<p>If I hear one more word about how awesome MAD thinks a program is, and I mean any program, I’m going to THROW UP.</p>
<p>Interesting article - full of “it’s who you know” references as far as how admin/faculty got involved with the Texas program. </p>
<p>I was intrigued by this statement - "Dennard interviewed Hopkins for a podcast series featuring leading figures in college theatre training, and then, says Hopkins, “she starting plugging us to her clients as the new up-and-coming program.” At the time of the article, the TSU program was only one year old - yet Hopkins is a leading figure in college theatre training? After only one year? Someone had to have petitioned for Hopkins to be included in the podcast series. Even her creds as a performer don’t give her creds as a college theatre trainer.</p>
<p>Would you consider petitioning for this article a form of recruitment? Meaning, students would see the article and the “lemming phenomena” would begin, which it did (40 apps before - 400 apps after the article)? Colleges are businesses in the end, and they do indeed have to “sell it”.</p>
<p>I agree that this whole process should not be in place to feed egos, and hopefully students will not make decisions based on such. However , in my D’s case, her 2 top schools were really neck and neck. When one of those schools actively pursued her and offered increasing amounts of money, it definitely impacted her decision. Since it was already one of her top 2 schools, I would say that their interest definitely helped sway her. In addition, as they increased their award offer, it became far less expensive than our in-state public school making it far more attractive financially. I guess In the end, if one school makes it very clear that you are one of their top choices, AND it is a school which you have determined is good fit, it may be the decidingfactor. The same thing happens with athletic recruits all the time. While I don’t think the 2 situations are directly comparable- MT is the course of study vs. athletics being an EC that allows athletes to pursue academics at desired schools that otherwise might be out of reach- the perks are there for each.</p>
<p>I find the article revolting. It is like whan Calipari showed up at Memphis and started wooing all the top AAU coaches and the next thing you knew other schools couldn’t even touch some of these kids without buying off the AAU coaches by paying them big $$$ to come coach various summer camps. College athletes end up picking schools often by who shows them the most love – how many texts and letters do they get each day, etc. What’s next? Colleges will come watch shows of top performing arts high schools to recruit kids to apply to their school? We’ll have offers going out before the college audition season even starts.</p>
<p>I don’t know the MT field as well as the acting field but programs like Juilliard, CMU, UNCSA, BU, Rutgers, Purchase, NYU, etc. got there by a proven track records of graduating people ready to work in the field. It will be a sorry day for this field if this comes down to how well each program can recruit.</p>
<p>re post #91
I was under the impression that in the state of MI it is illegal to give preferred treatment based on gender?</p>
<p>I agree ActingDad! But I think that does already happen. And there is a huge difference between the “it” program and the indisputable top schools with decades long track records. However, some of these schools are definitely engaged in a battle to become the next “it” program.</p>
<p>takeitallin, you make a good point about when that feeling loved may really be valuable.</p>
<p>But before the process even starts if one is going into the auditions thinking and needing to feel chased that may be unhealthy. </p>
<p>I do think it is part of our nature to want that love from schools. One of the things to debunk on this thread is our EGO telling us we need it to be happy.</p>
<p>I agree this seems distasteful at best. Do MT schools really want to go down the path of athletic departments and use shady recruiting methods? With athletic programs it brings in more $$. What would the financial incentive or other incentive be for MT schools to offer tons of $$ to steal away students from other programs? All I can see would be ego boosts not only to the student but the schools. And as far as scholarships and $$, it seems it would tend to lead students and their families away from those based on academic merit.</p>
<p>Just an aside, in the article, Hopkins mentions that CMU is a certain price for “out-of-state” students. I thought CMU was a private school and being from PA had no benefit?</p>
<p>CMU is a private school. Same price whether you are in or out of state.</p>
<p>ActingDad, I like that thought of offers going out before auditions. Think of how much money that would save us parents. : )</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I really dislike this statement from Kaitlin Hopkins. I know students, via my daughter, who were in the program at Texas State before she arrived. They are working actors happily pursuing their dreams. She didn’t build a program from scratch. I’m not commenting on the program currently. Just saying that I find that statement disingenuous on her part.</p>
<p>And by the way, just a note that that column is 3 years old.</p>
<p>Interesting insight though into the schools perspective and how they go about building a program that gets national attention. She’s very honest about her goals and her strategy. And she sure sounds happy to have a well known coach helping her recruit the kids. It’s fascinating.</p>
<p>Being a “top school” is self-reinforcing, because you will get the very best candidates applying, and then when they graduate they will become ambassadors for your school. Thus it would seem to be well worth while for a wannabe top school to be extremely lavish with the love and the financial aid, to lure the most promising students to come there and build up the program.</p>
<p>I’ve seen it happen with a local university. It was a commuter school that was not highly regarded, but they started offering huge salaries and full professorships to attract top teachers from elsewhere, and I imagine they did the same thing with students and financial aid. Now 20 years later they are very well known and respected, a top-tier university.</p>
<p>To quote Walker 1194 in Post #99:<br>
“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.”
