Cut from CCM - Transfer questions

College Majors Musical Theater Major
121

<p>There exists among some a misconception that only at a school where you have a cut system or where juries are used as a mandatory re-audition will you find high level professional training and students who reflect commensurate talent, are serious and focused about their work and bring with them the dedication and perseverance needed to prepare for a professional career. This is, of course, a facile and inaccurate perception. </p>

<p>There are many schools that do not subscribe to a "cut philosophy" that have as fine a standard of training, attract every bit as talented a group of students and expect the same level of seriousness of purpose from their students as any "cut program" school regardless of whether the "cut school" is a "professional studio" or a "conservatory" that happens to be housed in a college or university. There are many, many students who elect a school that does not have a "cut policy", not because the student could not successfully compete at a "cut" school but because in evaluating certain fundamental values and concepts of education and professional training, the student concludes that a school with a cut system does not reflect values that resonate well with theirs.</p>

<p>And to suggest, as some have, that such students would not be capable of success at a "cut policy school", "professional studio" or "conservatory" based program is smug, condescending and reflective of over inflated self esteem, qualities that are often reflected at some cut policy schools as part of their institutional fabric. So just like there are some students who would not be happy at schools whose culture and image do not reinforce their sense of self importance, there are other students who prefer a more congenial and collaborative environment, where the structure of the school does not force you to view your colleagues as a threat to your continued attendance and where you can make a commitment to the school, program and your colleagues knowing that they have made an equal commitment to you.</p>

<p>Everyone is certainly entitled to decide which schools are compatible with their preferences and values and which are not. But to suggest, in any manner, that those who choose schools that do not promote internecine competitiveness among its own are somehow in the need of "coddling" or are not receiving and meeting standards of excellence in their training is self aggrandizing and uninformed.</p>

122

<p>CA-Mom...
I do appreciate your sharing what you heard. However, I still have questions even if what you heard is accurate (not that you can personally answer them, I realize).</p>

<p>First, if you are saying that Tisch gets around this number by having no more than 18 students in class within the conservatory, why couldn't any other program do that? In other words, based on this concept, a program could have 30 students/year with 15 in a classroom. They would not need to employ cuts.</p>

<p>Also, while we don't know this 'magic number' and you are inferring that it could be "18".....let's look at how CCM has about 20 per year in MT and so does UMich but UMich doesn't cut. CCM's number may be within the magic number with no cuts presumably. This year, I think UMich graduated its biggest class ever at 28 because more took their offer of admission than they had planned to yield (though they have since adjusted the number of offers to align with their increasing high yields). They didn't seem to have to cut any students. </p>

<p>Doesn't UArts have about the same number of freshmen in a year as CCM? They don't cut. </p>

<p>And what would account for the changing number that CCM cuts per year? Even I would admit that CCM does NOT cut by number (like DePaul does). Some years, they may cut one and another year they may cut four, but they admit about the same number per year. I don't think that the number they cut is any way related to accredidation as they even claim that they are willing to keep all 20 they admit if they pass juries. </p>

<p>And once again....the question would remain....even IF there is a certain number required per class related to accredidation, why must a program admit a lot more than this number and then cut? They could admit just this number in the first place or one or two over the number in case of attrition.</p>

123

<p>I've hesitated to join in on this discussion, as it's been done far too many times since I've been a member at CC. :) However, this conservatory specification discussion is one I've never heard of in all the years I've been on CC and I've been involved in the theatre community.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The way NYU gets around it is because the classes are divided for training purposes so the students in each section are within that magical conservatory number. I could never get anyone to commit to an exact number, although it seems to be around 18.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When you refer to a school being 'considered a conservatory', can you tell me considered by whom? This reference to a way that 'NYU gets around it' doesn't make sense to me, even if "it" exists. While it's true that each studio divides their classes into smaller subsections, I can't imagine that anyone who might be looking for qualification as some sort of specific 'conservatory' that they wouldn't look at the studio itself and not at how the studio then makes smaller classes in which to better teach the students. This class structure is designed to suit the instructional needs of students, not, as far as I've ever heard, to make the school 'qualify' to fit some arcane rules of a conservatory program.</p>

