<p>Brian - Many schools do not have representatives on CC. I happened to stumble upon it one day doing a google search. Have you noticed if Arizona has a representative from the Theatre Dept. who posts on CC? If not, you may want to contact someone in the department directly with you question.</p>
<p>Theater Arts students are definitely not treated as second class citizens like they may be at schools with two different degree programs (currently, I'm at Michigan where we have a BFA and a BTA). That being said, switching doesn't seem to be a very popular (probably a good thing, I don't know how i'd feel being a theater arts major and having my classes suddenly double in size due to actors), probably due to the factors you mentioned. Anecdotally, the people I know who switched programs had a really healthy sense of self to begin with so they could deal and are in the more academically inclined subset of students if that makes any sense. It's not a popular choice, it seems like most people go for the Plan B options that mamamia has addressed, many go to Columbia College and this year I know at least two people who have chosen Act One Conservatory which is also in Chicago.</p>
<p>Thanks, wandergirl! I never ceased to be amazed at how resilient and strong many of you young performers are. I guess you have to be, to deal with the prospect of having to face rejection, not only in a college admissions setting, but also in the professional world of auditions and so on. Hats off to all of you!
Wow, wandergirl, how fortunate you are to be at Univ of Michigan! It's one of my kid's absolute favorite schools. She visited last April (when there was still some snow on the ground and freezing rain was coming down!:)) and loved it. I had not realized that there was both a BFA program (in musical theater and acting) and a BA option. That's interesting. Is the BA a degree in Theatre Arts, and does that encompass any acting classes?</p>
<p>KatMT : UA does not have a such a person, but I am surprised, given the number of postings by students, etc. pre/during 2006, that there have been few postings post 'CC squirmish' re" the how/why of UA cutting. I am aware that there are a number of faculty/staff from programs (theatre and other majors) that respond 'off record' to questions posed by students and parents. I do it in my area for my college, though privately and cautiously, as I have this thing about being fully disclosive (my username) in this type of cyber environment.
Back to UA: I am just surprised that there is no response, whether formal or informal. Their web site does specify that students are reviewed, etc., but the CC debate post-06 was of such a pitch/intensity (read it - have you ever read a controversey so intensely debated by multiple parties) that you would think that they would decide to communicate better; reach out, as it were. I am making a leap here, but having worked in huge reseacrch oriented U's, it smells of bureaucratic neglect and/or arrogance. It also suggests a 'love it or leave it' temperment, or, alternatively stated, an institutional disposition that assumes that they can rest on the laurels of the past. As a newbie to this sector of higher education, it looks like theatre programs that had great reputations in the past have lost their competitive edge (god, I'm talking like Romney - Mr Bain), while others have developed or adjusted their practices and policies in pursuit of educational excellence. It would be interesting to know what factors contribute to the rise and fall of theatre programs. This is something that my small LAC discusses all the time. I wonder whether Theatre Depts. (typically organized as a School - division, for you corporate types - or a major player in the School ) reflect upon how the game is played in this decade, say, in comparison to how it was played in the 90's. We, as consumrs, often judge a program based upon old information - past status/reputation/placement. Its difficult to ascertain the current effectiveness of a program via an interview/visit, as education is an 'experience good' (like choosing a vacation - you can only do a good assessment after you've 'been there, done that'), in contrast to a 'search good' ( deciding what car to buy based upon test drive, consumer reports, performace/reliability data, etc.).
