Well said @monkey13
My kid was the one who got in nowhere until she came off her wait list…our mistake was not understanding the full competitiveness of this process. She did not apply to any “lesser” known programs and she paid the price. We figured one of the 8 top notch programs she applied to would accept her…WRONG. We were floored. Do love your safety but also apply to some good smaller programs. I think that is where we went wrong.
We know a boy who was wait-listed at CCM and did not hear of his final acceptance (with zero talent scholarship) until mid-May. He did not receive other offers, even from schools he had considered lower-tier or safe. I also heard from a current student at another major school that the faculty are generally disappointed with the boys they chose last year. Personally, I don’t trust the process and think it is very flawed. However, the numbers being what they are, I don’t know how it could be done differently without absorbing ridiculous amounts of faculty time. On the other hand, I tend to think MT-ers and their parents are “glass-half-full” types–if they don’t get into the schools they love, they quickly learn to love the schools that accept them. It’s not necessarily that people land in the schools where they are meant to be, but that they see the positives in the schools that accept them, quickly get over the schools that didn’t, and get down to enjoying the great training that most of these schools are able to offer.
Ouch, @claire74…I’m not sure you should be perpetuating rumors you heard from students (e.g., “I also heard from a current student at another major school that the faculty are generally disappointed with the boys they chose last year.”) If I had a son who started at CCM last year I would be pretty angry right now. This is a rumor. CCM has a fabulous reputation, and it’s a great school. The kids who go there are uber-talented. Please don’t badmouth the students who go there, especially with no personal knowledge. Sorry to call you out like this, but it’s just not right. I highly doubt professors would be confiding things like that in faculty from other schools, let alone students from other schools.
Is the process perfect? No. But “very flawed”? I don’t think so. It works for the vast majority of kids, just like all college acceptances in all majors.
And the bottom line is this, as much as you don’t want to hear it: Yes, there are kids who should probably not major in MT. The hard part is recognizing if your child is one of these kids. Most kids learn to find their path…if MT is something they are passionate about, but they’re not good enough to get into the program they want, they work it out. That’s what life is all about. There is no one definition of success, not one path to get there.
Perhaps we don’t repeat it, but the kids in these programs definitely talk about the quality of the incoming class and you’d be surprised what they pick up when they’re helping out with auditions.
I hate to say it- but I have a sneaking feeling (from D’s older friends who have graduated) that if you think the college process is unfair, or hard to navigate etc - Wait till you see the “real” world. At least you can schedule a time to get in the room with the colleges. If you can’t stand the heat…
@monkey13 I think @claire74 was referring to another “major” school, not CCM.
And re: post #17…don’t you think that resumes and other factors could be tie-breakers? I’m sure more people WOW the auditors then they may have openings in their program. That’s what’s so crazy about this process. The whole CCM deferral thing is an example. If all these kids are still being considered weeks or even months after their few moments with the faculty. How in the world does the auditor remember enough to compare that performance to one that is fresh in their minds?
Now, being about halfway (3/4 ? please…) through this process there are a few things I think could use a major overhaul, in the interest of truly getting a full picture of each candidate and just of reform to this process in general.
I think the time allocated to each student is ridiculously short in some instances. Given the amount of money, prep time, essay writing time, etc. etc., surely each candidate deserves 15 minutes consisting of two contrasting 32-bar cuts, two contrasting “up to 90 secs” monologues, and - most crucial, five minutes of conversation. Some schools are managing it just fine with exactly that - and I thank them for it. Boy does it make a difference. Maybe not in the final result, but in the applicant’s sense that they had a real chance to actually fulfill the “we want to see who you are” thing everyone spouts. My daughter came out of a few like that feeling she had had a decent opportunity to show what she could do. It also allowed her to get more of a flavor for what the schools were like, and in each case, she wound up with a highly favorable impression. It just seems humane to spend 15 minutes and not less than 5, with each candidate. To say that “this is how it is in the real world” is valid, but at the same time, these are not hardened professionals yet - they’re still teenagers with aspirations - cut them a break.
