Finding a good fit/growth in college

College Majors Musical Theater Major
41

@connections - I think you have a lot of interesting suggestions - but where is the time/money going to come from for the schools to spend all this time getting to know applicants? After all- the more time staff spends auditioning kids for the next class, the less they spend with the kids who are currently in the school… and while I would like to get value from my audition fees - I really want to get it from my tuition dollars. You mentioned prescreens - but idk if that is a real timesaver vs in person audition for the college staff - they must spend 5-10 min a kid on those too. Plus, if we don’t want decisions made by 1 arbitrary view - prescreens would need to be viewed by more than one person … more time away from actual kids paying for the college program…

I don’t have better solutions to this- but I am looking at it from the viewpoint of the parent of the kid IN school, not applying to school.

Tisch had a panel of 3 people from 3 different studios in 2014 when my D auditioned.

42

I think that it is very, very hard to see our children stress out and for us, as parents, to feel unable to control the outcome and make it better.

I have been following this thread for years, but I have also been following the visual arts thread as well, having one D who applied for MT and one who applied for studio art. Let me assure you that it is not fun and games on the art thread either.

Like MT, it is a combination of talent and academics that will get you accepted. Some schools place all or most of the emphasis on talent–a school like CMU–and others make it 50-50–a school like NYU. Sound familiar?

The hard part with art is that you don’t present your portfolio in person at all. So there is no interaction and no chance to talk about the story behind your art. People are just viewing it flat on a screen and who knows how the color and resolution looks while it is actually being viewed? You write a sentence at most describing materials and title, but that’s it. And the worst part is that you have no idea what any particular school views as “good” art. It is so much more subjective than music. At least with voice you can tell if the technique is good–whether a person was able to hit particular notes, and their voice crack or was tone deaf. Or if you felt you had two left feet during a dance call. But in art, you don’t even have that. Good art can be ugly and dissonant and not hit any of the notes you’d expect.

And, of course, every single school wants something else in the portfolio and wants the images sent in different ways. It got so bad that I actually went to the Apple store with my D in tow to see if we could get someone to help us get the correct resolution for an application and to explain how to change it for other schools. They took pity on me and helped for at least 40 minutes because we looked so desperate.

And with art, you have the same BA vs. BFA quandary. Generally BA’s have no portfolio requirements whereas BFA’s do. And the same–will they end up a starving artist with no marketable skills if they decide on fine arts question is always lurking.

So the waiting and the worrying and the feeling that you want to fix things to make it easier for our kids is larger than just MT admissions.

I hear from some friends that going after $ for athletics isn’t fun either!

43

Comparing it to athletes is interesting. And probably a pretty good comparison. Because a team, is never just looking for the best say basketball player. They need certain “types” maybe they are hoping to find a 6’5 forward, or a fast guard. And each basketball program has its own style of play. Much like a theatre program.

Setting aside money. (of course the budgets and revenue from sports puts it in a completely different ‘arena’) Sports teams have recruiters out checking out kids from all over the country from quite a young age. The athletes are not just observed in one game for a few minutes but they watch hours of tapes, and watch them develop over years.

Perhaps that is what MT needs… college recruiters!! :smiley:

I remember someone talking about the numbers in the past… that if you add up the number of places for BFA and the number of students applying, you find that there is not a ton of kids not getting in anywhere, there are enough spots. It seems to me, and we have not been through it yet that there ought to be an easier way then spending $12K on auditions. (using a number from an article that was linked to this week, I have no idea if that is accurate, but it stuck with me)

44

@KTVoice, there was indeed a discussion a while back about the cost of auditioning. I remember it because I participated in it and was blown away by what people were spending. From my experience, the $12K is a number that is impossible to get to unless you include coaching and it costs what… $7,000?? But I know there are others for whom that number is real and I assume they must know what they spent. You can find the discussion here starting about at #57: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/1813195-my-d-is-obsessed-with-one-school-anyone-else-go-through-this-p4.html

I detailed my expenses in post #70 in the above thread. I kept records and we flew to every audition from the west coast without the advantage of attending Unifides to catch a collection of schools.So if we can do that all in for less than $5K throwing in everything I can think of and rounding up generously, I would think people that can drive to auditions or can attend could Unifides spend even less than we did. It’s still a big number and something to plan for.