I do not expect a response to these statements, but it is worth noting that the value of CC is that it serves two purposes. First, it gives the ignorant, like me, invaluable information. Second, it puts the schools on their toes; CC is also a consumer feedback site, the most effective one out there, and in theatre studies, by far the best (puts Everett, etc. to shame). I would think that any proactively managed theatre program would check up on what is being said (or the total absense of discourse - i.e., Illinois, Utah,) at least once a week. It's a low/no cost investment with many returns.</p>
<p>I don't think one can expect that theater programs or colleges in general are keeping tabs on College Confidential. Some may do that but many many do not. I think when a rep from U Arizona came on in the past, it likely was due to being tipped off by someone to answer to an online message board controversy involving their school. Otherwise, they likely don't read CC. I personally feel if you have questions about U of Arizona's latest year of cutting practices, the very BEST way to get that information is directly from the school and contact them and not via CC, where they likely do not read. If you told me that they did not respond to your direct query, I would agree that is quite negative. If they don't respond to questions raised on CC, I would think nothing of it really.</p>
<p>(I do agree that reps from a program or college may want to think about keeping tabs on the "chat" that is out there about their schools on the internet.)</p>
<p>soozievt: you stated, (in the statement in parentheses) the intention of my post. My S intends to get some clarification on retention practices in interviews. Nevertheless, given the work load of selecting/applying to programs, one tries to get information more efficiently via sources like CC.
I am not arguing with you. We are no longer interested in Arizona, so that was not the reason for the post. I was kind of picking on them - sorry UA, as if they notice (hah). Most of my academic writing over the past decade is based upon the perception (not only mine) that the 'academy' has become one of the most powerful organizations in our time, organizing not only our futures (i.e.,consulting, investment banking, and other firms hiring only from Brand ID schools because it enhances their brand ID - their marketing literature often posts where their employees got degree from), but organizing the everyday life of adolescents and the family system - aspirations, status pursuits, pressures, decisions. This was always an abstract interest for me. Now its personal, given that I/we are now in the game. So my comments reflect this knee-jerk tendency - well, it kicks at times - to assess the game.
We are not applying to Arizona. Perhaps we would have, had someone replied to my posting and that of others, but that is neither here nor there. The intent of some of my posts has been to encourage academic departments to direct their reflexive eye - what most academics/scholars claim as their distinctive competence - to their own practices. That is, academically speaking, and with the voice of the late Pierre Bourdieu (French Sociologist), we must constantly re-mind that which academic organizations repress; the obvious fact that they are managed, complex organizations, and that their practices have consequences on the organization of everyday life.
So, I am picking on Arizona, just the same way I bug any other academic institution that I work with, including my employer for the past 20 years, an institution that I love dearly. I irritate because I care about higher education, and I do not think that the status quo is as good as is often assumed. Some consumers have an 'as is' disposition toward academic institutions. "Well, that is what UA does, so don't apply there", someone might say. But I am not thinking of my child; what of the other children and parents. And what does it say about my occupation and the type of institution that I work in; UA's practices have an ethical dimension as well, and therefore warrants critique, even from a noninvolved third party. Why not hope for better practices? Speaking more broadly, why not provoke, if need be? CC is one of the few vehicles through which consumers can provoke. My hope is that CC will someday serve such a purpose; to affect change by the mere fact that it has become a dynamic forum where reasoning voices share their impressions and desires, in detail, eclipsing coventional wisdoms, entrenched opinios, and the glitz marketing practices of colleges.
So, as a parent, I do not have to talk directly to UA by calling or visiting them. With CC, I can yell from the distant fringes of the campus. Large organizations tend not to listen, but at least it feels good to yell every now and then. Also, over the long run, perhaps others will start yelling. Colleges should listen, as I suspect that we know something (consumers often see what owners and producers do not) that may assist programs like UA get to the top. It's called customer feedback/service. Corporations discovered it decades ago. Academic institutions could learn much from reading some old 80's management literature, though I fear that many academics assume that their organizing is progressive because their political rhetoric is.
