<p>i meant "gestalt" (I think)!</p>
<p>Jasmom,</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t know what you are talking about? Your post is in quotes, are you quoting someone else? Not sure where there was a discussion of “moderator actions”.</p>
<p>Babar;</p>
<p>That was a good post. Do you attend or work at NCSA or have a child there? I am sure you are correct that there is an academic review for their program. You say they are looking for “smart” actors and I am sure you’re correct. Would you explain what you mean by smart though? Anyone talented enough to get into their exceptional program has to be pretty “smart” at acting in my book. Make choices, connect and understand the materials.. that takes an impressive maturity and intellect at such a young age. That’s different to me than having 55 AP classes. Please elaborate</p>
<p>Wally wrote:
[quote]
What CC does is their business but my advice is that post size limitations would improve the forum
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Jasmom wrote:
[quote]
"Out of respect for both moderators and policies, discussion of moderator actions and forum policies is welcomed via e-mail; these issues are off-topic for the forums."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wally wrote:
[quote]
Jasmom,</p>
<p>Sorry, I dont know what you are talking about? Your post is in quotes, are you quoting someone else? Not sure where there was a discussion of moderator actions
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wally, Jasmom was quoting CC's Terms of Service, which I know you have reviewed by now. I imagine she was quoting it because she observed your post which I just quoted where you discussed CC's policies. She isnt' saying you discussed moderator actions but the OTHER part of the rule about discussing forum policies. Earlier in the thread, you were also not adhering to other rules in the Terms of Service and I pointed THOSE out to you. It may help to look them over again. I don't wish to discuss this ON the forum but simply ask you to follow the rules. </p>
<p>Back on topic (which is where I hope we'll stay)... I agree with Babar's post. Adcoms to BFA programs look at the "gestalt", the whole applicant. They are admitting people, not just acting skills (or in the case of MT, singing, acting and dance skills). Yes, you MUST have the talent and skills revealed in the audition room. However, they want kids who are good students as well. Being a good student isn't only about being smart. One gets good grades also due to work ethic, time management, etc. As well, many programs value a "thinking actor" who has intelligence and worldly knowledge to draw upon in their acting. </p>
<p>As babar also mentions, there are things beyond SATs and GPAs, rank, and HS courseload, that are revealed in documents such as essays, recommendations, activity resumes, and such. An effective application is going to SHOW the adcoms WHO the student is as a person. The applicant must reveal their character traits. These aren't revealed through GPAs and SATs (though those should also be strong or in range for a particular school's stat range for admitted students). They care about the personality traits. That's one reason for essays and recommendations. They want to know what the person is like. Some of that is in the audiiton, but some is not. </p>
<p>When an adcom views the entire package, they are looking at the student's academics, audition talent/skills, background, theater experience/training, extracurricular pursuits, leadership and significant contributions made to their activities, personality traits, writing skills in the essay, what others have to say about the student, how the student might fit at the college, their demonstrated interest in the college, their potential, their work ethic, their character. They need to review all the pieces to determine all of these factors. </p>
<p>Also, before you knock AP classes, more selective colleges (and in fact, many good BFA programs are located in selective colleges), care about the rigor of the applicant's HS curriculum. Did the student challenge him/herself? How prepared are they to take on that college's coursework? Do they have a history of taking on challenge? Grades matter as they reveal the type of student the person is. College, even BFA programs, are educational institutions. They are admitting STUDENTS who they feel can handle their program, their college, and flourish. It is not enough to have some acting talent. Further, these BFA programs are pretty intense and someone who is not a serious student, no matter how talented, often won't last because she can't keep up with all the work. </p>
<p>As well, many programs, including the one my child attends, Tisch, believe in the intellectual foundation that an actor needs for the profession. Even at other schools besides Tisch, there is some coursework outside of training.....theater studies and liberal arts. There is a reason for that. That part of their education makes them a better actor. Colleges want the students they admit to be able to handle all the facets of the BFA program. </p>
