<p>MYTH: Grades and Standardized Test Scores aren’t that important if you’re going to a conservatory program within a Liberal Arts College or a State University. The audition is all that matters.</p>
<p>REALITY: They may not matter much for admission, but they may make all the difference in the world when it comes to determining whether you can afford to attend. Almost ALL of the scholarship money my D received at every school was in the form of Merit aid that was tied to her GPA/SAT scores (emphasis on the test scores). Most schools don’t have very much artistic merit money to give, and the vast majority of it goes to those they are most desperate to get (read: boys). Sometimes your only hope of affording an OOS school or a private college is going to be in getting a very significant Merit Scholarship, and that is all about the test scores (with a nod to GPA).</p>
<p>Good point, Tracyvp. In addition, many wonderful MT programs are located in top universities, like University of Michigan and NYU, and if you don’t get accepted academically, you will not be accepted into the MT program. Also, keep on striving to take those AP courses, as those also can affect admission, as well as giving you some wiggle room in college to take additional courses or declare a minor - day job, anyone?</p>
<p>^^^TracyVP is SO RIGHT about this. Some schools have automatic scholarships with a GPA of X combined with an SAT or ACT score of Y. If you are just 1 point shy of Y…TAKE THE TEST AGAIN! Chase the $ and you’ll be glad you did (or your parents will be that is for sure).</p>
<p>I don’t know momarmarino. I think your D might be the exception rather than the rule. Unless your kid is attending a performing arts school, a coach or some sort of summer prep program really does help. We live in small town USA, with limited resources for the arts, and she took advantage of as many opportunities here that we could find. (Including participating in the ITS festival competitions) She did do a summer program, but no coach, (because at the summer program they told her they wanted raw undeveloped talent and not “coached” performers–this was CMU). I really believe she would have gotten into a couple more programs if she had a coach. Mostly because I think with a coach her college list would have looked a bit different, and she might have been a better fit for some other programs. We didn’t find CC until almost the end of the process. There are programs we have learned about on here that she would have taken a shot at if she had known about them. She is lucky that she did get offers from 2 good programs, and she loves her choices, only because she did not audition for any school she where she would not have accepted the spot. (she had no “safeties” either, and planned to take a gap year if it didn’t work out.) Once the audition process got underway she realized that she needed to make some song/monologue changes and once she did, she started getting more positive responses. I think even just a couple meetings with a coach could have prevented that. Who knows though right?</p>
<p>Oh my gosh glassharmonica. I read that same article and I tried to arrange my D’s auditions based on the adjudicators’ fatigue levels . . . I think it worked for all but one. I wish I would’ve known another MT parent that saw way too . . . I was afraid to tell anyone that I believed it related to auditions as many friends thought I was already on the crazy-train regarding auditions! :)</p>
<p>Also, I agree wholeheartedly with Tracy’s myth. Everyone talks about grades, but the money is tied to ACT/SAT + GPA combo. A mere one or two points on the ACT can make several thousand dollars difference in academic merit money. I posted this a long time ago somewhere, but if I had to do it all over again (Lord help me!) I would get my girl a math tutor for the ACT test. She ended up with great talent + good academic merit money at her school and outside scholarships saved us, but those tests are so, so important.</p>
<p>kksmom5, I think the research on decision fatigue is very important for all artists (any kid-- writers, visual artists, musicians, actors) to understand. Not because they can game the system-- I think that is almost impossible, as we rarely have much choice for where we stand in a line-up; those placements are usually the luck of the draw-- but because artists often take adjudication results to heart in a way that is destructive. Positive results can result in false confidence, which can be an inhibitor towards growth. Negative results, of course, are worse, and can lead to to feelings of worthlessness which are not warranted. </p>
<p>On this forum I often read comments to the effect that “talent is always noticed” or “talent always rises to the top.” Usually, these comments come from the students or parents whose talent has been validated by positive results. This is not to say that these results are invalid, but only that one forgets that the adjudicators are human. </p>
<p>Anyone who has sat on an adjudication panel knows that choices are often a result of compromise. Often, rejected applications were strongly supported by some members of the panel, but in the end a compromise had to be made. It is also true that results can suffer for a candidate who presents an audition in an inauspicious time slot-- i.e., before lunch, when the session started late and ran over. Or, first, when not all of the panel members had arrived and most had not had a cup of coffee… </p>
<p>What can be done about this? Nothing much-- these conditions will persist throughout the lifetime of anyone in the arts. Someday, the current audition candidates may be adjudicators themselves.</p>