Speaking way beyond theatre programs, but to the higher education game, there is some value to playing 'kynic', to protesting on the sidelines, and, in doing so, to encourage my S to understand and change organizational behavior once he is in one. Sorry for the tone. I am working for Obama.</p>
<p>Brian, I think we are talking of two different things. I think you are now talking about effecting organizational change in an institution of higher learning. I wasn't suggesting to call up UArizona to discuss their policies in the hopes of effecting change. I thought earlier you were posing questions on CC as to what were the cutting practices in this last year's cycle and then observing that U of Arizona did not respond on CC. I was saying to call/write directly to get such answers, rather than assume that college personnel read CC. I wasn't suggesting calling the school to have a dialogue on their practices or trying to effect change. </p>
<p>Yes, it may be wise for schools to read forums where their practices are being discussed. As far as Q and A, I think one should not rely on the forum but to do that directly with colleges. </p>
<p>Yes, colleges could get a pulse on the "chat" that it out there. </p>
<p>I think that effecting change is easier to do from within the institution than from people chatting on the outside about it. </p>
<p>As well, I think that schools can create their own policies and consumers can determine which schools fit what they are looking for. U of Arizona's rep defended their policy on CC and they believe in it. I personally disagree with it. But anyone who chooses to attend should familiarize themselves with it. I don't think that U Arizona cares that their policy is not agreeable to all. People can pick and choose schools. I haven't heard that these schools are low on applicants. For instance, one of the top BFA in MT programs in the country is CCM and CCM cuts students. My D, who applied to most of the top MT programs in the country was not interested in applying to CCM for a few reasons but their cut practices (and the side effects of it) were a part of that decision, no matter how great the school is and its reputation in the field. Does CCM care that it lost out on my D as an applicant? Hardly! They still have a slew of applicants who are fine with their policies. It is just as well because fit matters and their policies and environment don't fit what my child wants even though they are a top and well regarded BFA in MT program. That is why people need to research schools for fit. As a college counselor, I certainly suggest CCM to many students and make sure to inform them of the practices and let the student decide. In fact, I have a current client who is an applicant to CCM and that's cool with me because she made an informed decison and it certainly is a fine program.</p>
<p>I don't know that the schools need to change to fit everyone. They have plenty of candidates who are fine with their policies and don't need to change if they have consumers who are willing to attend their school with their current practices. My D just is not one of them. :D</p>
<p>Honestly, I think the only reason that some people are "all right" with cut programs is that those people cannot fathom that they, themselves, will ever be the ones cut! :) Kids are generally very optimistic in outlook and certainly kids going off to college for acting and MT tend to have confidence (in general, some more, some less) in their level of talent. Thus, no kid believes (or will let herself) believe that <em>she</em> will be the one who might be cut. In fact, I have been privy to a number of young people discussing this issue (when talking about college choices) and not one of them ever believes she/he will be in the losing end. Unfortunately, that's not always true. (I hope this makes sense.) :)</p>
<p>Ok; I will stop arguing my philosophical position, which assumes that there is an ETHICAL line out there that an EDUCATIONAL institution should impose on itself; a line that cannot be justified under the same logic utilized by a Broadway theatre or, for that matter, UA's football or basketball team, which will demote upperclassmen to the practice squad because of newly acquired talent. Peace.</p>
<p>brian, fwiw, I agree completely with you that educational institutions should hew to an ethical line in everything they do, including the way they treat students who they select for an acting program via a short audition. As a parent, I do not at all agree with the idea that a program (no matter what the program's caliber and reputation) admits more students than it knows it can handle and then "cuts" them for various reasons apparently sometimes having little to do with those students' talent and work ethic and more to do with the fact that a better offer (transfer students) came along. (Reminds me of men and women who tire of their first wives and husbands and "trade up." :))
However, I do also get what soozie is saying, which is that (and soozie, forgive me if I paraphrase this very bluntly and basically!) "it is what it is, and students can either buy into it and audition for those programs, or avoid those programs."
Practically speaking, that <em>is</em> all that can be done. People can vote with their feet, if you will, and not audition for/enroll in those programs. If enough people chose to go elsewhere, then perhaps these programs would consider changing their practices. But it is likely that as long as hundreds of students turn out at auditions and enroll gratefully after being accepted, things won't change.
