<p>There is a reason the top schools are the top schools and it seems to me notable alumni is one of them. There is also a very good reason that students want to go to top schools. That doesn’t mean you can’t learn alot…maybe just as much at other programs but they are not top schools and I don’t see how that can’t matter. Now if you don’t get into a top program, sure, you can still make it work. But what in the world is wrong with aiming high?</p>
<p>I agree, it is an interesting thread along with so many other threads the “the theatre CC community” produces!</p>
<p>Again: Reach, match, safety (non-audition) - or be prepared to take a gap year. A couple of my D’s friends were “BFA or die” types, did not get accepted anywhere during their senior year, so waited a year, re-auditioned and are now at programs that they like. A couple others went to their non-audition safeties (Muhlenberg, Columbia Chicago) and are very happy.</p>
<p>Two schools that I know of that have great networking in the world of entertainment (so covers a variety of things) are Wesleyan (mainly in film-making) and Emerson. Emerson’s network is jokingly referred to as the Emerson Mafia.</p>
<p>I think the OP is just looking at yet another criteria for selection for a college program. Things that are important to one person (alumni Qs), may not be important to others. I’ll admit that I also scour the playbill of any play I see - whether it is a touring company, or a local one - as I am interested in seeing schools if they are listed. That’s not to say I would send my son to a school based on the talented performance of an actor I saw in a play! </p>
<p>For theatre, I think it is “What you know, AND who you know!”</p>
<p>Although I agree that a strong alumni network shouldn’t be the end-all be-all in choosing a college program, it can definitely be of help once you’ve graduated or are even approaching graduation if you’ve a) excelled in the program and b) played the cards you’ve been dealt well. There’s definitely a lot more to it than just giving you something to chat about at an audition. </p>
<p>There’s a girl graduating from one of the name conservatories this year who’s played her cards so well that her senior showcase will pretty much only serve the purpose of getting her in front of the studio and network execs and members of the Hollywood and New York casting communities who show up. She’s already set for top tier representation and that partially came about from her having woven a web of connections from both her college program and her high school that led to enthusiastic referrals - one from me. It also helps that she’s gorgeous, can still play teens and has the most impressive reel of student film and ULB work I’ve ever seen. But, she won’t be casting all that into a vacuum like she would were it not for those connections. Of course, she obviously still has to book, but she has a huge leg up on those coming out of places where they’ll be essentially starting from scratch no matter how well trained or talented they might be. Probably a three to four year head start in fact. </p>
<p>There’s a lot more to these alumni mafias than just career connections, too. Just moving to one of the major markets, finding a place to stay and learning one’s way around town can be a challenge and it can be a HUGE help to already know a number people you can trust who’ve been there awhile and can show you the ropes. That can just as well come from those who finished a year or two ahead of you who might be still stuggling, too. Sometimes moreso. There’s an old Tibetan proverb that goes something like, “If you want to know the mountain road, ask the person who travels it daily.” You can get a whole line of those people at virtually all levels of the industry to ask about any number of things if the school has a strong alumni network.</p>
<p>
No. It’s not so much who you know and what you know as it is “who knows you.” :)</p>
<p>With respect, I think many posters are misunderstanding kjgc’s point. Here is what he said:
“But I also wouldn’t choose a school based solely on that criteria. It’s too volatile and the outcomes are too weak. This is a tiny business as it is. Believe me, your personal connections are far more likely to bring you work than some distant shared connection”</p>
<p>He is NOT saying that connections don’t matter! At all. Only that you can’t really ride on the alumni reputation of your program in your auditions. Sure, there are exceptions. He is not saying it’s impossible, only that the it is unlikely. For instance, my D goes to NU. So did Stephen Colbert and several other famous alum. She would not get a role in any part based on this fact. She MIGHT get a part if she interned WITH a NU alum, or if an NU alum were directing a show and she was referred to him/her by another NU person she had already forged a connection with. Maybe.</p>
<p>It’s indeed about connections, but not about saying, “Gee, x school has some great alum, so therefore it’s likely that the automatic alum networking will land me parts.”</p>
<p>Even in fishbowl’s example, she is referring to an exceptional candiate (beauty AND talent AND marketability, VERY unusual), who NETWORKED to establish CONNECTIONS before she graduated. THEN through those connections she positioned herself to branch out to alum. Great.</p>