<p>There is a reason why some talented students whom I know cannot be admitted to certain BFA programs....they do not have the academics to be admitted, though could be admitted at much less selective colleges which contain a selective BFA program. As I have mentioned before, one mistake I see some applicants make is to just find good BFA programs to apply to as if that was all there was to selecting their college list. Au Contraire....only schools where the student is realistically in range to be accepted academically ought to be on the list. I have seen kids with SATs of 1000 (CR/M), 2.8 GPA, no Honors or AP classes, ranked in the lower 50% of their HS class have schools like NYU/Tisch, BU, UMich, CMU, etc. on their lists. These are not appropriate lists for them. Some think...."but I am really good at acting and singing, so that will get me in" and nope, it won't if the school is OUT of your range academically speaking. However, there are some BFAs located in schools that are not that selective and so it is a matter of having the right schools on the list. </p>
<p>But even so, any of the schools are admitting people, not just actors. How they think you can handle it, what your personality is like, what you are like to work with, etc. all come into play. That doesn't all come across in an audition but the essays and recs and academic record paint a picture (if the application is done well, that is). That's my advice based on my knowledge of and experience with this process. </p>
<p>These things DO count. Not INSTEAD of the audition, but they do count to GET admitted. As babar put it well, they look at the gestalt. Feel free to doubt and/or disregard any of this information.</p>
<p>Although I do know a kid - my friend's son - who did poorly academically (C's), took unchallenging classes and who focused exclusively on theatre, and he's now at U of M MT. Also got accepted to Cincinnati and CMU. Not to say that academics aren't important - they are - but really & I hate to say it, but the most important thing is that audition and the more intangible 'look' that you have and how you fit into the program. This kid is very tall and physically imposing and has an excellent baritone. He's also very focused and driven. It may be that there were few young men of his type auditioning and this pushed him into a more selective category. Of course, you can't change your height, but you can think of your 'look,' at least to some extent. Try to bring out what makes you special and distinctive. Everyone is unique. This is your chance to really be who you are. Don't fret if you're not blond and gorgeous. In fact, chubby, plain and short might actually give you an edge, depending on your talent.</p>
<p>ALso, please please can anyone help on the schools? What exactly are 'ivies'? The top five? The top 10? Please help advise,
Raphael</p>
<p>Raphael, I think you are closer to my sense of why kids are accepted than you think. I don't know what each school looks for - certainly baritones and other types of voices are needed for MT programs just as different physical types are needed for straight acting - but what I am saying, too, is that the perceived character of the student matters. Believing a student is focused and driven from recommendations, interviews, etc. could be a tipping reason to accept that student as your example of the UMich student demonstrates. I know a student at CMU who had very mediocre grades and scores but was very talented - and very focused. One auditor for a strong school which you, soozievt, have called one of those where academics counts for a lot, says that what they're looking for most of all are qualities like tenacity and imagination. I also know a student with reasonably good grades but not-so-good scores, no summer experiences, and from a public high school background who was accepted at one of the schools that is supposed to have a very high academic bar. This kid was someone who was catalytic everywhere he went and that must have come through in recommendations and/or his interview - I think that the school wanted someone with his charisma and his raw talent, though really I don't presume to have inside knowlege - I am speculating. I guess what I think is that you really don't need a perfect package - Lopsided is OK. If your scores aren't great, look at the strengths you offer and know that unless there is a score cut-off (I think UMich has one), you actually do stand a chance. You would have to show strength through your grades if your scores are lousy, or through scores if your grades are lousy, or have a reputation of leadership or something that would catch the eye of whoever is reading through the package of the application materials - plus audition well. I think that the long conversation elsewhere on the forum about MIT wanting kids who are not totally type A drones applies in this arena as well. BFA programs are selecting a small number of applicants who will form a community. Personality and character matter, and these attributes cannot really be faked, because truth will be told by the people writing recommendations. I know that there are many parts to the whole - but I don't think (in fact I know from experience) that the whole needs to be perfect.</p>