45

But getting back to the sports comparison, those recruiters will only see the “star” athletes who get to play everyday. Not the bench warmers who haven’t had their break. And I’m sure the sports parents have a lot to say about who gets to play and who doesn’t. Might not always have to do with talent or potential.

From what I understand, athletes vying for recruitment and scholarships send videos they make of themselves playing and training to potential schools. And those are big productions that keep professional videographers in business. And are quite costly.

We know the MT world of admissions, but getting in to good schools seems to be complicated, gut wrenching and costly for students pursuing all different majors.

46

As for the sports comparisons , I have 2 nephews who play college baseball. One is on scholarship for it , the other isn’t,( one is playing division 1, the scholarship one)
The costs I would say are the same when trying to play for college as in they are and were on travel teams which are a huge expense.
The difference is they wanted to play in college and they wanted scholarships to play but…it’s not their major. You can’t major in baseball so it’s more a (in the div 1 case) scenario of getting to play in college in the hopes of being recruited to play professionally in some way. I would equate it to “training” as you need to play in a college realm to get to move on.
So it is similar in many ways I agree , if your ultimate goal in MT is to reach the pinnacle of Broadway. Like in baseball that pinnacle is playing professionally for a major team.
However, an MT major has so many other options as they can get paying jobs in theatre that aren’t Broadway and are in many cases just as prestigious and respected. It’s more about the education you’re getting in 4 years if that makes sense.? I don’t think my nephew on scholarship even declared his major till last minute. the end all was he wanted to play in college in hopes of getting recruited by a team. The education aspect although important wasn’t actually as important . (Well it was to his parents lol)

47

Ha, with 5 children, I have the range of experiences–I have 3 who have gone the theatre route (one no longer in it), one in studio art,and one in athletics! So I can speak from personal experience here.

Just to be clear, I’m not talking about unfairness in judging. Obviously there is going to be unfairness. I’m talking about what I feel is a poor way to choose a class, mainly via the 2 minute audition with a single adjudicator. This definitely still happens.

  1. Athletics--my son, who will be playing football in college, was absolutely NOT judged by a 2 minute 'audition' in a panel of 1. Far far from it. He had a film created of highlights of his Junior year, plus highlights of his SEnior year, then went to call day football 'camps', which are in fact sort of auditions. Teams of coaches - not one person - watch and asses you all day, as you go from skill to skill. They consult with each other. You also express interest in particular schools with your link to a film. The coaches - as a team - view the film, and decide whether to invite you for further assessment.

The film was free btw, not costly. Although it’s football, so they film everything. His public school does the filming. But he was also in track. Track is different–it’s all about the time. But you have an opportunity to run your best time over multiple, multiple races over the years. No film. Expenses for both sports were minimal. It’s true there are expensive sports–that’s why my S never did travel :slight_smile:

In other words, it is a rigorous, complex process that goes on over time, and it is not decided in 2 minutes by one person alone.

  1. Studio Art. A while back, my D was accepted to RISD and MICA, but ended up not going , mostly because of money. I totally agree that they judge only by the portfolio. But again--this portfolio is put together over years. It is a sampling you choose over time. I mean, maybe it's judged by a single person in two minutes, I have no idea. But usually admissions is a panel. My D is continuing her post-grad education at an atelier, Florence Academy of Art. There again she is judged by her work over time.

So this goes back to what I was saying–I think the 2 minute/1 adjudicator/no interview audition process in some schools is unique amongst any other process. I’ll stand corrected if I’m wrong.

