<p>Well yes, monkey13, it does depend on the school. I believe I said, “wide range” from “non-existent to extensive email campaigns.” And I don’t mean the generic admissions emails with reminders about this or that. I meant personal emails. So there was recruiting. It was never the full press I expected. Like I said, it may have been my imagination working overtime but I did have a couple of insiders tell me that it would happen.</p>
<p>Everyone was warm after we would call them. But it took initiating the contact often after admission.</p>
<p>And, we want them to be excellent MT schools, not excellent recruiters. It was just that I thought there would be more and I wanted future CC’ers to be realistic about it.</p>
<p>I think that’s a good myth to debunk grayhairedman! Like you, I also heard that some of the more well known, most competitive schools will “do what it takes” to recruit you if they want you. Also, that significant adjustments will be made to financial/talent scholarship offers to make it possible for you to attend. It’s good to have the information of this just not being true going into it. Especially if someone ends up in a situation like your son. Heck, it could even influence your choice when applying/auditioning!</p>
<p>Myth: you can predict anything about this process. </p>
<p>I have read this site in an effort to help a young lady who auditioned for musical theater. I did tell her that her list was too top heavy but she had her own ideas. </p>
<p>Her list:
Point Park MT - auditioned, rejected quickly
Otterbein MT - didn’t pass prescreen
Baldwin Wallace MT - auditioned, rejected
Pace MT - passed prescreen, auditioned, no callback, rejected
Carnegie Mellon MT - auditioned, rejected
Shenandoah MT - late addition, didn’t pass prescreen
North Carolina School for the Arts Acting - late addition, auditioned, rejected
Safety: UMass Boston Theater Arts - accepted but not willing to attend</p>
<p>After all of the rejections she planned to become an elementary education major at a local college. </p>
<p>She was in a monologue competition in March where a Point Park person was in the audience (not sure who). She was offered a spot at Point Park in Acting by this person as they were leaving the event. She had to audition for the $16,000 per year talent scholarship she got. Her plans have changed and she will be attending Point Park. </p>
<p>Point Park’s website says they do NOT allow you to audition for MT and Acting in the same year. </p>
<p>The tip top schools do actively offer big money to people they really really feel that they want but this is rare. We know of one boy who was flown in to meet with the people at Michigan because he was also being recruited by CMU and CCM. Not trying to be insensitive, but the vast majority of the accepted kids to these schools are easily replaced with the next incredibly talented kid on the list. From what I have seen, a really talented student has a better chance at big money from schools that are a step away from the well known “top” tier.</p>
<p>My kid got into 5 BFA programs and priority waitlisted at one (applied to just 8). I don’t recall any schools actively recruiting her after offering admission. I like it that way, actually. I don’t want a hard sell. I feel that once acceptance offers go out, the tables have been turned and the student is in the driver’s seat. I don’t want my kid to judge a school as to who had the best persuasive tactics, but simply pick the school that is a good fit. My D got scholarships at all the schools. We did not weigh the scholarship offers in the decision, and just went by fit. I don’t think of the scholarships as recruiting. </p>
<p>I have worked with numerous applicants pursuing this field in college. I can recall one student a couple years ago who got into many excellent and well regarded programs. One program, a newer one mentioned here, did put on the hard sell, in my opinion. I think they do it a lot and get the kids to commit and are doing well with that strategy. When the student relayed to me the many things he was told by the program as to why he should choose them and not the others, I felt there was a bit too much “kool-aid.” I could think easily of some rebuttals to what he was told. Nonetheless, the program is very good and their promotion and recruiting efforts are working for them! I just prefer less of that myself. My kid weighed the merits of each program without anyone trying to sell her on them. </p>
<p>So, while there may be some programs who do a lot of active recruiting in the spring, many do not. These other programs still seem to get a lot of talented kids to enroll.</p>
<p>As much as it so competitive for students to find acceptance into a program it sounds like it is becoming more competitive for the schools as well. Especially schools that are not as well known and who are also vying for top-tier talent. I recently heard from a MT program director that there is not so much more talent out there, just more applicants and it is making their jobs harder.</p>