<p>And Wally, I forgot to respond to you - I attended a presentation by auditors for NCSA where they said they wanted "smart actors" and spoke of the intensity of the program. I was very impressed, but even more impressed when they selected a student who was indeed smart but not in the great scores/great grades mode - I think BFA auditors are not so left-brain minded. They define smart in a broader context looking at all the intelligences, not just the type that takes test well and learns rote information well....</p>
<p>Babar wrote:
[quote]
I know that there are many parts to the whole - but I don't think (in fact I know from experience) that the whole needs to be perfect.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I completely agree with you. There are many aspects to an admissions decision. Just like how the decision isn't based 100% on the audition, it also does not mean someone must have it "all" in every single piece of the package. Great essays and recs might overcome some C's. Same with leadership and other achievements. Great grades with less than stellar scores can also work out. I only disagree somewhat on the great scores with a combo of poor grades because THAT combo can spell "underachiever". Anyway, back on point...each piece of the package is examined. A strength in one area may overcome a weakness in another. With MT Programs, not all who are accepted are triple threats, for example, and some are beginnning dancers with potential. They have enough strong other aspects to overcome a weaker area. Great grades may not overcome poor recs and essays. But there is a balance of all the pieces and also the program's NEEDS. You can have it "all" but just not fit a slot that they need to form the grouping. Also, some examples, such as the boy at UMich, bring up that the admit rate for BOYS into BFA in MT Programs is much higher than it is for girls. Speculating now, but who knows if a girl with that boy's package would have made it into UMich because they have so many more viable girl candidates than slots, compared to the boys. Great time to be a boy, lol. Also, the admit rate at many Acting programs is not as low as for the BFA in MT Programs. </p>
<p>I agree with Babar that personal traits and achievements matter and can't be faked, and also are not revealed as much in test scores and auditions. But they do matter. I think if you were to talk to any adcom for a BFA program, they would list SEVERAL criteria they consider for admission and that list would go beyond acting skills/talent (which you must ALSO have of course and THAT area cannot be compensated for by another area). Unlike Wally, I do not believe an adcom or a rep such as All4FSU who posted here, would be misleading or "biased", by expressing which criteria they are looking for in admitting students to their programs. I also do not believe they would waste time requesting extra essays, theater resumes, artistic recommendations for nothing. While many factors go into the final decision to admit, like Babar says, it doesn't mean one must be "perfect" in every single area. It doesn't hurt, LOL, but it is not necessary!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Unlike Wally, I do not believe an adcom or a rep such as All4FSU who posted here, would be misleading or "biased", by expressing which criteria they are looking for in admitting students to their programs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thats not what I said. I never said misleading; actually I think most of these programs do a bang up jog of the inverse. I also did not say they were biased by expressing which criteria they are looking for. A classic example is given above. Those three schools are all going to claim they want the best and the brightest talent wise and academically. What else are they going to say??? Yet here is a student with acceptances into top programs with a pathetic academic record. To not recognize their preconceptions and predilections in the process is beyond comprehension to me. </p>
<p>Rapheal, </p>
<p>There are good lists elsewhere on the forum but I will throw out a few names. This being just for straight acting not MT</p>
<p>Ivies
Julliard
Carnagie-Mellon
Rutgers
NCSA</p>
<p>Other top top programs yet I have not heard them referred to as Ivies</p>
<p>SMU
Cal-Arts
University of Minnesota/Guthrie ATP
NYU
SUNY Purchase
Boston University</p>
<p>Others that are definitely on the radar when thinking about top theatre schools of differing types would be:</p>
<p>USC
DePaul
U. Evansville
Emerson
Ithaca
Otterbein<br>
Florida State
U. Cincinnati Drama
Penn State
Syracuse
Elon
Webster
Cornell
Middlebury
Sarah Lawrence
Brandeis
Muhlenberg
Fordham
Cal State Fullerton
UNC Chapel Hill
Indiana University
U. Arizona</p>
<p>A few thoughts:
1. I agree that good grades/low scores trumps good scores/low grades - and should - but each case is different and mitigating factors might lead an admissions committee in an unusual case to conclude that significant other achievement is evidenced - but in general, very low grades across the all subject areas is not viewed as a favorable predictor for college success.