124

<p>I have never heard this conservatory specification before either!</p>

125

<p>I have NO CLUE how my response (post #123) to AlwaysAMom now appears BEFORE her post...LOL. I posted it AFTER reading her post as a response to HER. Oh well. I noticed on another CC forum the other day that this happened with some other posts. Weird.</p>

126

<p>Just want to post here that I think CC is very lucky to have so many articulate and knowledgeable people on this board. I love reading soozievt and MichaelNKat, as well as many others of you!</p>

127

<p>I am just reporting what was told to me while we were on the audition circuit this past year. As I said, everyone was very vague, but the "conservatory" designation was mentioned at more than one of the schools when we questioned them about why there needed to be cuts. I couldn't seem to get a straight answer on that "magic number". Emerson was the most straight-forward of the cut schools we visited in terms of trying to explain their philosophy. Soozievt - you're right, if they started with the "magic number" of students in the program, then there would be no need to cut. One school in particular seemed to think they were doing a good thing by admitting almost twice the size of class they intended to keep because that gave more students the opportunity to rise to the top. Again, everyone needs to make their own decision of where they will be comfortable and do their best work.</p>

<p>Alwaysamom - Again, I am just reporting what I heard. I cannot tell you whether there is some sort of national accredidation program or not. The way it was presented to us was that in order to be a "conservatory", they could only have a certain number of students in the class during the conservatory years. Frankly, we didn't follow-up any further because my D fell in love with a program that, thankfully, doesn't have this issue.</p>

128

<p>In son's school there are no cuts. However, there are performance requirements. Someone who is not getting parts in the productions is not going to get his degree for MT. However, the school has a number of opportunities for shows, auditions, parts, and you have 4 years to get the requisite 3 roles. Indirectly, one can say there is a cut component to the program, it is over time and the student is more nudged to find another major rather than it happening over one audition or jury. Because of the guest director situation, kids have opportunities to audition for many different people including those who are not staying at the university for more than one show.</p>

129

<p>I always thought that the difference between a "traditional conservatory" and a "college" was that a conservatory 1) exclusively offered performing arts of some type, 2) admission was by audition only with little or no weight given to academic criteria, 3) had as a mission and purpose to be a professional training program from which a student moves right into professional performing and 4) studies were limited to performing arts with no offerings or requirements in liberal arts. Conservatories may be small in numbers within a particular artistic area but I think that is a by product of the type of education received and the need to keep classes small to give intensive individualized instruction and not because of a "mandated" class size.</p>

<p>Today there has obviously been a blurring of the lines somewhat in that some schools that were traditional conservatories now offer some liberal arts or general education, colleges and universities now offer conservatory training housed in a college setting and some colleges offer "conservatory style " training intended to prepare a student for entry into the professional world but also require a limited amount of L.A. to get the degree.</p>

130

<p>I agree with the stance that a cut system does not automatically bestow on its students some kind of rarified status and assured success. I know that Otterbein has produced many talented students that have gone on to great success one being on Broadway right now. Otterbein does not have a cut system, but does have evaluations. I believe that Otterbein, CMU, MichU and many others without cut systems produce just as many talented, committed and tough actors as any school with a cut system. My D is a driven talented competitor that I beleive would not be cut from a program, and still she does not believe that CCM would provide her any more high level training than the school she has opted for. On the contrary, she feels that the attitude at her chosen school will assist her in her quest to pursue her theatrical passions successfully.</p>

131

<p>Some of us who are students in programs, college/conservatory faculty, teachers, coaches, and professionals in the field participate here with the intention of trying to help to bring some light to these discussions from the inside. It seems, however, that certain parents who have never in their lives taken an acting, singing or dance class are now arrogantly and aggressively taking the position that they know more about the audition process, training, and even working in the field than those whose life it is. Has it really gotten to the point here that we have to write the equivalent of a legal treatise to share our experience and opinions and maybe even attempt to inject a little humor into the discussion - highlighted by smilies - without running the risk of our words being interpreted in the worst possible light? Do we now even have to risk enduring personal insults and attempted intellectual bullying? It's no wonder so many rarely participate anymore and others who have just lurked laughingly dismiss this forum as "Stage Parents Confidential." Why bother? </p>