<p>Soozievt, are you referring to your daughter who matriculated 8 years ago? (unless I have the wrong poster) Or do you have another one? I think a lot has changed with these programs in the past decade with the advent of Glee and Smash and the like. As well as the general surge of global popularity that musical theater has gained. A lot more applicants in the pool, and like md311mt said, there is another off the hook talented kid waiting in the wings for that spot in that very popular, well known school. Not sure these kids are ever in the drivers seat.</p>
<p>Theatermom, yes, I was talking of my MT daughter who matriculated in 2005 (I have another D who did not pursue MT). Yes, it is getting more and more competitive but let me assure you, it was still highly competitive 8 years ago! The acceptance rates to all the programs my D applied to were in the single digits. </p>
<p>When I said the kids were in the driver’s seat, I SURELY did not mean in terms of admissions and selection and all that. Absolutely not. What I meant was in ANY year, once the offers have gone out, the tables are turned and the applicant is picking the school (from among his/her acceptances) and the schools are no longer selecting the student.</p>
<p>I think recruiting tactics vary significantly by school, and no one should be discouraged if they are not actively recruited by phone calls, e-mails etc. I don’t think it is all that common, but it does happen. My D applied as a transfer to BFA/BA programs 3 years ago- she just graduated. The BFA program she ended up transferring to started e-mailing and calling her 2 days after her audition. When she hesitated to accept admission to this program because she was still seriously considering another school, they flew her in to spend a couple of days with them, and then upped their original scholarship award. When she still hesitated, they upped it again, at which point she committed to them. We were not intentionally negotiating anything, as she really was torn between 2 schools. Especially after her visit, she was very excited about their program but couldn’t quite let go of her other pick, which had originally been her 1st choice. In the end she decided on this school because 1) she felt it was a great fit for her, 2)she felt like they really, really wanted her (it’s always nice to be wanted), and 3)it was hard to beat the financial incentives. They did not let her down and she loved every minute of her time there. Her 2nd choice school did not indicate much interest, outside of accepting her, and I think that is partially what dropped it down to a 2nd choice for her.</p>
<p>I do think that the hard sell can be too much. We didn’t mind the checking in or having students email and ask if you had any further questions-that’s a nice touch. Also as stated above the student is in the driver seat once acceptances go out and if you want to negotiate scholarsip offers all you have to do is call and ask.</p>
<p>@md311mt, maybe a few superstar kids do get the big recruitment treatment. I find your closing statement to be more plausible and have seen more evidence to support it, but not overwhelming. What I have really seen this year is kids with financial need getting nearly full rides. My son has gotten almost 50 % costs covered by academic money. The talent money seems to be the smallest pool. Not just our experience, but from what I have gathered from others. I am certain there are exceptions.</p>
<p>I have certainly observed one thing. In this year’s crop, there were not enough top recruited boys to go around to the top ten schools. I use top ten very loosely. Top eight, top ten, top twelve, etc. In fact, at this very moment, there are still dominoes falling as CMU continues to fill their boy spots. Michigan is not full of boys yet either. And programs that thought they were done will find out in the next few days they now have a new spot open. Even though the programs behave as you say, replacing the “very incredibly talented” with “the next incredibly talented” kid. The fact remains that when the top schools choose the same kids independent of each other, there are attributes, talents, types, about these kids that make them more desirable or attractive for their program than the next kid. The schools do not really believe they are interchangeable. In fact, mich and CMU do not give non need based money (easily) to their wait listed students. They definitely believe their “chosen” acceptances are of a higher order.</p>
<p>I certainly think they are making a mistake. They offer spots to WL assuming they know how lucky they are to “just get in.” </p>
<p>Mich does not currently have enough wait listed boys to fill their original goal of 11. Will they go with 9? Or will they go back to their tapes? So, where is the “next incredibly talented” kid on their list? What if another wait listed boy decides he is now happy with his pre-May 1 selection and scholarship from another school? When does Michigan change their strategy? Does it matter? They are still Michigan. First or second MT program in the country depending on who you ask (today).</p>