2. On the boys vs. girls issue, certainly in most public high schools, boys have an advantage because fewer usually try out for the musicals and plays. That advantage continues as both sexes audition for colleges, but not to the same extent. Dr. John posted the numbers and percentages of applicants and acceptances to his school this past spring and, yes, boys had a higher percentage of acceptances than girls. However, boys who do audition are usually very strong and still only a small percent are offered spots in any given program. When we went around to the auditions, in several cases I saw more boys than girls. Of course, all sessions are different. Nevertheless, for BFA programs, it is still VERY competitive for everyone. And MT even more so.
3. Wally, your list would not be my list. Programs offer different types of training. Stand alone conservatories and conservatory programs in university settings are very different environments. Just as one hopes that schools will assess students wholistically and individually, the schools, too, are assessed by students who make choices based on a variety of factors. My child was accepted into two of your "ivies" but opted to attend a school which you list as "on the radar." Those schools you list as ivies are fabulous programs - for the right students. They are not "better" for everyone.</p>
<p>Wally, I only know that you discounted what I have written about schools looking beyond the audition for admissions to BFA programs, suggesting my reasons for saying so were to garner "services." You also responded when I mentioned that a rep from FSU concurred:
[quote]
I believe that FSU and their representatives are of the highest credibility but they are also biased.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think adcoms are biased or say that they are looking at other criteria and ask for all these other pieces from candidates if they didn't mean it. </p>
<p>Do kids get in who have low stats? Sure, but you can be an armchair analyst as to who got in and why but ONLY the adcoms saw ALL of their materials. It is not like they take the highest SATs off the pile and admit them. They admit people. We are not privy to everything in these students' application packages to know what tip factors mattered. If you read CC's other forums, you will see kids/parents asking all the time...."how did THAT kid get in over me....that kid had lower SATs and class rank....". That is because the adcoms weigh the entire package...many criteria. It is not simplistic. There is also the NEEDS of the class. Maybe they need a baritone. Maybe they need a character actor. Not only are we not privy to these kids' applications/auditions in order to judge why they may have gotten in or not, but even in the examples given, we have no "data" to go on....What one person calls "mediocre grades and scores" is what another person calls really good ones. If you are a reader of CC's other forums, you'll find a SLEW of students and parents who would call a 1380 SAT and a 3.6 GPA in non Honors/AP classes "fair" or "not so hot", and there are some people who would consider those VERY good. So, we can't draw conclusions from a student here or there who got in because not only don't we know their entire package or the needs to the program, but what one thinks of as very good, another might not. I don't know, Wally, how you can draw a conclusion that the student in the example had a "pathetic academic record".....has the poster even listed the student's stats? Hardly. She characterized them. We don't know the SATs, rank, GPA, coursload...just for starters. That's without even knowing what else in his package might have been weighed such as possible awards/achievements, etc. </p>
<p>The list of Acting programs posted includes some BAs as well, which is good. But I can't imagine a list of very good BA in Theater programs not including schools like Northwestern, UCLA, Brown, Yale, or Vassar. Some of the most talented students I know in theater who did not want a BFA (despite getting into top ones), sought out Brown, Yale, Northwestern and have chosen to attend. Those schools are very strong for theater. </p>
<p>Babar, I completely agree that each case is different and there are mitigating factors. There are some generalizations as to what is needed to be admitted but then after that, it is a case by case thing. I also agree that poor academics, no matter how talented in an audition, would be a red flag because they are admitting "students" to an educational institution and want to know that the student has the potential to succeed in an educational setting. I have seen some very talented kids with very low academics have trouble getting into many of the BFA programs. Medium level academics might work out, but low ones make the odds much longer. </p>