<p>I'm not going to do a point-by-point here because the real intentions of what I said in my last post should be clear to anyone not predisposed to adverse interpretation. To state as fact, however, that students in a program with a cut policy have self-aggrandizing motives, view their colleagues as a threat to their continued attendance, and to assume that such programs lack a congenial and collaborative environment shows gross ignorance as to the interpersonal dynamics in a professional training program. Actually, even at my program which, btw, has neither juries nor a cut policy, one thing that will get you put on probation and potentially asked to leave is showing a selfish and competitive attitude towards members of the ensemble over a period of time. Actually, one the the most important factors in this type of training is one's commitment to the company, group, studio, ensemble or whatever a particular school happens to call it. That is even something that the faculty at DePaul which has a true, numbers-based cut of 50% look at in deciding who stays or goes. Here's a quote from TheTheatreSchool who is one of their faculty members ...
[quote]
To also do double duty and address the concerns in the other thread (above), while it may seem counterintuitive to someone outside of the program, ckp is very much correct that the first year experience for the majority of the class is not a cut-throat competitive environment. The first year curriculum (in fact all four years) is ensemble-based and the students' commitment and responsiveness to that ensemble is part of their evaluation (the collaboration element above). Anecdotally, I can say that students who are uber-competitive or "cut-throat" do not fair very well in the evaluation. What we see happen is that "family" effect that ckp mentions where student become VERY supportive of each other.

[/quote]
And here is the quote by CKP he references ...
[quote]
The 12 people in my section (the section with the least amount of people cut) have been my backbone through this year. We came together in the begining and formed a bond. We were section 102,and called ourselves 102-love with a cute hand signals. I love them almost as much as a family, they were my family for the past year. We NEVER were competitive and NEVER stabbed people in the back, because that is just plain stupid. You ca't learn like that, and teachers want people who can learn. We encouraged eachother and loved eachother, shared are darkest fears and all our hopes, cried and laughed together. I feel sorry for people that even think that they should go into a program to show off or anything like that, and they are going to have a hard time out there, cause that takes its toll.

[/quote]
Here are links to those discussions ... </p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/225346-welcome-new-college-rep-thetheatreschool-depaul.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/225346-welcome-new-college-rep-thetheatreschool-depaul.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/223433-depaul-university.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/223433-depaul-university.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>As for the rest ... Like it or not, there are some programs - some with a cut, some without - that have shown themselves over a long period of time to clearly and obviously better prepare their students - on average - for life in the professional theatre than others and it's not just because someone's dad said so. Their graduates are proof and CCM is one of those programs. </p>

<p>Now as to the new bent about conservatories. I don't think there is one standard as to what may be called a conservatory any more than there is a single standard for what may be called a BFA. Really, it seems that a BA program could call itself that if it wanted to. There is a "Consortium of Conservatory Theatre Training Programs" that includes Boston U, CMU, NCSA and SUNY Purchase and they share the same standards athough they do not include a numbers-based cut. What I personally consider a conservatory has more to do with contact hours than anything else.</p>

132

<p>Perhaps fish you responded to my post as you did because my comments hit a nerve, perhaps because you simply have a low tolerance for those who have a view different from yours. It's noteworthy that while my post made clear that those of my comments that could be viewed as critical were repeatedly qualified by the use of "some", you chose to characterize them as a blanket portrayal of all schools that have a cut system and all students who choose such schools. They clearly were not and such generalizations are never appropriate. However, they are applicable to some schools and to some students who attend them. Those schools and those students exist.</p>

<p>What is interesting is that while you take umbrage to my comments, you apparently feel that you have a license to make comments which expressly or by innuendo denigrate schools that are not on your "approved list" and the students who attend them. In this regard, it is hardly coincidental that the schools that you declare you wouldn't "touch with a 10 foot pole" are the very schools attended by the kids of 3 posters who have expressed strong opinions disfavoring cut systems, opinions with which you have made clear you disagree. It appears hardly unintentional that you make such comments in the same breath as your comments on what is and what is not a "professional training program", knowing the difference between "coddling and nurturing" and students who are not well suited for a real "professional training program". For you to suggest that your words are misinterpreted is disingenuous; you are too bright and articulate a person to be oblivious to your own "subtext". </p>