<p>Anyway, it’s all fascinating. I don’t pretend to have the answers. Just a father who thinks the schools could learn a few things by looking at the process through our eyes, (if they wanted to). Not that they need to.</p>
<p>I think this has almost certainly been true for at least the past 4 years, and I assume far longer. I suspect it’s even true for the top 5 schools. </p>
<p>No surprise, but the same is NOT true for females. I assume in general for females connections may come in to play far sooner, and there is generally less talent money offered.</p>
<p>Grayhairedman- I agree with everything you said and it was well said. Things are changing. New programs are becoming more competitive. Parents are re-thinking going into debt for college. Colleges don’t have as much money to give. But the “top” programs need to start showing the love. The reputation is there but parents want to know they want your kid and they will take care of your kid. As we both know, TSU shows the love and the price is right. This was a year that the top schools lost some kids to better recruiters and better prices. Of course they got top kids, but they need to work harder.</p>
<p>It must be happening with girls too because a girl that I work with got off the waitlist for NYU, Penn State, Syracuse and Boco in the past week.</p>
<p>Michigan got all 11 girls, but only 7 of their boys. My wait listed son also said no after their “no money offer”. They only wait listed 3 boys. I believe 1 girl said no to CMU. Apparently, this “never” happens. Not certain about CCM. I have no intel from there. It can happen with the girls, just less often due to the competition.</p>
<p>I’m surprised Michigan took that many this year. When my d visited her junior year she sat in on their sophomore MT class and it consisted of 7 boys and 5 girls</p>
<p>Gavin Creel said no to CMU and I would think with all the “top” schools picking a lot of the same kids it would happen each year or close to it.</p>
<p>I have never read a thread more carefully than this one. Whomever started it, thank you, and whomever is posting, thank you. </p>
<p>Just from my limited perspective. We do not “recruit” once the offers are made. We attempt to spend hours with each prospective student prior to the offer. By then, we tend to know each other. After that, I want the decision to be theirs based on what they know of us. It’s just me, I hate any pressure in an already difficult decision. That said, maybe next year (based on this thread) we will at least reach out slightly more often.</p>
<p>I can also say that the schools with large pools of talent based money are limited. And in my experience those schools tend to be private institutions. This isn’t a rule, more of a “guideline.” I wish I had full scholarship money for one or two students and envy the schools that do. </p>
<p>And since I opened my big mouth again. Feel free to ask any questions about the process. I can give you one school’s perspective. Might not be worth much, but someone above said something about wanting a school’s perspective.</p>
<p>I think the most helpful part of this thread is the idea that no one should assume their kid will get merit money based on talent, stats or even low family income needs. </p>
<p>But I am having a hard time seeing a benefit to needing to feel chased after and recruited other then feeding demands of ones own ego. Ego’s should not be feed.</p>
<p>^^^agrees with shacherry. The only thing helpful about this thread is that to expect no money. The schools don’t have it to give except to the the top academic students. Not to say that an acting/MT kid can’t be a top student but they are NOT in a field that the schools feel are important to recruiting and the number of kids in these programs is very small. </p>
<p>Getting into ANY program does not mean guaranteed success. It’s what the kid does with the opportunity that they are given that determines success. It’s hard work. I fear that some of these kids are so coddled and used to being fawned over in their small pond that when they get to the ocean they won’t be able to take it. Nobody cares what you did in high school. It’s a whole new ballgame.</p>
<p>This article addresses this whole competition for top talent students thing and how some schools are efforting to rise to prominence by targeting and heavily recruiting those kids and enticing them with scholarships on top of an already very low sticker price. Of course, cost is a factor for most these days and if a program is giving you the majority of what you want for a fraction of the price and has a reasonable reputation to boot why wouldn’t you want to attend? This is not a business where anyone would recommend a tom of debt. But it does bring up the whole nature vs. nurture debate. Are they looking for people with potential to teach or are they looking for people who they believe will give then bragging rights as soon as possible?</p>