<p>Babar, on the boy/girl numbers....your son was going for BFA programs in Acting, yes? My comments before pertained to the status of BFA in MT admissions. My comments are based on what I know about BFA in MT admissions but also having attended 8 different well regarded BFA in MT auditions and there were many more girls than boys at all 8 which I attended. The numbers of female applicants are WAY higher than the males and the odds much worse for admission (for MT). I do agree that the boys in the applicant pool may already be "weeded" out with a stronger pool from the get go, but even so, the admit rate for girls is lower than for boys to BFA in MT schools. Also, as you say, the odds to get into BFA in MT programs are worse than to get into Acting programs, overalll.</p>
<p>Babar, I also agree as to your comments about "ranking" these programs. While reputation is a factor, the programs differ widely and FIT is extremely critical. Not everyone picks a school as to which has the most prestige. My own kids went after the schools that fit what they wanted the most in a college. It sounds like your son did the same. There are students who are tops in acting talent who don't even bother to apply to NCSA (JUST ONE EXAMPLE) because that sort of school doesn't match their criteria, even though the school is well regarded.</p>
<p>soozievt, whether the guys/girls issue is relevant here should pertain to straight theater because this forum is about that - many people who are interested in this subcategory of the BFA lurk around the MT forum because it's more active but this thread is about the acting BFA, and is really the only place that the straight drama people have - You and I agree about a lot but I want to clarify a couple of things. I am not specifying kids' scores or grades even though I know them because I think the way kids have to define themselves by these is awful. Trust me, I know kids who you would probably advise against applying to certain schools who did apply and were accepted. My main point is the one you make when you say that we are not privy to why decisions are made. I have come to respect admissions people and believe they are often idealists who want to create a diverse community of learners and implicit in that is that kids learn in different ways. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I would say to parents that many paths can lead to the same program. And as far as Wally's list goes, I wouldn't agree that the list is organized along the lines of prestige. Many of the schools on the list - both BA and BFA - are "prestigious" - I recognize that prestige has value and often there is a validating reason for the reputation - but I would not block out the list that way at all. I might say if a student wants X then try this school...But even objectively without thinking about fits, I still would have a different list.</p>
<p>Babar,
Yes, I agree this thread is about straight acting programs. That's why I realized when you mentioned you observed more boys than girls at some auditions you attended, that my earlier post was referencing my knowledge of the ratio of girls to boys auditioning for BFA in MT programs and their subsequent "odds" of admission and figured I better clarify that in my response.</p>
<p>I certainly don't want you to list the boy's stats from your example and I also agree that kids should not be defined by their stats. Schools weigh stats but FAR more than stats, which is why you will notice (and I am sure you agree here) on other CC forums, kids who do post stats and their admissions results in spring reveal that it is not like the highest "numbers" wins. Having stats in RANGE for a school is important. After that, so much else comes into play in the decision. Therefore, it is not like the highest stats applicants get the fat envelope. What can be fairly stated is that those who fall in the mid range or above the stats of admitted students to X College, have better odds of admissions than those who fall below the 25%tile of admitted stats. Kids who fall below STILL get in, but just at a lower rate of admission. That is why I detest the "what are my chances threads" because the basic information provided is not enough to go on. When I evaluate a student's chances of admission to colleges, I gather a great deal of information in order to do that...not just SATs and GPA. What I was trying to say before is that we don't even know the stats of the boy you mention and what one person thinks is pretty low, another might not and that we further don't know all the other "pieces" the adcoms got to view....essays, recs, achievements, extracurriculars and their contributions and roles in those, etc. Therefore, we can't draw any conclusions. Some kids who have lower "stats" get in over kids with higher ones ALL the time. So, that's why your point (and mine) about wholistic review is important for some on here to understand. Your example should not make others conclude that "so and so got in with a pathetic academic record and so could I" as that is not the case. On top of that, we have no idea what "pathetic" is. A 3.3 GPA avg. with no Honors or AP, a rank in the top 30% of the class, and a SAT of 1180 might still get a kid into some of these schools where their stats fall below the avg. of admitted students. But I also know applicants with SATs of 1000, GPAs of 2.7, rank in the lower half of the class, no Honors/AP classes and so on who would have very very slim odds to get into a school like NYU, BU, UMiami, UMichigan, etc. Not everyone understands this. </p>