<p>It is also of note, and perhaps most telling, that while you group yourself among the "insiders" that are possessed of specialized knowledge, insight and expertise that you would also seek to diminish, ridicule and castigate those who you believe to to be nothing more than uninformed "arrogant" "stage parents". With all due respect, while you no doubt have a body of knowledge and experience that you have accumulated as a college student involved in theater, it is more than a bit presumptuous and revealing for you to comment on the experience, knowledge and back round of any other poster on this Board. Simply put, you are in no position to judge. For all you know, some parents who post may have spent years of their lives involved in theater, others may have developed successful professional careers as college counselors specializing in theater programs and some yet may spend quite a bit of their professional time negotiating contracts on behalf of professional performing artists and otherwise interacting with the executive directors, artistic directors and music directors of a variety of well known professional performing arts companies and theaters. The fact that you would take such a tact speaks for itself and unfortunately belies your protests.</p>

<p>It is a shame that while you do an admirable job of quoting comments that reaffirm the importance of congeniality and collaboration in performing arts, on this board such qualities often do not appear to be reflected by your posts when they are are most important - in having a lively exchange with those that have differing views. It's a shame because, as I said, you are a bright articulate person with no doubt some interesting and informative experiences and perspectives to offer.</p>

133

<p>While the debate over 'cut or not to cut' is a fascinating read it is the exact thing that I have found very frightening about this site over the past year or so that I have been involved. The vast majority of parents or students who come here looking for information are not keyed in to the process and are looking for answers. There is a sense of almost desperation to figure out how to do this as right as possible. I have read posts on here where visitors have made blanket decisions about certain schools based solely on what others have posted no matter how many times it has been said to "do your own research." That's why strong voices and opinions can really lead some people astray. I truly think the purpose of this site is to give as many facts and "personal experiences" as possible rather than opinion. It would be far more helpful to those coming here for help to be able to view a thread called THE FACTS ABOUT CUTS AND JURIES. (This would be a short thread and would, hopefully, be locked or labeled "important" so that the information is available to anyone at any time). If there wants to be a separate thread called THE DEBATE OVER CUTS AND JURIES that would be okay but at least break down just the facts somewhere so that people can have information without opinion. I think it would be most beneficial to take the Big List and, after each school, list whether they have a cut policy or not AND define exactly what that means for each school (i.e. cut from program due to a number needed to be reached, cut from program based on jury evaluation, refocused to a different degree program within the department based on jury evaluation, etc.) This will take some actual research by someone who is willing to corespond with each program and get the facts so that they can be listed without emotion or personal agenda. It would be fine to receive 'from the horse's mouth' the criteria behind the cuts but this thread should not debate that criteria or whether it is believed to be right or wrong. It should just list the facts as stated by the department itself.</p>

<p>To quote Sergeant Joe Friday "Just the facts, ma'am."</p>

134

<p>DD...I only wish we DID know the FACTS and the CRITERIA for cuts at some of the schools! That is one of the issues being discussed. There is some vagueness at some schools and no written criteria articulated. </p>

<p>Also, I do think there is a place for facts to be shared but the main thing I have seen on ANY discussion forums on ANY topics (ie., I used to read a travel forum about my favorite island) is that it is a discussion of opinions and so on and not simply a resource of facts. This is a DISCUSSION FORUM. It is not a resource book of facts on schools, etc. Nobody here is paid to participate or do any groundwork or establish any list of facts. I DO think the forum is informative but the main thing is that it is a discussion forum where participcants may discuss information but also discuss experiences and perspectives and opinions. In my view, this MT Forum is the best resource right now for that sort of thing. In fact, it is DIFFERENT than reading a resource book with facts in it. There is a place for that too. What differs on a discussion forum is that you can learn things that you CAN'T in a factual resource book. You can hear about first hand experiences, parent perspectives, comparisons, viewpoints, and so forth that you would not find in an factual book. </p>

<p>If you would like to develop a list of programs with cuts and define their policies and procedures as a resource for this site, please do so. Anyone else who wants to develop any factual information to post, can do so and it would be welcomed. Otherwise, the forums are for discussion and in fact, debating the pros/cons of cuts is appropriate for this forum. </p>

<p>A thread of FACTS is welcomed. But there would be no way to verify that information and still families would have to go to the source. Otherwise, we have anonymous members posting what they feel are facts and may not be the real deal. Example, I recently had someone tell me that a faculty member at another well known BFA in MT program told her on a visit that at Tisch, students take their training classes with NON NYU students. That is completely false. If a studio trains non NYU students, they do so in completely separate programs and all NYU students take classes ONLY with NYU students. Now, what if someone posted this as FACT? It would have to be verified. </p>