<p>But she didn’t graduate and rely on her alum network to get her parts. ANd this is an exceptional candidate. Most people are not blessed with the confluence of beauty, talent & marketability. </p>
<p>Connections and networking are EXTREMELY important. That’s the point. But I wouldn’t base my school largely on their alum stats. I mean, it’s a factor, but not the be all and end all. Alum stats can be misleading and very volatile–the stats may well reflect a staff and philosophy that is no longer in place when you go to the school. </p>
<p>I think the most important thing are the personal connections YOU forge while in school and during your internships/roles. LOTS of things are word of mouth. One single well-connected mentor can be invaluable. If your professor, for instance, is a very well connected theatre person he/she might be able to refer you to a great internship he’s involved with, or refer you to an audition you might not have landed. But the rest is on you. You have to be professional and talented and desired. You have to keep networking. </p>
<p>Yes, finding an alum network in a new town can be great. They can help you get on your feet. But this varies a lot from school community/environment. Some BFA programs have a ton of alums but IN PRACTICE have very poor alum networks. What I mean by that is if you land in, say NYC, and say, “Here I am folks, a grad from X school! Alum, help me!” – some schools have a far better climate than others. As far as I have seen, this has less to do with the numbers of alum than the climate/attitude of the program in your ‘era’, AND just good luck, being at the right place at the right time. </p>
<p>kjgc’s point was pretty subtle, but savvy. And good to keep in mind.</p>
<p>I would be more focused on connections with casting directors, agents and producers then actors or fellow students.</p>
<p>We have quite a few LORT and SPT theatres very near to where we live. These theatres employ a steady stream of college graduates who have been connected and referred by fellow graduates and alumni who have either performed or have directed/are directing shows at these theatres. I can’t imagine that this area is unique, except that it is a fairly large theatre community. Alumni Connections do not have to focus on who you know in Hollywood or on Broadway. There are loads of places where notable alumni (maybe not the Clint Eastwood’s of the business – as “notable” is very relative to so many different considerations) provide connections to true working relationships whether it be in a theatre in Pittsburgh or an indie film project in Idaho. Networked alumni who are notable to a prospective student is a tool. The same as the prospect of having your Equity card when you graduate. Does this tool increase your chances for getting into an Equity house? It probably doesn’t hurt and it most likely gets you into an audition sooner than those without. Another aspect students might factor in is how well does the school help launch their career? What marketing of the students does the program employ? It does make a difference as students who graduate from programs who do very little to launch their grad’s success, find it very hard to compete with other students who have been given a start at the school’s exit door.</p>
<p>I think Dreambelle was worried about the fact that while CCM MT is indisputably a top program, we never hear a thing about CCM Acting other than that it exists. It’s a legitimate concern.</p>
<p>In some markets, you’ll get a lot less work if you HAVE the Equity card.</p>
<p>Very interesting discussion, and I appreciate all the subtle interpretations of the power of networking and what strong alumni presence in the theatre world may mean. It would be nice to know that sending a student to X University would give then entree into the career they want so badly, and looking at the track record of previous students seems a way to judge.</p>
<p>However, many here are aware that some very top theatre programs & schools (an analogy in the academic plane might be HYPS) have their pick of the most desirable applicants. It has been shown in a study, in fact, that the quality of the kids coming into the ivies is more indicative of their future success than anything they learn once there. Quality in; quality out. So too, in the most prestigious auditioned BFAs, one would expect those top schools to select beautiful, talented, marketable and smart actors who, in turn, will go out and make good careers. Why am I belaboring this point? I guess I’d like to add the idea to the mix that it is not the training at such elite acting programs that causes its grads to have a leg up when they go out in the world. It may just be that subset of talented kids was bringing a lot of their gifts with them. So… looking at the notable alumni may only show how desirable/elite a program is/was. And we can clearly see that using other measures.</p>
<p>Great point madbean! The HYPS analogy is so true.</p>
<p>
*</p>