Even if, indeed, schools can tell much/all about the applicant in under 30 seconds, it gives some dignity to the teenager auditioning. Two 16-bar cuts, a one-minute monologue and a cursory one-minute hello is dispiriting when real hopes, dreams and consideration are involved. Seems to me to be easy enough to accomplish this by limiting the number of audition slots. Applicants don’t get their submissions/application in on time, they lose out. It’s a motivator to get things done.
The other big thing is standardizing the pre-screens, making them into a Common App-like standard so that you are not endlessly having to re-film, meeting different length and era and no verse vs. place an emphasis on language, etc. etc. etc. If only the institutions could come to an agreement - again I would argue for 32/32 and 2 monologues - the assessor has the freedom to zap through and/or stop if they’ve seen enough. But standardize it to make the process so much easier – and – big one – so much less expensive. Especially with voice, dance, sometimes ballet and drama components, most involving different locations, teachers, studios, etc. etc. Surely there is a huge under-representation of talent of kids from lower income families who are not attending arts high schools, because the amount of money it takes to apply to the requisite number of schools one must to hope for a couple of admissions at the end of it all is incredibly high.
I personally also believe in notifying all the candidates at once, not in “holds” or weekly bursts or here and there phone calls, etc. - it just builds anxiety levels - especially for those on CC!! Simply to know that something like “On approximately March 15 we will tell all applicants if they’re accepted, rejected or WL” would just calm things down to a more normal level of anxiety!
I’m curious to hear other opinions on all of this points.
@toowonderful I was writing my post while yours was posting, so my comments about “the real world” weren’t at all in response to yours…
Totally agree!! You summed up my feelings 100%!
Yes @rampions !! I agree! Definitely a unified process of audition requirements! The hoops you have to jump through at some schools is ridiculous. My D is only auditioning for summer programs & the requirements for that alone are a bit much, before anyone says it …yes I know it’s great practice for college auditions but at some point having to have a video is fine , but when you have to have live accompaniment and not recorded …I mean really folks…
@rampions - I get it and I agree with you about the need schools taking time to make kids at least feel “seen”. I was just acting as the “voice of cheer” (irony intended) and mentioning that the unfairness, waiting, and wondering etc is not going anyway theater kids anytime soon
@monkey13, thanks for the reminder not to help rumors along, but if you reread my post, you’ll see that I did not do so. I did NOT identify the school that is reportedly dissatisfied with last year’s intake (I heard about this through a personal conversation with a current student, not from the rumor-mill). Nor did I identify the “year” of the boy who was wait-listed. I was not trying to spread any rumors: I was simply responding to the comment that we should “trust the process” by pointing out that the process is not perfect, giving two anecdotal examples. (The boy, who I’ve known since he was ten years old and is very talented, by the way–was accepted at CCM while denied from non-brand name schools). This was not a comment on the boy’s talent nor on the school’s reputation, simply an observation that the process is not perfect. I’m a little befuddled by your final comment. You suggest I accept the “truth” I may not want to hear of recognizing that my kid is not an MT kid. Where the heck is that coming from? Just as you suggested my comment was not appropriate on a support site, may I not say the same about yours?
@rampions, I couldn’t agree more with your post #27. Just as schools have cooperated with each other to create Unifieds, it seems reasonable that they might take it a step further and standardize the pre-screening process, saving us all a lot of work and headaches.
I imagine it is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
The schools use their specific requirements and essays etc, to individualized the process, and ensure they get the right fit. Of course this adds a ton of extra work to the applicants, and can make it easier to screw up based on a technicality.
I think all we can hope for is the magical fit for our kids, and help them see that if they love what they do it will all work out. Since a very young age my daughters teachers and I have emphasized that she can do MT her whole life, and even if she never sets foot on a broadway stage, she can still do what she loves and have a successful career.
What matters is what you give and what you give out of your performance. The rest is gravy.