<p>CC is a resource but it is not a site with researchers who post facts. It is a site with many articles and resources and has Ask The Dean (free advice by a college counselor), as well as discussion forums on a myriad of topics related to college selection and admissions. It has no oblgation to post factual information. If members want to develop such factual info. (such as Shauna developed the "Big List" of MT colleges and others contributed to it), they certainly can. I want to remind you that no members on this forum are paid, including myself. We all volunteer to share and/or help others. Nobody is on staff to provide information/resources on the discussion forums itself. </p>

<p>Again, nobody should rely on what they read on a message forum to be entirely true. They can weigh the validity depending on how much they trust the member who has posted (members can develop some sort of reputation over time). They can also garner a variety of opinions on a school or topic and that can be very useful indeed and can't be gotten in a factual book. Nobody should put much weight on just ONE opinion about a a school. One's own experience at that school could differ greatly. </p>

<p>Anyway, regarding cuts...I happen to think this discussion is fruitful as it raises the issue as something a prospective family should learn more about at each school they are considering and to try to get information and some of the pros and cons of this issue that they need to weigh for themselves. As you say, some newbies to this process have no clue and those who have been around the block are offering up things to think about and look into based on their own experiences. I find that very valuable myself. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I truly think the purpose of this site is to give as many facts and "personal experiences" as possible rather than opinion.

[/quote]

Just to reiterate as I have been on CC for six years and also am affiliated as a college counselor, that the purpose of the FORUM (which by the way, CC is WAY more than the discussion forums) is not to give facts and personal experiences. It is a forum for discussion of opinions. Read all the many CC discussion forums which are chockfull of opinions. </p>

<p>Again, if you want a factual thread/resource on cuts at various schools, I welcome you or anyone to research it directly with each school and post it here.</p>

135

<p>Quote: A thread of FACTS is welcomed.</p>

<p>Terrific! Then we are in agreement.</p>

<p>And, I do have to say that, if my post is read carefully, at no time did I say that a Discussion Forum was anything other than what was described nor did I make an assumption that anyone who posts here is paid to do so. Or that opinions should be excluded - only that the weight of the posts should fall into the personal experience and facts categories. What I did say is that I feel there should be two threads so that those who come here have the opportunity to weigh opinion against fact - a suggestion not a demand. And obviously a suggestion reliant upon someone's interest in taking the time to put in the leg work (or phone work or email work, as the case may be).</p>

<p>But, then again, these are only my opinions. Take them for what you will.</p>

<p>My apologies if anyone's feelings have been hurt. That is also an inherent danger of the internet because one's delivery is subject to the mood and interpretation of the reader - and my last post was obviously interpreted very negatively as the reaction to it became personal as opposed to the general concern I was relaying.</p>

<p>My only suggestion to those who come here "seeking" - please do your own research. If a school is attractive to you, really check it out. You will find pros and cons (and different degrees of each) with any school. This will be one of your (and your child's) most important decisions. Do everything you can to make it the right one - even though there are no guarantees.</p>

<p>And, if anyone ever has any questions about Disney - their shows, internships, etc. - just ask. I will give you facts and opinions.</p>

136

<p>DD....I did not take your post negatively. I am simply saying that CC's discussion forums' main purpose is not to be a resource of factual information. By the nature of these being discusson forums, information is shared (but can't be verified), experiences are shared, and opinions are shared. </p>

<p>If you would like this site to present factual information as a resource, it will depend on volunteers who are willing to do the legwork directly with schools and post their findings (and even then, there would be no way for CC to verify those supposed facts). Indeed, I often read members posting as FACT information that is FALSE. Right now, all participants on CC are volunteers and if anyone wants to do research and post it, it is always welcomed. There won't be any site owners who provide that within the discussion forums itself (CC is more than discussion forums, however....not sure some of you realize what else CC offers on its site and so forth). </p>

<p>If you wish to start a thread to post some facts about each school's cut policies, please do. If I were a newbie, I'd still want to check directly at schools and not rely on what I read on a message board. A message board can raise issues to investigate further. </p>