<p>I also agree with you that adcoms want to create diverse student bodies and so it is not like the decisions are made by who has the highest stats in the pile. One must be academically qualified to get in, but since many meet that criteria, then the adcoms can pick and choose who they want. I mentioned at one point how my kid was chosen as a "Scholar" at her BFA school and I doubt her SAT and GPA and rank were higher than ALL the kids who were not chosen to be a Scholar. They were very good but simply not the highest ones on the pile. That is because the criteria for selection included many things. It is easy for folks to sit back and read this one or that one's "credentials" but they are not the adcoms who see the entire package and also get to view who else is in the applicant pool and who they wish to fill their available slots. To draw a conclusion that someone with "pathetic academics" got in, so none of this stuff matters, would be a misguided conclusion (I know you agree so I am not trying to convince YOU). I also have no clue how anyone can conclude from any example written about here that the student had pathetic academics. I had nothing to go on to even comment about it. Also what one person thinks is pathetic, another thinks is great. Stats and such are looked at in context of someone's background and high school, and then in context of the level of students admitted to a particular college. </p>
<p>I totally agree with you that Wally's list is not ordered by prestige. It is HIS list, and his opinions and that is about that. As I said, there was no mention of some well regarded theater schools such as UCLA, Brown, Yale, Northwestern and also his grouping is not any existing "ranking". Besides all that, I am with you in that I am not into even the published rankings such as USNews ones. I agree that picking a college is about fit. When my oldest child was narrowing down her list of acceptances in April of senior year and deciding where to go back for another round of visits, she knocked off one of the Ivy League schools she had been admitted to (let alone as a Scholar) for two selective colleges that she liked better. She had her criteria and was not after prestige but after the school that fit what she wanted in a college.</p>
<p>By the way, I would not suggest Penn State as being "on the radar" for theater/acting performance. It is definitely on the radar for its BFA in MT, however. I've never seen it on a list of recommended schools for acting. I SURELY have seen schools like Northwestern, Brown, Yale and UCLA which didn't even make Wally's list. </p>
<p>There are many more BA schools with notable theater programs and I am not about to list them all but it is surprising to not see ones like Boston College, Conn College, Kenyon, Catholic U and Skidmore, to name a few.</p>
<p>my daughter is a senior in high school and will be applying to BFA theatre arts (drama) programs this year. she is very bright, has quite a strong personality and likes to play strong characters. the problem is finding a good contemporary monologue for audition to the university programs. do any of you, especially the professors or current theatre arts college students, know of any STRONG, TEEN, FEMALE, contemporary monologues from published plays?</p>
<p>Miahana - Marymount Manhattan College in NYC has a list of suggested monologues on their website. You can access it by clicking on the following link: <a href="http://marymount.mmm.edu/study/programs/dfpa/theatrearts/monologues.html%5B/url%5D">http://marymount.mmm.edu/study/programs/dfpa/theatrearts/monologues.html</a>. </p>
<p>I also know that BU has suggested Shakespeare monologues on their website but I don't have the link. </p>
<p>Other colleges might have monologue lists on their websites that I'm not aware of. I do know that many colleges post lists of monologues NOT to do because they have been overdone. I would check out the specific college websites for each school your D is applying to to see what they say about monologues.</p>
<p>On another note, there has been a lot of discussion recently about the disproportionate amount of female MT applicants as opposed to male applicants. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether the reverse might be true for straight acting? I was just wondering...</p>