This is one tough process. It’s akin to applying to an Ivy League school. Many qualified applicants, few slots. At some point, it becomes a lottery even for the lesser known programs. Michigan is auditioning 400 kids this year and taking 24. You can’t tell me that at least half of those kids aren’t incredibly talented and wouldn’t be a great fit for Michigan. So how do they choose? I’m sure far more than 24 wowed them in the audition room. C’mon. These kids passed the prescreen. At CCM they said that they don’t get it right lots of times so don’t feel bad if you aren’t chosen. I liked their honesty. It is a flawed process but I’m not sure how to improve upon it. But @EmsDad you’ve got a lot of good ideas there. Now you just need to get someone to listen. And I agree @claire74 that you don’t just land where you are meant to be. I think you make the most of where you land. My humble opinion.
Also… On the positive side sometimes you can be more advanced in certain areas and the school knows that for your skill level, you would be better fit another program who specializes in the categories in which you excel, and a program that can better build your own special strengths in 4 years. Programs like to offer potential students their own personal training style, and what they specialize in as a brand. So if they know you wouldn’t fit into that style or brand, they are making a good choice by recognizing that. Whether you sang and acted amazingly or not. It’s too bad we can’t know all that from the final letters we get. Because then it feels like you weren’t enough. But YOU ARE ENOUGH. It’s hard. But the passion and love for the craft, and the endless possibilities of the future, drive us all forward into the madness. My teacher said this amazing thing today. “Let be what is.” Are the anxious, overwhelming feelings there? Good. acknowledge them, feel them, recognize them, and then take a deep breath and “let be what is.”
@theaterwork 10-12 programs isn’t considered a lot any more. What you need to do is drum it into your child’s head that there is no such thing as a safety-audition school. The list of schools should be over 15 long and include a non-audition safety school. My son had 10-12 rejections last year, but because he applied to enough programs, he had excellent choices at the end of the process.
Well, we are in trouble as we only did 8 audition schools and one non audition. Not sure I buy that any of these schools except the smallest are focused on that you may be a better match for another school. I think they listen and watch you audition and they make a guess on how you will do in their program and click a box. Imagine four or five different sets of faculty watching 800 auditions, 200 each, my lord depending on who your kiddo follows or when in the audition season your child auditions may totally skew your odds, as well as did they just hear your song or mono five times:)
One thing that is different from the real world auditioning is that these parents have paid their 75+ dollars for the opportunity for the kid to be seen. D’s teacher told her to enjoy the time she has to perform for schools because she paid for it and therefore has the RIGHT to her time. It does therefore seem that some applicants have been shortchanged if they are not permitted their two and two plus a short interview.
The schools are not doing charity work by providing a time to audition. They are taking payment for that. They are taking payment to teach if they accept a student. It seems to me that a fair transaction would dictate active attention by the auditioners. If they impose a prescreen then those who pass it should be allowed a fair hearing. Sure, these auditions are draining. But they are draining to the performer as well. If the students are behaving in a professional manner the auditioners should do no less.
A show, on the other hand, is providing a job at and has, therefore, the advantage. One can’t demand a casting director spend his/her time on you. Or spend anymore time than necessary to determine your suitability. It’s different.
My bad, @claire74, I misinterpreted your post. You were talking about CCM and I assumed the next sentence was also about CCM. I apologize."
But to drive the point home about misinterpreting posts, I was most definitely NOT talking about your child when I said: “And the bottom line is this, as much as you don’t want to hear it: Yes, there are kids who should probably not major in MT. The hard part is recognizing if your child is one of these kids. Most kids learn to find their path…if MT is something they are passionate about, but they’re not good enough to get into the program they want, they work it out. That’s what life is all about. There is no one definition of success, not one path to get there.” I wasn’t directing that comment at you.
I don’t know your child. For all I know, your child is the most talented kid around. You had been talking about how kids don’t get into the top programs/programs they wanted, and they learn to love the one they go to…and @theaterwork said, “Well I wonder what you tell the kid who auditions for 10 /12 programs and doesn’t get into ANY of them… they of course are going to question their choice of major. Do you tell that kid that they just didn’t " wow” the auditors … any of them…" I was responding in general - NOT to any particular person out there - that indeed, there are kids who shouldn’t be majoring in MT. That it’s difficult, as a parent, to know if your own kid is one of them. Again, this was most certainly not directed at you, or at anyone else…a general comment about all the kids out there, my own included.
I guess the lesson learned for both of us is that it is easy to misinterpret what someone says when they are typing these posts.