<p>On the topic of cuts, again, one problem some of us are raising is that at SOME programs, the rationale and the criteria for cuts are not articulated and there is a vaguenss. I'd welcome specifics actually. That is one of the points some of us are discussing. </p>

<p>In any case, a message board is a resource in some ways but it is not anything like reading a book of facts or going to a source. Every post is anonymous and there is no way to verify the validity of anything posted. Again, some may put more stock in what is written by some members if they have come to trust the body of posts by that member. </p>

<p>I agree very much with you that anyone who comes here cannot substitute what they read here for their own DIRECT research. But the forum is valuable in other ways. It is a chance to garner a variety of perspectives on schools and related issues. It is a place to come ask a question and get some advice from some who have been there done that. It is also a place to just share experiences and discuss topics of mutual interest which of course involve opinions. A discussion forum is a resource of sorts but is not the same as a website of factual information. Nor is it the place to conduct research. All have a place in one's college selection and admissions process.</p>

137

<p>
[quote]
Perhaps fish you responded to my post as you did because my comments hit a nerve, perhaps because you simply have a low tolerance for those who have a view different from yours.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, Michael. I responded as I did because you got personal. I also responded as I did because I have noticed that some of the faculty, teachers and coaches who have in past been such a valuable resource on this forum no longer post with anywhere near the candor they once did. It seems that they don't want to step in it for fear of having to wipe it off their shoes. I know that to be fact with one. Actual students in programs have to risk suffering patronizing lectures for offering their points of view from those very familiar with the menu, but who have never tasted the meal. I see this as a problem and I wouldn't say it if I felt for a second that I was the only one who thinks that. </p>

<p>
[quote]
What is interesting is that while you take umbrage to my comments, you apparently feel that you have a license to make comments which expressly or by innuendo denigrate schools that are not on your "approved list" and the students who attend them. In this regard, it is hardly coincidental that the schools that you declare you wouldn't "touch with a 10 foot pole" are the very schools attended by the kids of 3 posters who have expressed strong opinions disfavoring cut systems, opinions with which you have made clear you disagree. It appears hardly unintentional that you make such comments in the same breath as your comments on what is and what is not a "professional training program", knowing the difference between "coddling and nurturing" and students who are not well suited for a real "professional training program". For you to suggest that your words are misinterpreted is disingenuous; you are too bright and articulate a person to be oblivious to your own "subtext".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again ... No, no, no. Non, nein, nyet! I'm flattered that you perceive me to be bright and articulate, but you have completely misinterpreted the subtext. Yes, I definitely named those two schools because they are the very ones the kids of the parents expressing those opinions attend. Why would I do that? Has there been a single thread involving schools with cuts where those same people have not recited their opinions ad nauseum - sometimes twice in a page with nothing new added - and implied that they wouldn't touch such a program with a ten foot pole? Maybe I wanted to remind them that the schools their kids chose are not for everyone, either, although reasons for not wanting to attend may not be as scandalous and sexy as the possibility of being <gasp> cut? Hrmmm ... Besides that, I really would not choose to attend either and, yes, I have very good reasons particular to me that I assure you do not include the word "sucks." If you'd like, I can list them. It seems you are for some reason more than slightly defensive when it comes to your D's school.</gasp></p>

<p>As to the rest, I just went back, cleared my mind, and carefully reread the post you keep referencing and your mischaracterizations of what I've said are so over-the-top that it seems a bit sanctimonious for you to quibble over words like "some" vs. "all." I would also like to know which programs you know for a fact lack to a congenial and collaborative environment amongst their students. Please do tell.</p>

138

<p>CCM, Arizona, DePaul do not seem to be suffering from a dearth of candidates despite their cut system. It seems to serve them well. Yes, I can see how a cut system can benefit a school. </p>

<p>When posting about these systems, I want to make it clear what the disadvantages are of the cut system and how it differs from the way most of the other performing arts schools work so that parents and students understand it thoroughly. What should be emphasized is that if a student may have to go through the expense and trouble of the auditions and applicaton process again, even if he gets satisfactory grades if he cannot get the approval of a jury to continue. As much as I could love a school or a program, as a parent, I don't want that risk. I want that little bit of safe haven for a few years before my kid goes into the inferno of rejections.</p>

139

<p>
[quote]
Has there been a single thread involving schools with cuts where those same people have not recited their opinions ad nauseum - sometimes twice in a page with nothing new added - and implied that they wouldn't touch such a program with a ten foot pole? Maybe I wanted to remind them that the schools their kids chose are not for everyone, either, although reasons for not wanting to attend may not be as scandalous and sexy as the possibility of being <gasp> cut?