This is what all kids should keep in mind. There are so many great examples out there to give them inspiration. We just saw a fantastic talent who played Wendy in the National Tour of The Addams Family and she went to Curry College (sorry I don’t remember her name). Laura Osnes, who is having a stellar Broadway career, went to the University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point. Sierra Boggess went to Millikin. We know of 2 recent University of Kentucky grads one of whom just did a national tour and one of whom is in Cinderella on Broadway right now. (and no, Calipari did not help get them recruited!) Steve Kazee went to Morehead State University in Kentucky. These are all great examples that prove your student can be successful no matter what school they choose to attend. It is all in what they do with the opportunities they have been given. There are many great programs out there whose names may be not as well known. But that doesn’t mean you can’t get great training there. And ultimately it depends on the student themselves to make it happen.</p>
<p>prodesse hit the mark EXACTLY about “self-reinforcing”.</p>
<p>And I’ll take it one further and say that when you read an article like that it makes you a little cynical about the process. The connections help, but recruiting those future ambassadors does not make your school better in terms of training. I didn’t come to CC until late in the game and I was very naive in terms of what schools were looking for. Especially those that are considered the top schools. It seems like they want kids that are very talented yes, but not only that but well connected through coaching, classes, PA schools etc. And also very well prepared (trained and coached). I’d like to see how these kids in the “elite” schools change from Freshman to Senior year. I would be willing to bet that many of them won’t change that much because they are already THERE. The connections that those schools offer are immense, no denying that, and they can afford the most well known, well respected faculty for sure…but how much are they REALLY giving the kids that go there in terms of training and teaching? Some of these kids could walk out of high school, and with the right connections, get jobs immediately. So is it worth paying nearly a quarter of a million dollars for connections? Maybe for some it is.</p>
<p>There was thread about that topic recently theatermom2013. Interesting read:
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/1178243-transformed-fine-tuned-hardly-changed.html?highlight=hardly+changed[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/musical-theater-major/1178243-transformed-fine-tuned-hardly-changed.html?highlight=hardly+changed</a></p>
<p>I don’t blame Texas State for building their program quickly and making it affordable for kids (and their parents). It is a business and they are fulfilling a need in the market. Their gain is a loss for schools that might be pricing themselves out of the market. The more competitive programs, the better, as it will eventually get the most expensive schools to pay attention. </p>
<p>However, I find ActingDad’s mention of AAU basketball coaches to be very interesting, especially in light of the boom in audition coaching recently. While I don’t think for a minute that audition coaches are of the same ilk as many AAU coaches I’ve known, I will say that the “relationships” that some audition coaches have with decision makers in MT and acting programs falls for me in the category of “things that make me go hmmm…” After reading that article and having looked at the master class instructors listed on the web sites of the audition coach services mentioned most here, I am left to wonder if the rush to hire audition coaches is completely and totally to work on appropriate song choices, monologues, etc.? Or is part of the allure to gain a little more access to so-and-so at XYZ University, or the head of MT ant ABC Conservatory? Food for thought. That will certainly make some people angry here, but it is a legitimate question to ask. Whatever the answer, the world has changed, and while that is a reality, is it really a positive change?</p>
<p>I’m really interested in “how is much is too much” on the recruitment side by the school. As a student who works for the department and helps run auditions, I try to be as professional as possible in my dealings with the students who audition for us their parents. I do accept friend requests on facebook typically, and try to stay in touch and find out where they are going- whether we accepted them, or not, whether they accepted us, or not. I am genuinely interested in that sort of thing, as well as guiding people to find their right program (and hopefully if we like them- it’s CCU!). </p>
<p>But this year I felt like I was straddling a fine line. I was afraid to push too much, in all honesty. There were quite a few current students from other schools who I saw posting on auditionees facebook walls, basically saying (and I’m being a bit dramatic- fancy that), “IF YOU DON’T COME TO THIS SCHOOL THAT I GO TO, YOU WON’T BE ON BROADWAY!”… As I said- I’m being dramatic, but that’s just not quite my style. And when I was auditioning, that would have been a turn off to me. </p>
<p>However, we lost quite a few great kids this year that I really worked hard recruiting to schools that I see using these strategies. Did I not work hard enough? Should I have been more pro-active? I use the phrase, “I hope you choose CCU, but I know you’ll be successful wherever you go” quite often and quite truthfully- but is that a no-no now? When someone asks me my opinion of another school, should I have been saying only the negatives about that program to sway them towards ours? That makes me feel deceitful, but it’s not my job to sell another school. Hmm- so many questions to answer!</p>
<p>I’ve only got one year of officially recruiting left, so I very much appreciate this thread. It will definitely help guide me into fine-tuning some new techniques for next year. It never stops! :)</p>
<p>AlexaMT, you should be commended for your recruiting approach. It was honest and straightforward.</p>
<p>One of the best campus audition overviews came from Brent Wagner at Michigan who not only talked about the UMich philosophy and their MT philosophy, but also that their program was NOT the only good program out there. He then went on to talk about the recent WSJ article which cited UMich and CMU as the road to Broadway, and while “flattering,” it was not only an overstatement, but erroneous. He was absolutely brilliant in his remarks and really quite a lecturer. It also showed a great deal of humility and restraint because he could have used the article to make a crowd of parents and students eager to become UMich crazed, even moreso.</p>
<p>Articles such as the one about TSU in the New York Times and the one in the WSJ about CMU and UMich are always going to be a little extreme in their superlatives. They almost seem like advertorials. A writer takes a point of view and runs with it.</p>
<p>There are many fine programs out there and there is no one place, or even a handful, that will secure an actor’s future.</p>
<p>I appreciate all of the examples vvnstar mentioned from different schools who have succeeded on Broadway recently. The list is seemingly endless, actually. </p>
<p>I do think its important though not to confuse “stroking someone’s ego” with “a personal touch” and “making someone feel wanted.” These are very different things and anyone in business or sales knows what I am talking about. I still believe a personal phone call or an email from the chair or head is appropriate after acceptance. This is a very long process and its possible months and months have passed. A re-connection is helpful to answer questions and to gauge student’s continued interest is important. I would think it would be important for the school.</p>
<p>Again, my point in bringing this up is that students and parents have a realistic point of view about it going forward. We had been led to believe it would be different and I admit, part of it was my overzealous imagination. Forewarned is forearmed. That is the great gift of college confidential. </p>
<p>Thanks to everyone for their continued posts and contributions.</p>