<p>Just wondered if anyone has a sense of how much emphasis is placed on students' resumes by MT programs vs their auditions and training. It seems that there should be some balance between sheer numbers of performances vs. time required for basic skill development (e.g., dance classes, piano, theory, voice lessons, etc.) Also, at least in our urban area, many of the theatre programs are starved for cash so--surprise, surprise--children of major donors are often cast in major roles over and over again. Indeed, some families have managed to buy quite the resumes for their offspring. Do colleges somehow screen for this type of resume?</p>
<p>anne, I wouldn't worry myself unduly about what is or is not on a resume. At most programs, it is far, far more about the audition.
In other words, schools will care far more about the auditioner's level of skill/talent/enthusiasm, etc. than they will about what shows he or she has been in.</p>
<p>I agree completely with NMR. I do not believe a resume', whether impressive or lean, will play much into the decision made by the schools.</p>
<p>I do think that training is one of those elements on a resume that shows a certain amount of dedication or commitment. Not to say that you need years, and years of training, but during several of my D's auditions people asked her for details about the instruction she had listed and summer programs she had attended. </p>
<p>Also, any special skills one may have, can lead to interesting conversation. My D decided to put some totally random and fun skills on hers, aside from dialects, such as "can bark like a seal" and "is able to move like an inchworm". At one audition in particular, they actually had her do both; she received an offer letter :D.</p>
<p>Resume vs audition? In my experience, it is all about the audition. If, at your audition, you sing like Julie Andrews, dance like Chita Rivera, and act like Meryl Streep - but only were in three high school musicals with ensemble roles - you will be accepted (the example assumes the auditioner is female). The resume is important for secondary information - not for getting you in the door.</p>
<p>That's a great point, too. You can add elements to the resume' that show a well-rounded individual plus conversation starting "special skills".</p>
<p>One more thing, on a completely different thread, someone in fact wrote about this one girl this year, who barely had any MT credits, and hardly/no acting/dance training, but was accepted to some top programs. </p>
<p>In all fairness though, this girl CAN SING, to the point that she in fact blows you away CAN SING. In one word, unbelievable!</p>
<p>MTgrlsmom, I really like the idea of putting quirky skills on your resume! I list valley girl under possible dialects I can do, and it has gotten a laugh from an auditioner more than once. Anything to make them remember you, right? :)</p>
<p>I was wondering about the "quirky skills" on resumes too (this thread totally got hijacked :P). I don't really have any conversation-starting-worthy skills that I can think of. I guess the most abstract things I had on my resume last year were Motorcycling and Roller/Ice Hockey. Anyone have any ideas about some other strange skills that I might have that I'm not be thinking of?</p>
<p>I hope this made sense to you :/</p>
<p>freedom, start asking your friends who know you well. May be you can move your nose and ears at the same time, or possibly walk on stilts???</p>
<p>What about telling ghost stories?</p>
<p>I have a job as a ghost-tour guide for the Ghosts of Williamsburg Candlelight Walking Tours :)</p>
<p>Put it down, Robert! Those "special skills" on resumes are, as MTgrlsmom pointed out, real conversation starters. My D had several on her resume and was asked to perform them at a number of schools to which she ended up being accepted. The auditors probably don't really care if you can wiggle your ears while barking like a seal :), but it allows them a "hook" into a fun conversation with you, and an opportunity to see the real you. CAUTION: just don't put down anything that is not true/that you can't do.</p>
<p>Thanks to everyone for your input! It really is reassuring to know that the audition is the most important element rather than a "spectacular" resume. The special skills tip is great, too.</p>
<p>To MTgrlsmom: Out of curiosity, what kind of voice did the amazing singer have and what did she sing?</p>
<p>Robert, NMR is so right! These things are wonderful conversation starters during the interview portion of your audition. I know that if I were an auditor at your audition, I would love to discuss the Ghosts of Williamsburg with you, and you'd probably get an extra point in my book because I've been there so many times and love the town! ;)</p>
<p>When my D auditioned at Tisch, a couple of her 'special skills' on the resume were things like the skills that playing elite level soccer for so many years had taught her (heading the ball, scissor kicks, 'juggling' the ball with your knees and feet, etc.), and having the skill of instant detailed recall of things observed, read, heard, (she actually was part of a scientific study on memory when she was younger). Both of these were discussed during the interview, along with other things, of course, but sometimes it just takes one area of interest to 'break the ice' with an auditor, and to make you feel more comfortable. Having a conversation about something you've done or something which interests you will generally put you at ease and allow you to open up a bit about yourself, giving the auditor an opportunity to get to know the real you. :)</p>
<p>From what my son reported to me, the auditors did look at his resume (sometimes, not all the time), but it seemed that it was only to open a conversation during the interview. Who knows if they poured over it at another time, but I doubt they did. It seemed all about the audition.</p>
<p>In fact, we know of one student who did not have much of a resume--and in fact not much in the way of training or experience--who was accepted into a top program (not this year, rather, in a past year). According to report, he decided at the last minute to audition, applied to the school after the audition, and located and prepared his material the night before! While I wouldn't recommend this, it is interesting for sure!</p>
<p>I am just wondering how many kids really 'interviewed' with the auditioners? Beyond an intro and perhaps one question, my D never had a "here are some questions for you, do you have any for us?" (Is this just one more spoke in my kid's wheel?) All the auditions seemed like (nice) cattle calls that we always assumed real interviews never really happened!</p>
<p>Do remember that this was all pre CC and we did not have a large number of schools on the list.</p>
<p>snoggie, my D only did one audition because she applied E.D. to Tisch and was accepted so all apps were withdrawn at that point. So, I can't comment on other schools but the day she auditioned, she (and the others in her audition block) spent about 15-20 minutes each, 'interviewing' with two faculty members after their audition. Prior to that, when we were doing college visits and compiling her list of schools at which to apply/audition, she had interviews at several of those schools and always took copies of her resume with her.</p>
<p>alwaysamom, did everyone get the same 15 minutes? Before my D would even get to the auditions, literature said things like you will have 3 to 5 minutes to sing/dance/whatever. Pace said the audition would have an interview, but no one on our day had one as far as I know. It could just be the nature of the schools where she auditioned...</p>
<p>I only really had conversations with people at 2 schools: Webster and UArts. Those were also two of my favorite auditions. I'm totally reaudition for them next year :)</p>