[/quote]
</gasp></p>

<p>Speaking ONLY for myself, since I have particpated on this thread....
I have repeatedly stated that I think CCM is an excellent program and has a great reputation and turns out very talented performers. While I personally am not into cuts, I support anyone who is fine with such a policy who wishes to attend and have even had students of my own apply there. I can think that a program is excellent and still be against cuts (just one aspect of the program). And even if I am against cuts, I do not bash this school and actually fully support anyone's choice who wishes to attend. I'm not into that one policy no matter WHICH college we are talking about. It doesn't mean I don't think well of the school. And I also think picking a college is about a personal match between the student and the college and for many, this is an excellent match!</p>

<p>I don't AT ALL need you to remind me that the school that my kid chose to attend is NOT for everyone. I'd be the first to agree with that statement! I also do not think she attends the "best" school. I don't think it is better than any other. I only know that she found an excellent MATCH for herself which is all I care about. I don't bash other schools and nor do my kids. I happen to think well of the schools we are even talking about and am simply commenting on my views of cuts and the philosophy behind them and also trying to understand the criteria and the process employed. For me, this really is NOT about CCM but turned into a discussion of cuts and policies. That is what I am referring to generically.</p>

<p>When choosing a college, one must decide their personal selection criteria and how that school fits them. That's what it is all about. Just because my own kid didn't feel CCM fit her selection criteria, it doesn't mean she puts down the school. It simply wasn't for her. Likewise, I am POSITIVE her school choice is not for other kids. Neither are the "best" but simply good fits for certain kids. </p>

<p>I will add that the choice not to apply to a school with cuts has nothing to do with shying away from rigor and high standards. My kid craves those things. She feels she is getting it right where she is even though her program doesn't use cuts. </p>

<p>I think anyone looking into schools should examine them closely to see how they meet their own criteria because that is all that matters. Raising issues like cuts (among many other selection criteria) is a good thing to do for those who are unfamiliar with such policies so that they can examine what is the right fit for them. Again, I RECOMMEND schools like CCM all the time to prospective students. I share what I know so they can make an informed choice but urge them to get direct information. Schools that have cuts have PLENTY of applicants. </p>

<p>Unrelated to my points/response above....I do want to add that from anecdotes I have heard from those in cut programs, there CAN BE an atmosphere that is less collaborative and congenial and more competitive given they are all tryng to survive the cuts. Some thrive on that and some don't. I feel you can have a very intense training program with high standards and expectations that emphasizes the collaborative process and I think it is inherent in a cut system that there is competition as to who is the last standing and who gets roles and all that stuff. Even so, obviously LOTS of kids are happy in such programs and that is all that matters. And....some have opted to leave. AND....some opt to leave NON CUT programs too! It is all about fit and not about the "best" school.</p>

140

<p>I have to concur with a point that cptofthehouse made.....and that is that several members posting on this thread are PARENTS and as parents, many of us would not want to invest in a college that does not necessarily aim to maintain all its matriculated students (short of them flunking out of course). We are talking of a LOT of money. If my kid wants to change majors or even leave a school, I'd prefer it to be her choice. If she is flunking, different story. But I do expect an enrolled student who is getting above average grades to be able to stay in college if she so chooses. I understand that as a student you may have a different view but I understand the parents who are not keen on the idea of sending their kids to a school that may cut them and then have to lose that money and begin anew. I already can't afford the FOUR years I am paying for, LOL. :D</p>

<p>Unrelated to that point.....I will mention that in my experience (as well as clients of mine reporting back to me) at presentations given by BFA department heads at auditions, several went out of their way to contrast their educational philosophy with that of a cut program. So, it appears as if there is some difference in philosophy between BFA programs, and that is what some of us were referring to earlier. These are things that prospective students should look into as an educational philosophy and program atmosphere should fit them and they should talk to current students and so forth to ascertain these things which are not clear cut in some brochure.</p>