In my view, the bottom line is that a college BFA program in acting or MT is NOT the real world: it's preparation for the real world. I personally believe that these programs have an obligation to the kids they enroll to help those kids learn as much and develop their talents and abilities as much as they can in four years, and then let the outside market decide. Apparently, however, those in charge of these programs don't agree with us. The most we can do is to encourage our own talented kids to take their business elsewhere.</p>
<p>Wow, you guys are scaring me! One more reason to go for the BA and wait til graduate school for the MFA!</p>
<p>Brian,
Just to be clear, I TOTALLY agree with you about the cut practices at these schools! I didn't think we were discussing the actual practice of it here. I think on the UArizona thread that year, I did voice my opinion (I'd have to check). I am very against their practice. Same with DePaul. I'm not into CCM's either, which is slightly different, but I am not into cuts generally speaking. Neither is my kid. </p>
<p>NMR...yes, you paraphrased me just fine! </p>
<p>I also agree with you that some don't think they'll be the one cut. But it goes beyond that. For instance, I think there would be a good chance my own kid was not cut either but I would not be into the policy and the philsophy and the side effects of it. It creates a certain kind of learning environment and so even if my kid was confident about not being cut and even if that were a realistic assessment, she, nor I, would be that into the learning atmosphere of a program with that philosophy. A certain "climate" can exist in such a program with these sorts of practices. That wasn't for her. </p>
<p>I won't bother to get into all the reasons I would be against the practices at UArizona or DePaul or others now. I think I have written about it elsewhere and that wasn't what I thought we were discussing but more about getting the information from UArizona directly versus expecting them to answer questions posed on CC. That's all I was speaking to before.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Honestly, I think the only reason that some people are "all right" with cut programs is that those people cannot fathom that they, themselves, will ever be the ones cut!
[/quote]
I am auditioning for DePaul first off because they are one of the only schools that has the type of reputation for training I want and second because I have read that they give good financial aid and scholarships. I HATE the idea of the cut and I know I could be the one cut. They are my bottom choice because of it. However, I will HAVE to be "all right" with it if they are the only BFA that accepts me or the only one that makes it affordable to go. My next college option would be the BA at Bama.</p>
<p>There is a school of thought that thinks the cut system allows a school to accept students that maybe haven't had the caliber of training of say people who went to performing arts schools in Florida, but the auditors think are interesting and have promise. My best friend from DePaul went to a tiny high school in the middle of nowhere and I actually think she may only have been in three shows before college. She was accepted off the waitlist and thrived at DePaul and she survived the cut. If the cut makes it possible for students like that to receive high quality BFA training, than I can get behind it. But I'm not really sure how much I buy into that explanation.</p>
<p>Also, I was afraid that the cut would make people competitive and crazy and surprisingly, it really didn't feel like that. It's always there but it fades into the background pretty early in the year. I will say this though, no college student attends as much class as a student at the Theater School. The only way to get 18 year olds to go to a history of dramatic literature class at 8:00 three days a week (that they didn't even get to schedule themselves) is to threaten them. I would actually say the cut improves the environment, it's just the whole derailing people's life plans after it's made thing that sucks.</p>
<p>Anyway, i actually came on here because several posts ago Notmamarose asked me about the BA program @ Michigan. First of all, it actually is a BTA program which stands for bachelor of theater arts. I think that's because it's not housed in the College of LS&A which I think gets them out of the foreign language and quantitative reasoning requirements but don't quote me on that. The BTA program is very flexible, in fact, it's too flexible for me too give you very helpful information about it. The department website has taken down the requirements because "this area is undergoing renovations" and there is actually a Facebook group for the BTA's called "Okay, now exactly how do I graduate?" (not that it's problematic, just a bit confusing because it's so personalized). There can