Is the University of Minnesota/Guthrie Program on it's way to being the best in the country?

My son Sam is applying to Drama schools both in the UK and US next year. Having worked in development at the Globe Theatre in London, I am well-acquainted with the UK schools. I am pretty clueless, however, in regards to US schools. A friend of mine who has taught the study abroad programs for University of Hartford, the University of Minnesota/Guthrie Theater program and Rutgers University (as well as individual work with students from Juilliard, Carnegie Mellon University and Ithaca College). While he spoke well of all the schools, he was especially rhapsodic about two, telling me plainly that “Minnesota/Guthrie and Juilliard are the best acting schools in the US, no question”, telling me that he gave a slight edge to Guthrie simply based on the extensive classical work. This surprised me because I only had heard of Guthrie for the first time about ten years ago. I called another friend in London, who told me similarly, “The Minnesota/Guthrie School is the place to be in America!” Both my friends said that the Guthrie program is the only American school that has the classical training to equal the UK Drama schools. What do you all think? Of course I am going to try and take him to visit schools, but is Guthrie really on it’s way to being considered the best in the country?

No. It’s no doubt an excellent program with a lot of graduates working in regional theatre and a couple of minor “names,” but they have a ways to go to catch up with the Juilliards and CMUs of the world. They don’t even do an industry showcase.

Something else to consider is that the long term effects of Ken Washington’s untimely passing last fall combined with the retirement of Judy Bartl whose brainchild the program initially was along with Joe Dowling stepping down as Artistic Director of the Guthrie can’t be known at this time.

I’m sure it will remain an excellent program and most likely in the top 10-15 American undergraduate schools. But “best in the country” has always been overstated from back when they were a scrappy new program trying to steal students away from more established schools. They’ve now been around long enough to ascertain that those claims haven’t shown themselves to hold water in the real world.

I hadn’t realized that Guthrie doesn’t do an industry showcase. They have a good reputation though.

The whole “best in the country” and “top five” and “top ten” are specious markers anyway. The ones I see on Buzzfeed in particular come across as odd, and the latest Hollywood Reporter one seems to have come from outer space!

If you follow the “best of” lists, it actually fell this year, mainly due to the uncertainty of where the program was headed. UNCSA and Pace, however, went up. As I tell anyone who will listen, you can apply to all the top programs but just make sure you have a few solid, well respected “second tier” or lesser known programs as well. Some of which will no doubt be on the “best” lists in a few years.

Not to sidetrack @prodesse- and not to give credence to “best of” lists- b/c I agree with you that they are often out together poorly (esp buzzfeed where they are simply made up by contributors- D know someone who did that) but what about the 2015 Hollywood reporter lists struck you as “from outer space”? Seemed a fair ranking of most of the well known American and British schools to me… (Juilliard, CMU, RADA etc…)

This is the specific list I was thinking of:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/top-25-undergraduate-drama-schools-798626

Far from a nuanced, descriptive, helpful list, it is an embarrassment, all cuteness and name-dropping.

Yes, CMU belongs on anybody’s list of top drama schools, but it is scarcely because the music conservatory offers a degree in bagpipes. And what on earth is Georgetown University doing on there? Bradley Cooper didn’t get his actor training there, he got a MFA from the New School. And what is Case Western doing on the list? Nothing wrong with Case, but it’s not in the same category as Juilliard, RADA, and UNCSA.

LAMDA is a great school but Benedict Cumberbatch attended their graduate school, not undergraduate. Ginnifer Goodwin only spent a semester at LAMDA, then took a Shakespeare certificate from RADA, having earned a BFA from BU, an excellent “top 25”-worthy school not listed. James Dean attended UCLA for only one semester so he’s not the best poster boy for that school. I could go on.

Actually the thing I hate the most about “best of” lists is that it inevitably gets one thinking about which schools one would put on one’s own list. They are contagious, and must be exterminated.

I absolutely concede your point about the descriptions- my “favorite” was the one about the Emerson Quidditch team- seems like a poor reason to choose a school. But overall I found that many/most schools on the list are ones that deserve to be there. As as a note about Case…apple tree aside, I predict it will become one to watch in the next few years. My D’s voice teacher left BW (where she was a popular member of voice faculty) to be a part of the program they are putting together there- pouring $$ in and really cool things are happening

Thanks @prodesse - I think BU should be on the list too - LOL! But if I want to see BU make the “list” I just google “BU best drama school” and a bunch of other lists come up with BU included. I’ve always preferred Backstage to the Hollywood Reporter! http://www.backstage.com/news/5-tried-and-true-acting-colleges/

I think these lists also imply that you can choose from the best when in reality they choose you and you will be fortunate to have one or two offers.

I totally agree that BU should be on the list too. And jkellynh17 makes an excellent point too- most humans are not going to be sitting there choosing between Juilliard, CMU, and RADA. (Though it would surely be an excellent dilemma to have!)

jkellyh17 exactly! Many kids don’t even get any offers and need to rethink what they will do. Thats why its so important to have a good list with a balance of schools.

It also depends on your goals. The list descriptions are silly but they are valuable as a snapshot of Hollywood buzz at that moment. If your goal is bigger agent/LA/NYC centered, the Hollywood Reporter list would help give you an idea of what agents and casting people are thinking about the programs (fair or not). If your goal is regional theatre acting, then no, it wouldn’t really give you an idea of how best be placed as a regional actor.

Besides the silliness of saying who is well known for where, and the inaccuracies, they always describe people who graduated 20 years ago, often more. That’s not valuable for finding out if the program is placing people now, within the next 5 years, what their stats are. UK schools are more up front about their stats, so it’s easier to see how many grads are working and where. But you can do your homework with a little elbow grease.

Also as Fish points out, when a head leaves or passes, or the program changes itself (for instance, don’t know if it’s true, but I heard that Rutgers will be combing their BFA and MFA) that will change the timbre of the program. Not saying for better or worse. but it is something to take into account.

Of course, it is very competitive getting into any program, and the most important quality is fit and knowing your goals. You can be in the best program, but miserable and unable to make use of it; or you could be in a technically third tier school & thrive.

And finally, money must be taken into account for most mortals. Some programs are better with need based scholarships and/or talent awards than others.