As far as what can be done–I’m not inside the school so I don’t know how much is driven by economics or internal politics, and how much is driven by ‘we’ve always done it this way.’ But if it can be changed, that would be great. Btw, the UK schools my S auditioned for were all a minimum of 15 minute auditions and an interview, with a panel (before any callback). They have small programs and limited money, yet they manage. I wonder what the difference is between them and some American programs?

As far as cost–for my S it cost me a lot because he had a callback in London (Yikes). But I think including that and our road trip to North Carolina, it cost me $2500 total. He had to stay overnight in NYC twice and in London he stayed I think 3 nights, but it was in a hostel and he went alone. I can be frugal… For my D it was much cheaper as it was all day trips, less than $500. Again though I am fortunate to live within driving distance to NYC.

48

@connections Thanks. You explained it more clearly than I could!

@theaterwork I did consider the difference between playing a sport for a college and studying a sport in college. It might make more sense for many athletes to study their sport as often that’s all they care about at that point in time.

Your point about opportunities outside of Broadway is valid, and one I keep trying to suggest to my D. Your goal should be to do what you love… and not to worry about what street the stage happens to be on.

49

My d played competitive softball for eight years and spent 6 years on a tournament team. The expenses are high for elite level players, with summer travel costs in the thousands of dollars, and this goes on for 10-12 years for your average college player. If you want to go to a DI program, you need to play on teams that play in summer national tournaments all over the country.The tournament team expenses just for uniforms, coach’s salary (former college players), program costs, etc. run $1,500-2,000+ per year. Not to mention many years of pitching coaches, batting coaches, conditioning coaches, $300+ composite bats made from carbon fiber, etc., etc. The total expenses easily run more than the cost of college at many schools.

Softball costs dwarfed her MT expenses.

50

I also like the idea of universal pre-screens. Perhaps even a single pre-screen - similar to a demo reel - loaded with maybe a 5 minute video (songs, monologues, dance clips - whatever) uploaded to Acceptd. Students select top XXX schools and those schools review the prescreen and make further audition decisions from there. My S and D each did 3 prescreens or callback videos all with slightly different requirements. The "slightly’ different requirements made the taping a bit of a pain!

51

I’m going to be the outlier here and disagree with you all. While I think there are many things that can be changed about this process, the audition is not one of them for me. I actually find that 2 minute audition to be the great equalizer. Despite the finances spent up to the audition, I’d like to believe that every single person has that same 2 minutes and talent will win. Via pre-screen I think the polished (i.e. money spent) student wins, not talent. Are you dressed correctly? Did you slate correctly? Do you have the money, knowledge, connections, etc to produce a quality product? So what happens to the student who can get to an audition, despite being dressed “wrong” and not having the right music selection or years of training? I believe they have the opportunity to let their raw talent shine live vs a video which will just highlight all their wrongs. The exact same 2 minutes, across the board.

Furthermore, some people just shine in real life. We’ve all met that person who fills a room. You can’t describe it and they aren’t doing anything special, but you know they are there and you can’t stop watching them. They may not be the best dressed, most polished or trained, but there is something that you just like. Now the process is unfair to them.

I feel like the process some of you describing will do more to limit who has access than actually make the process fair. There will be no way to determine who viewed your video, how much consideration it was given, how many they saw that day and were they engaged. I’ve seen several people post about adjudicators who never looked up at their kid. I’d rather know this happened, than not know. I’d like for my kid to at least have the challenge to make the adjudicator look up. Whatever happened, I would know he had the same 2 minutes as the next person.

52

@IfYouOnlyKnew I have to disagree vehemently (but kindly) talent does not always win out. Many of these kids are wickedly talented and don’t get into any program because there is no room. Hundreds of kids are turned away because they are too tall, too short, too blonde… talent has nothing to do with it.

53

@bisouu There will always be a degree of typing out that has nothing to do with talent. I assumed that was understood here. I believe within 5 seconds of walking in they have already put you in a no, maybe, I’m definitely interested pile due to non talent factors. What happens after that is the equalizer. All you can do is sing, do your monologue and leave. That’s where all are equal.

