<p>Thought I would share this article. Not sure why NYU Tisch mentioned twice.</p>
<p>Top 10 Acting Colleges: The Best BFA Programs in the U.S. | Ace Your Audition</p>
<p>Please be aware that the site is a one that a young man who graduated from an acting school and is a working actor set up. The list is his personal opinion and has no “methodology” for selection and so people should be aware of that.</p>
<p>Example, he has Syracuse on the list (which surely is a very good acting program) and he is an alum, whereas someone else may have had Rutgers on the list and he doesn’t. I think Rutgers’ program is more competitive to get into than the one at Syracuse for Acting. (nothing against Syracuse as my own kid applied and was accepted there for the BFA in MT)</p>
<p>It is odd that he left Rutgers out. He does mention Rutgers in the BU section, though. He certainly does think highly of Boston University! :)</p>
<p>(In the Syracuse section, he also mentions Rutgers, and implies that Rutgers students spend a semester in London. This is incorrect, however, because Rutgers students spend a whole academic year in London.)</p>
<p>Isn’t that list missing some of the really good ones like USC, UCLA and Rutgers (among others) ?? It sounds like it’s coming from an opinion more so than facts.</p>
<p>Just based on what I know about Tisch, this is really poorly researched. I wouldn’t give this list any credence whatsoever.</p>
<p>This isnt a bad list other than the fact that its a Top 10 list in the first place with ten being such an arbitrary number to which to narrow. I can name you seven BFAs he excluded right off the top of my head - DePaul, Emerson, Evansville, Ithaca, Otterbein, SMU, USC - for which one could make reasonable arguments for inclusion as well as a couple of BAs in name only - UCLA and Northwestern - that could be considered as well. Also note that he very clearly alphabetized and didnt rank.</p>
<p>Its pretty obvious to me that he intended to include Rutgers in the first Tisch spot given that he mentioned it in both the BU and Syracuse descriptions. Sloppy? Yes. Poorly researched? Not really although I do have to wonder on what criteria he bases his judgments to exclude others. If I were to make such a list based on my own observations and biases, there would actually only be six, but I wont go there naming names to keep the peace. 
Id also make it a point to make sure I interviewed at least three recent graduates from each school before writing the descriptions because some of those do seem to be a bit off from what I know about the programs.</p>
<p>Oh, geez, fish, don’t leave us wondering which 6 schools … or more importantly, why those six. Hummph.</p>
<p>When it comes to BFA programs, most people would probably say Juilliard, CMU, Purchase, UNCSA and Rutgers…with either NYU/Tisch or Boston University as the sixth.</p>
<p>However, as is often discussed here, conservatory-type programs are not an appropriate choice for everybody. Some kids are not ready for that degree of rigor right out of high school, and others have the estimable desire for a more broad based undergraduate experience.</p>
<p>It is really a bad idea to become fixated on the “top six” or “top ten” or anything like that. Excellent training may be obtained in many places and in many ways.</p>
<p>My point about his research: in the BU slot, he compared its toolbox approach to Tisch, which he said didn’t have one. The fact is, that at Tisch, while some studios have a specific approach (eg, Meisner), others do incorporate a variety of training techniques. His listing of the numbers auditioning for Tisch were also way too low, by about half. </p>
<p>The fact that he double posted Tisch also points to his sloppiness, IMO.</p>