<p>Grades may be important for scholarships, but I don’t think they do much (or anything) to get you into most programs. There are exceptions. A very talented and very smart student I know got accepted this year into only two schools. USC and NYU. Rejected from 10 others who didn’t care about a 4.0 at all. These could still be unaffordable and it seems crazy that someone could be accepted to 2 really good programs and rejected from a bunch of the mediocre ones.</p>
<p>The small conservatories may not care about SAT scores and GPAs, but the NYU, USC, Michigan type schools do. They are academic institutions and want “smart” actors. Northwestern has no audition at all, yet turns out quite a few successful actors. Clearly there is something to be said for picking good students.</p>
<p>Last year my wife and I attended a lecture by the Chairman of a very good theater department. There were kids interested in MT, acting, etc and a number of parents. The first thing he said to us was that they look at grades. Two reasons for that. One is because they know with the amount of material kids have to take in they need smart kids. Second reason was that unless you meet the standards for acceptance to the university in general it doesn’t matter how talented you are.</p>
<p>As he put it, they will interview hundreds of kids for a handful of spots. They don’t have to compromise on what they’re looking for in their program. So if you don’t think grades and scores count it’s something you’ll want to reconsider.</p>
<p>I think most schools take a holistic approach. My D is not a good standardized test taker however she is in the top 10% of her class of 300. She is a hands on student. She has taken honors and AP classes and has a good unweighted GPA. Even though her ACT score is acceptable it is not in the high range. She received good merit money from most of the places she applied long before we found out about whether artistic acceptances were a yes or no. While yes scores are important there is no need to over stress a kid to get superior scores. The main thing is to know your kid and not put the added stress of scores on them.</p>
<p>Some here say grades are relatively unimportant. I can only say again it’s the first thing that was mentioned by the chairman of a highly sought after MT program. I would hate for any kid to mistakenly slack off on grades thinking they’re not that important based on what this gentleman shared with us.</p>
<p>I agree with glass above. Talent at audition will always be paramount, but when you have hundreds of talented kids vying for just a few spots programs will be looking at other things like grades. And based on his comments at that lecture, it’s not only grades and talent but attitude. He told us of times when they crossed kids off their list as soon as they walked in the audition room because of their attitude towards the accompanist, etc .</p>
<p>jeffandann, that’s a great point that is not often made, and I think it has value even beyond the scope of auditioned programs. I’ve been counseling a student who is wait-listed at my university (her mom asked me to review the letter she is writing the admissions department.) I was a little taken aback at the tone of entitlement throughout the letter and have been trying to make her understand that she needs to see the process through the eyes of the admissions committee. </p>
<p>Applicants need to demonstrate professionalism and an appropriate level of humility. The committee is trying to pick a class that will work together and work well within the school. If a student presents herself as potentially difficult to work with, that raises a huge red flag. With so many other talented applicants waiting in the wings, those who are perceived to be arrogant or disorganized, or difficult in some other way will be eliminated.</p>
<p>We’re working hard on improving grades and getting good test scores, but just want to mention that D’s friend was admitted this year to at least 2 of the most prestigious BFA programs despite very low grades and test scores. It makes me think that admission is possible with less-than-stellar grades, but you probably won’t get the extra $$ given for academic achievement. Immense talent probably helps, too. :)</p>
<p>Just to reiterate, YES, if you have the talent, you can get in to some really AMAZING (TOP?) MT programs even with extremely low grades and test scores (with some exceptions). </p>
<p>NO one is questioning that. But unless you happen to be instate at a state university or can afford the $40-60k per year OOS or private school tuition, that academic merit scholarship money is going to probably be the real deciding factor for you. (IF it’s a school that considers academics in awarding scholarship money, which the VAST majority of them are.)</p>
<p>With regards to scheduling, I’m auditioning 2014 and already have butterflies thinking about it! Have probably posted on other threads about this but I live overseas and have to fly into the us on two very very lengthy flights for unifieds. My top school is boco but I can’t audition on campus because I have to be in the states only for that February week. One of my major concerns was that a lot of the slots would be filled in terms of classes by the time feb rolled around, since I know tons of people receive their acceptances in december. Just wondering what your thoughts are! (Obviously a big advantage is that boco only publishes all its decisions late in the march so everyone gets a chance)</p>
<p>Jessgn - don’t sweat this. Most slots are NOT filled by Feb. Almost all the slots get filled after unifides in Feb. Certainly, there are schools that do not go to Unifides and you have to go to them, but most if not all schools fill slots after auditions in Feb (or later).</p>