I were trying to ascertain whether going to a PA hs would be an <em>advantage</em> in auditioning for college. I did not mean to ask that! I meant to ask whether anyone here had opinions on whether kids who have studied acting and/or MT at a PA hs routinely felt bored or as if they had already gone over the material when they got to freshmen year of college in an MT/acting program, as one would assume that freshmen year would be intense, yet somewhat introductory for kids who have never <em>studied</em> acting before in a formal way.
I do think that going to a PA hs is helpful to the extent that the hs counselors and teachers are accustomed to kids wanting to go onto BFA or BA performance programs and can no doubt wisely (I would hope!) advise students on appropriate college lists, etc. They would also (I would hope!) know where the best programs are for the students coming out that year. Barring that, though, I don't see it is a huge advantage.
We let my D enroll at her PA hs because it seemed to us that it would give her a chance to do now what she wants to do: study acting and act!</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think that if you are really far ahead at the conservatory, than it's not the place for you because you should be learning constantly, not waiting for others to catch up (hey, wasn't that part of fishbowl's bowl?)

[/quote]
It was a small part, but I expected that. I won’t say that I didn’t learn anything because I certainly did – especially in the realm of Theatre Lit. Overall, the entire environment at that school turned out to be a lot different than what I was led to believe on my visit and it just ended up not being a good fit for me … plus being sexually assaulted my first weekend on campus didn’t help a bit. There. I said it ...</p>

<p>As far as “being ahead” or whatever, it really depends on which p/a/h/s it is as has been stated before. I had some classmates who came from some different ones at my first school, too. It seemed like what was done at theirs was pretty much having a school where all the local drama kids went and put on big musicals and whatnot as opposed to actual process-based training. And yes … Some were total museums of bad habits that were gonna take a long time to break because they had been reinforced over and over again in performance moreso than those with little experience. Very very “stagy.” Actually, it was the kids who had a lot of previous performance experience who often had the toughest time at my h/s! As far as pitfalls go, on the Otterbein forum Doctorjohn outlined some of the things that can go wrong …
[quote]
Let's start with your good friend who was turned down. I'm going to assume she goes to school with you, and that you both attend a fairly high-powered pre-college actor training program. Some colleges feel that students like you have already taken the equivalent of their first-year curriculum, and consequently find themselves impatient in their freshman year, so impatient that they transfer out after a year, or even a single term. Or worse, they've stayed, but their impatience has infected the rest of the class. If that has happened to a college more than once, the faculty may be reluctant to take the chance with applicants who have had extensive training. Quite simply, you can be too trained for some college programs. Not all, but some.

[/quote]
We were pretty much warned about the same thing though, like I said, it wasn’t my main motivation to leave after a semester. “Knowing everything” or manifesting boredom as diva-like impatience really can make one a cancer to the ensemble and could and should get one asked to leave. There are always improvements that can be made to your basic technique and nobody our age is "there" yet no matter where they've trained or how much experience they have. You just have to maintain that attitude. And I'll be going through it again, soon! LOL</p>

<p>Notmama
maybe I didn't read your post carfeully enough. I wish my D's PA had counselors who knew about good arts programs for the studn, or counselors woe even knew the students. MY D's PA is urban in a struglling district and the primary concern of the guidance counselors seem to me to be keeping the failing students from dropping out or failing completely. Very little attention gets paid to the top students. Now my D is still young and we have not done the college center at the school yet.
One advantage I do see with the PA is the networking through parents and older students. My D has seen how students ahead of her have faired in auditions and scholarships, and there are other parents close by who can be helpful.</p>

<p>This may not be the case everywhere, but the PA high school in this area is part of the City school system and, as such, is subject to their academic standards(students from the suburbs are NOT allowed to attend the school). This leaves the students at a real disadvantage when they get to college as they are far behind their peers- several friends on the faculty of the HS tell me that the retention rate after the first year of college is less than 30%.All of the acting, singing and dancing in the world can't make up for major deficiencies in basic English,mathamatics,history and the sciences. I would hope that this is not the case in other areas.....</p>

<p>Both of the PA schools (well, I don't like to say "performings arts" because these schools also include visual arts, which are not "performance") are through public school systems. The one that is conservatory style (that is, the kids spend four hours a day in their major) is part of a large and beleaguered city school system that is often in the news for its lousy schools. However, this school has very good academic standards and the kids who come out of it do very well, without the retention rate problem that Lulu'sMomma speaks of. They also seem to do quite well in college admissions, whether they are going to pursue their art further or not. This year's seniors were accepted at (among other places) Princeton, Sarah Lawrence, Johns Hopkins, Juilliard (two actors from the same class got accepted to Juillard and several dancers always get in), CalArts, Purchase, CMU, Curtis, NYU, University of Minnesota's Guthrie Program and many more. However, these kids do not have access to the same kind of academic choices that the kids attending the area's private schools (which cost an average of $15k-$20K a year) do. The arts school doesn't have special courses in forensic science, Mandarin V and the role of Chairman Mao Zedong in the history of China. :) Then again, the private school doesn't have the kind of acting training (or visual arts training or music training) that the arts school does. It's a tradeoff of sorts.</p>