<p>miahana, I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but I felt that selecting monologues was a major hurdle. It may be that students in PA high schools or those who attend premier summer programs get help with this, but most kids are on their own. My kid's acting teacher suggested he think of actors who were physically his type and look through plays they were in. So he thought of a couple of young actors and googled them and found a play he liked and ordered it online and went with it. Then he still had to find a contrasting one. Shakespeare was comparatively easy - there are finite roles for young people there. We live near NYC so he actually searched theatre bookstores - and he went to <a href="http://www.dramatists.com%5B/url%5D">http://www.dramatists.com</a> and browsed there - But do look at all the lists that exist even here at CC - there are monologues that worked listed - search monologues and see what you get. Good luck! </p>
<p>seashells29 - In straight acting the ratio still favors boys according to the statistics that doctorjohn gave. In addition, there are more parts written for males since more males have written plays, and many programs accept more males than females for this reason. The program where my son is did not - there are slightly more females - but anyway, my point is that there were still a lot of guys at the auditions and to think that being male is a free pass to any program is delusional. Having said that, I do think there's a program for everyone who wants one, so cast a wide net and go for it, whatever your sex!</p>
<p>Thanks so much for that list. We're trying to compile possible places, and so far have come up with 9! Is that too much? </p>
<p>Many ivies are on this list, but not exclusively. My son wanted safety too, of course. I've heard Pace's program is growing. Is this true? </p>
<p>Final question: We're in the NYC area, and almost all of the auditions take place during one weekend (February 2-4). Does anyone have advice as far a how many to schedule for one day? We were thinking of two max. Is this reasonable?<br>
Thanks again for the advice
Raphael</p>
<p>Babar,
Which schools would you put on your list? Which school did your child end up going to and why is it the right fit for him/her? I'd love to hear your opinion on this,
Raphael</p>
<p>Last year around the NY Unified, we scheduled a total of 8 auditions over 4 days - 2 per day. Only 2 were technically in the Unified group, but other schools coordinate and hold auditions around town before, during, and after the Unified weekend. My son was not happy about missing school, primarily because he didn't want to miss rehearsals for his school play and I had to miss work, which was stressful, too, but I wanted to be around for support. We were in the city Thursday through Sunday, and we actually got a hotel room since the auditions were pretty early and we wanted to be relaxed and rested. At night we got discount tickets to plays to take his mind off the auditions...His list would not be appropriate for everyone and does not mean that these are the best schools. He auditioned at SUNY Purchase and Fordham on campus, both earlier than the Unified weekend. During the Unified time frame, he auditioned for CMU, Rutgers, NCSA, USC, UArts, Emerson, and NYU. Only Emerson and UArts were "Unifieds" in the AMA building; the others were scattered in studios around town. He had an audition scheduled for DePaul but cancelled it because he decided he didn't want to deal with the cut policy there. He also applied to three nonaudition BA colleges with theatre majors. He really liked Drew in NJ - the others I liked!!! So a total of 9 auditions with a total of 12 schools applied to. I feel like I shouldn't be revealing where my kid is because it's a small world and he's entitled to some privacy. Even though I would love to know where Fishbowl goes to school because I admire her, I respect her anonymity. But PM me and we can talk about it. I have heard good things about Pace. I have no idea why we didn't pursue that school - I loved Sarah Lawrence but my kid didn't...I was surprised by the end results - There was one case where he felt his audition was amazing but he didn't get in and one place where he felt his audition was horrible and he did...I think that the audition counts but I can say from experience that it doesn't count for everything...</p>
<p>Thanks for the advice Babar.
Another question I have: Do you all think applying for EARLY ACTION to your #1 choice is a good idea or a bad idea? FYI: EARLY ACTION is non-binding but you do have to audition early and you also find out early if you are accepted(mid December). EARLY DECISION is binding and my D is not interested in that. We probably still want her to go thru some other auditions at the February unifieds so that we can evaluate financial aid packages unless she gets in to her #1 and gets a good financial aid package. She might be eligible for some honors scholarships, we'll see... Does anyone out there have any experience with early action? On the upside, it would take a lot of stress out of the whole process. On the other hand, she will have less time to prepare for the early audition. Not sure what to think. Thanks</p>