definitely be a lot of acting courses in the BTA and many BTAs are wonderful actors. The BTA is also reasonably easy to combine with another major. In fact, we're currently casting a play I wrote and the actress I really want for the lead is a BTA/electrical engineering major. You can also concentrate in Drama in the Residential College which is a liberal arts degree that is mostly performance and criticism with a directing option. I think we even have a minor in German Theatre in case she, you know, speaks German. There are so many opportunities to study theatre at UofM! The department is so welcoming too, most of the classes that BFAs traditionally take are open to everyone and teachers are surprisingly eager to grant overrides to driven students. I'm glad your daughter liked Michigan so much! If she has Michigan quality grades and is open to BAs, I hope she's looking at Northwestern too. Their department is fine, but it's the student run theatre there that's light years ahead of everyone else (although ours is good too, but we have quality and not quantity and they have both, plus diversity. One of my least favorite things about DePaul was the complete lack of student run shows, although there are legitimate reasons for that).</p>
<p>Thanks, wandergirl. My kid actually is auditioning for the BFA in musical theater at Michigan. I knew that Michigan also offers a BFA in acting/theater, but had no idea of this BTA degree. It sounds very cool! My D did not apply for Northwestern because she is pretty intent on getting a BFA.</p>
<p>Well, some safeties came through; son got a thumbs up from Marietta College and U. of Montana (well, a 92% acceptance rate). Both have non-audition BFAs. Actually, as is the case at a number of programs, at Montana students are evaluated at the end of the sophomore year to determine whether they are to be advanced. Missoula is an athlete's dream - incredible place if you are into the remote outdoors.
Marietta is a tuition exchange school. It looks to be an interesting option (lots of productions) for a student who needs acting experience and wants to try their hand at directing, perhaps in preparation for a MFA program. It's also a very nice campus in a cute town on the banks of the Ohio River.
S has first audition this weekend; Syracuse, in D.C. Probably like some of you; an audition (or a few of them) each week between now and mid-Feb.
By the way, what do you as parents do during an audition scheduled between, say, 1-5? If in a theatre, do they usually let you sit there?</p>
<p>frenchlaw: I suspect that we will confront your point in March. 'This LAC (or lower tier BFA proram from which many go on to get their BFA - looks to be a common career path, from what I read in the 'alumni' sections of BFA program websites) or a BFA program that might deplete all or a substantial portion of the college savings fund because it is not a tuition exchange school?</p>
<p>So far our experience has been that there is either some type of info session or tour for parents while the kids audition AND/OR there is some place that parents are encouraged to "hang out"--say, in a cafeteria. For acting auditions, the time-frame for the wait is much shorter than for the MTs--say 3-4 hours, or even less. No, you don't get to watch the kids perform, if that's what you mean. . .Bring a book, or be prepared to chat with the other parents (always a fun time). </p>
<p>Good luck in DC! And, congrats on the acceptances!</p>
<p>We're at CCM this weekend. . .</p>
<p>CONGRATULATIONS to briansteffy's son on his acceptances. That's great. And best of luck for this weekend. Tell him to break a leg ....</p>
<p>brian, bravo on the acceptances! What great timing just before his first audition. I've never heard of a school which allows parents to watch the auditions, although some schools do, indeed, allow other students to observe (which I disagree with). Chatting with other parents is usually the norm. I remember being more nervous than my D at her first, and only, audition and I went out for a walk to deliver her application, and picked up coffees for a few of the moms I'd met that day. We were all fortunate because one of the moms there was very chatty and the type that enjoyed sharing every detail of her life with all of us. :) At the end of a few hours of waiting, we knew more than you can imagine about her, but I have to admit, she did keep us enthralled enough that it passed the time!</p>
<p>Break a leg to all of you and your kids who are heading off to auditions this weekend!</p>
<p>See, alwaysamom, it is not only our kids who can be the entertainers! :) Seriously, being able to chat with other theater moms and dads sounds like fun. I am pretty chatty myself :), and hope I run into some "kindred spirits" (as Anne Shirley, the heroine of my favorite childhood novel, Anne of Green Gables, put it) as my D hits the audition circuit.</p>