<p>I think any college in the land is likely to have one, or maybe two, kids who are just as theatrically able as any kid in an auditioned BFA. They simply decided to do something else. Or they had a lousy day of auditioning despite their talent. Or they are late bloomers. My son knows a girl who was accepted as an MT at CMU and decided to go to art school for visual arts instead!!</p>
<p>These kids decided not to train, and therefore it’s less certain what their path will be if they choose to pursue a theatrical career at some point.</p>
<p>Probably most graduates of a conservatory type program would acknowledge that the training helps, and they would be able to explain, as a layman cannot, exactly how it helps. If it did not help, why bother with it?</p>
<p>^^Oh, I certainly think the training is very helpful. I guess I’m saying it is hard to judge if the training at School A is of such a different caliber as the training at School B. As has been noted earlier, even at a school with incredible faculty, through the luck of the draw, one’s student may never get to train with those superstars. Or they may have left the program before one’s student arrives. So many variables in judging the quality of a school.</p>
<p>My point is–perhaps there is not a lot that separates the top 20 or so programs, or the specifics of the most able teachers can vary from student to student in any given program. We’re spending a lot of money on our kid’s education, but there will always be some variables that are out of reach. </p>
<p>So while it may seem like notable alumni is a worthy criteria to research, I’d be inclined to think it says more about the quality of the program several years ago, and really–maybe more about the quality of the individuals who enrolled several years ago. </p>
<p>At every school, there will be superstars who have what it takes to go far. I guess we have to encourage our kids to make the most of the schools they attend. It is up to them, rather than the name on their diploma?</p>
<p>That is a very good point. There are some wonderful comparisons in the sports world. I went to Wisconsin and follow Wisconsin sports closely. Bo Ryan – the basketball coach there – is widely regarding as one of the best teachers in the business. This past year Wisconsin was in a major recruiting battle with North Carolina (a CMU of the basketball world) over a Wisconsin high school kid. The biggest argument from the North Carolina side was well if kid X wants to be in the NBA, he should absolutely go the North Carolina because the coach of North Carolina has coached 15 times more players to the NBA than coach Ryan.</p>
<p>Of course, the reason he’s had so many players go the NBA is because every year he gets his pick of the best high school players in the country. His players go to the NBA because they are the best players. Taking the best player in a given year and putting him at Wisconsin won’t make him not one of the best players. In fact, most in the know believe Ryan is a better teacher of the game. Thankfully, the argument did not work and the kid will be playing at Wisconsin next year!</p>
<p>^ Riddle me this. Even if Ryan is a better teacher of the game (doubtful), would he be able to accomplish as much as Williams if he had at most two thirds of the time with players that Williams does? Half the time? That’s about the range of difference in contact hours between the “tippy top” BFAs and the lion’s share of the others. </p>
<p>Now what madbean says is no doubt part of the equation. Another part, however, is the synergy you get when you bring that select group of kids together into a tight knit ensemble with those kinds of contact hours. They can’t help but grow. But enough with those differences …<br>
Those are often the most important members of a good alumni network. Remember, not everybody who graduates from these places goes on to have an acting career and many who don’t move on to other areas of the industry. Seriously, a class from even one of the toppermost programs could be considered a roaring success if half of them are still in the game as actors ten years after graduation. </p>
<p>But really, if you’re going to look at alumni, it’s best to concentrate on those who’ve graduated in the last five to ten years and see what they’re doing. It doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll be doing it yourself, but a good number of recent alums who’ve passed from the wannabe stage to the true working actor or “name” category could certainly be considered an auspicious sign. And if there really are NONE and the program has been around awhile, maybe not so much unless major faculty changes have occurred in the recent past. See what the faculty have done, too. There are some programs scattered around the country at which a large percentage have never ventured outside the ivory tower of academia. Much less made a go of it in a major market.</p>
<p>Wow. I’ve never gotten such a strong response to my posts. “Connections” thank you for clearing up my point. I undersell the alumni connection because it deserves only some consideration. I went to two very strong schools who have many people working in the world of theatre. At no time have I ever been given a job as a result. </p>
