<p>stlouismom: The recruitment of athletes is cut-throat, but sometimes more from the school's end. My son was going through it his junior year. The schools visited the weight training sessions in the early AM. Who was auditioning and who was auditioned was confusing at times. They definately had better data - game film, speed on the 40, etc.</p>
<p>RE: the selection of BFA students, which you seem to know much better than myself. After reading CC for well over a year, I picked up some pointers that guided the advice that I gave to my son. First, unlike athletics, there is far more noise/randomness in the selection process - sorry programs, but I'm an academic (teach employee selection) too. and though one can likely see it when it is definately standing there in front of you at unifieds, but for the vast majority of kids it looks to be 'informed randomness' - just my opinion, but even in football the predictive validity of selection decisions is not all that good; check out the number of NFL players who played in 2nd and 3rd tier colleges.
Second, given that my S was an athlete and was not involved in the number of HS and regional productions as the typical applicant,. we assumed that he was very unlikely to get into the top programs - he had a shot, but the deck was going to be stacked against him, even though he is male. I made sure that he applied to two levels of safeties: LACs and non-audition (auditions 1st or second year) schools. He's gotton into these programs, which gives us some breathing room and reduces his tension. Third, we made sure that he applied to more 'shot' schools than 'reach' or 'far reach' schools. I told him the facts as I saw them - what used to be called 'realpolitik'. His competition at the tier one schools was going to be intense, so we thought it best to assume that he would, at best, get into an 'A-' program, likely a perceived 'B' program. If surprised, then 'surprise', but best not to anticipate that outcome.
Fourth, and I think that this was the smartest thing that we did, given my son's relatively thin resume; my son attended a summer program that provided written feedback as to his potential. He attached these reviews to his resumes. Heck, we could not report the number of sacks he had playing noseguard or his wins at Fencing Nationals. Whether these reviews will influence assessments, I do not know, but it's better than nothing.
Fifth, if four years (after moving up the experience/learning curve) from now he is convinced that he has what it takes to make it in the business, we, as parents, want to be sure that there is money available to pursue an MFA. For us, this means that he must not deplete the financial fund on some expensive BFA (there is one exception). If not a MFA at some future time, then there is funding for something else. A generic college degree is a dime a dozen these days, and while waiting tables may be cool for a while, it likely gets old.
Sixth,as a parent, I look at the BFA much like another parent whose D/S is getting a history degree. He is unlikely to work in the area, but the education is worthwhile over the long run. True, the BFA is more of a quasi-professional degree, but it provides rigorous experience that is generalizable over the long run. The breadth of education is narrower than that provided by a LAC, but I am not sure that the sin is as severe as some of my more purest LAC colleagues would argue.</p>