54

And room…they physically cannot take everyone who auditions so if they have 100 equally talented kids but only 10 slots…90 talented kids are left out.

55

And yet, the people who do it say they can tell in 30 seconds. (I review records, and I always know by the first time the vocals come in whether I want to hear more or not, just saying…)

56

I think taking more time “might” help on borderline kids - but for most schools have a really good idea of what they are looking for- and they see it (or don’t) really quickly. And I think we might be surprised about how much schools can tell about work ethic etc really quickly. For example, I had one person from a well respected college tell me that they tend to look less favorably on someone who ONLY has leading roles listed on their resume - that shows a need to be a “star” rather than a team player - and that they like kids who have done other things in theater BESIDES perform (stage manage, choreograph, crew etc) for a similar reason (shows they have an interest in the full process).

57

@Jkellynh17 I do believe they know right away if they want to hear more. We attended Chicago Unifieds in 2015 and they were constantly running behind. More than once I heard the person working sign ins say they spent too much time on a few people. So to @toowonderful point, I believe they take the time when they have a question. Of course this is not across the board for every school, but many programs will. My S certainly had adjudicators slow it down and ask for more information or have a conversation at Unifieds.

58

yeah it’s hard to explain but (with record) you’re looking for an individual spark sort of thing, something that makes it worth listening to relative to all the others in the pile, plus some minimal level of competence. You can certainly find out more about stuff by listening longer, but the spark thing is apparent right away. I realize it may be very different in the audition world.

59

@KTVoice re post #42 I wrote this a long time ago and it’s been sitting in drafts because I never had the courage to post it. I think this conversation is one of the most important ones we have on CC and I’ve been stalking for the last 3 years.

I love Malcolm Gladwell. His books and podcasts (especially Revisionist History) are the best!

I was recently listening to one of his podcasts and he was talking about the money that comes into higher ed and he gave a really interesting analogy about soccer and basketball. Now, I’m neither a soccer nor basketball player (so forgive me if I sound ignorant in some aspects) but I thought his take was very interesting and I started to think about the kind of college program DH and I want our kid to experience.

He said there are two types of thinking when it comes to making something better. The “weak link” theory and the “the superstar” theory…or soccer vs basketball. Basketball is a superstar sport. You can have one or two superstars on your team, while the rest of the players are good but not great, and still be a very successful team. The team, coach, manager, owner all benefit by focusing their efforts (and dollars) on developing the “superstar” because the better he/she is, the better the team is, the more recognition the program (or school) gets etc. Soccer, on the other hand, is a “weak link” sport. In other words, the team is only as good as their weakest player. There are no superstars unless those players are assisted by other players…everyone on the team needs to be great, or at least developed to the best of their abilities. Efforts (and dollars) go to developing the entire team, growing everyone’s skills and capacities, not just the superstar.

The rest of this podcast is extremely thought-provoking and goes on to interview the president of Stanford and the namesake of Rowan University in an effort to draw attention to the fact that billions of dollars are going to those universities who ALREADY HAVE large endowments. In other words, they’re developing the superstar. While folks like industrialist Henry Rowan are about “building the base”, financing higher ed for those in our communities who might not be able to attend Stanford. Of course who’s to say which of these philosophies is better than the other, that’s not the point. The point is, after listening, I started to think about my own kid and what we hope to provide her in a college education (and honestly what I hope she takes from this experience well beyond the voice and tap classes). We want a school for her that is all about the “weak link”, that is looking to take kids where they’re at and grow them…making everyone better, which makes the team better.

All that to say (if you’ve made it this far, thanks), there are some amazing programs out there, both well-known and “hidden gems”, and I truly believe there’s a fit (or two) for every kid. College is about learning, growing as a person, and attempting to find your place in the world. Here’s hoping that all of our kids find their fit and find joy in the coming four years!

60

^^^I love that podcast. It should be required listening and it’s why I’ve decided I’d rather donate to our community colleges than either of the private schools my kids attended.