<p>Have my undergraduate and graduate schools alumni networks opened a door here and there? Sure. But my training is what got me the job. You will make your own connections in the world. The alumni network may be the first step in that journey, but it will not sustain any career. </p>
<p>There are programs with great reputations. Most deserve those reputations. And like others have pointed out, once you have gained that reputation it becomes easier to attract students who are special. I love the sports analogy that “ActingDad” uses. It’s true. Yale is considered one of, if not THE best, graduate acting program in the country. Many great actors have come from there. But they also have their pick of potential students. </p>
<p>Now, before someone points out that they must do something right… you are correct. They do. The training, I am sure, is fantastic. But it isn’t flawless. Nor is it so much better than other strong schools that it isn’t possible to succeed with training from another institution. The Yale alumni network is very large, and very strong. And where it helps is the first steps outside of the university. But it isn’t the famous actors that are the network. It’s the people working in the business that are the connections. </p>
<p>Meryl Streep isn’t getting you a job. The alumni casting director, director, producer, etc. are the ones that are going to help you. That is really important. That’s the network you want. But even there, it is my considered experience that your own personal connections will develop more quickly and with more strength than any shared school experience.</p>
<p>By all means, consider everything as you choose a school! My god, this is really expensive and really important. Leave no stone unturned. But because Kristen Chenoweth went to school at OCU doesn’t mean OCU is a great training program for you. What makes OCU a strong program are all the other things. The strong dance, strong voice, strong acting programs. Ms. Chenoweth will likely never get you a job. But her success may be ONE indicator of the ability of a program to train quality actors. But again, her teachers may have already moved on or retired. Programs are made up of an ever-changing faculty. </p>
<p>(And on a side note to whomever posted about CCM Acting. It’s a highly respected acting program with very strong teachers and a long string of working alumni. It’s just not as visible as the MT program.)</p>
<p>I was telling my son about this interesting discussion on CC. He said, “Of course, it’s self-reinforcing.” Yes! Self-reinforcing. THAT’s the term I’ve been struggling to remember – are the “top” programs staying at the top because they give the best training, or because their reputation draws the best applicants? And if a program’s graduates seem to work more than the graduates of other programs, is it because of a network of alumni, superior training, or the calibre of the students who came there in the first place? There’s no ready answer. And a school can coast for a while on a reputation created by someone who is long dead, as kjgc points out.</p>
<p>I attended a state school with a great academic reputation but no music performance program. As a flutist I was a bit wistful about this, but I knew I didn’t want to make a career of flute playing because although I was good, I was not good enough for that. It turned out I was MUCH better off than I would have been at a school with a music performance major. I got to play first flute in the band and second flute in the orchestra, and when the theatre department needed a pit orchestra, or someone wanted a flute for a wedding, I got the gig. I had tons of performing opportunities, and that’s what I wanted.</p>
<p>That university (U.Va.) had the same situation for theatre as for music – the departments were mostly academic so the most serious would-be performers attended elsewhere. But guess what, two of the most famous women in television today are graduates of that school – Katie Couric and Tina Fey.</p>
<p>I guess I’ve strayed from the point. But “notable alumni” can come from anywhere.</p>
<p>Hey – Fishbowl, love your posts but stick to acting. 
</p>
<p>Ryan has the highest all time winning percentage in the history of the Big 10 without a single top 20 recruiting class ever. When Williams does not have 4 NBA players on his roster (like this year), he has a hard time coaching them up to even make the NCAA tourney.</p>
<p>So it seems its a " which came first, the chicken or the egg?" situation. But either way, a school that has many notable alumni, is considered a top program and therefore gets the most talented applicant pool, will help with connections. No, it may not give you the actual job, but it may open the door to allow you to even audition. We live in a credential based society. No one on cc can claim that they don’t make assumptions based on what school someone gets into. If I told you my daughter got into Julliard as an 18 yr old, you would assume she is a superior talent, wouldn’t you? And you would assume if she got into Northwestern, that she was very smart. Well, don’t you think agents, casting directors, etc make those same assumptions? They do, and it will open doors. Once you get in the door, then it is up to you.</p>