tramsmom, the problem with that analysis is that I believe your numbers are very off for NYU/Tisch. Getting in there for acting is easier than for MT. For MT, they have a high number who audition, higher than the number you said. I know there are 64 slots for MT, and I don’t know the recent number accepted to yield 64, but a few years back, that number wasn’t nearly as high as 150. I think it was about 80 accepted for 64 slots. I believe the acceptance rate for MT at Tisch was about 6% or so and unless something has changed, I think it still has a low admit rate for MT. It’s higher for Acting.
Besides that point, selectivity for a MT program is not merely based on acceptance rates. I venture to say that most BFA in MT programs, particularly if fairly well known, accept in the range of 2% to 9% (and frankly, those are tough odds all around and not a whole lot different if 3% or 8% in the scheme of things). But OTHER factors come into play when it comes to selectivity for MT programs. There is the depth of the applicant pool. Certain programs attract a more regional crowd. Certain programs a more national one. Yes, the applicant pools overlap. But I know a great many highly talented kids who attended the renown MT programs who never even applied to certain other MT programs. Those applicant pools were missing many of these top talented kids. I don’t want to offend people and so I won’t name programs. But while I think the admit rate is low at almost ALL MT programs, certain ones are considered more competitive than others, but it is not an exact science and there are loads of examples where a kid gets into what many consider to be a top program and rejected at what many consider to be an “easier” odds program.
It is more difficult for MT, that’s for sure. I really don’t know how many who auditioned at NYU checked the “MT ONLY” box. But I do think they are beginning to price themselves out of the market for many families, and that must drag down both their initial audition rate as well as their acceptance rate. I doubt they had more than 1000 MT ONLY applicants. And for 64 slots – and probably (and this is pure speculation) no less than 90 MT offers, it has an acceptance rate close to 10%, which I stick by my statement that it is not as tough an admit as many schools with small classes IF you have the right stats. I want to add that I do think NYU is a First Rate, Fabulous school, with amazing staff and facilities. Its just really expensive. Which is sort of breaking my heart to be honest.
Sorry @vocal1046. I was being a bit sarcastic so removed that line. I think people come here because they are stressed, and look for support. And hopefully they do get support along with a wealth of knowledge.
I don’t consider the applicants for MT at Tisch to be just the ones who checked off “MT only.” I would use the total number of applicants who were auditioning for MT (that means they sang and danced, not just acted), even if they were willing to consider another studio if offered that. They are still MT applicants.
Columbia College in Chicago. The college itself has an open enrollment policy.
We could debate this all day long. The one point I would make is that information from people whose kids went through the process more than three years ago is not terribly relevant anymore. The landscape has changed way too much from both a school and applicant point of view. The same will be true three years from now.
Another point to think of- and I do not have correct numbers to support - but if I am correct, NYU auditions a much larger number of kids than Otterbein, BW or TX state (which I mention only because trams mom used them in her post. ) And while the idea that if you have great stats it improves your chances at NYU, I don’t know that it makes it an “easier” admit for the average MT student- quite the opposite in fact - as it creates another hurdle for kids to jump over.
Not to beat this dying horse, but its all about ratios: number of applicants/number of offers = acceptance rate. At NYU The student with high gpa and sat and say “average” talent, will have an edge over the kid who has a little more talent perhaps, but doesnt meet the academic threshold. Take the same two to another school, and because the school doesnt give a fiddlers fart about grades, may take the more talented student, and reject the NYU admit. Thus, the “inconsistent” results we often see. Which is just a round about way of saying its also about the Fit.
@transmom, do you have a relative in the Tisch admissions pool who can tell you the numbers of applicants and how things work? Having gone through the same process 3 years ago and then actually paid for the damn school for 3 years, I actually have absolutely no idea how you can know what you know. And I say that with all due respect and a clear heart which is open to be schooled. I’ve admitted to being wrong in this forum more than once because I was. Meanwhile I have a kid who actually goes to NYU and is in MT at Tisch right now and that YAY me… I only have one year of school left to pay for there. I could not begin to even pretend to know what you know. How do you know? I’m impressed.
I have always endeavored to be very very careful to acknowledge what I don’t know about other programs. Numbers. Size. Who applies and who doesn’t. I encourage all who go forward and all whom are already in the mix to be careful about what they know and cannot know and the post accordingly. Makes for better discussion all the way around. Just sayin… Off my soap box.
I don’t “know.” I would venture that most of what is written here is not “fact” but opinion. Any answers in this particular thread, “what are the less difficult schools to get into” are bound to be nothing more than opinion. You have singled out mine because I lack personal knowledge? There are many, many, threads where people discuss odds based upon information given at schools, either at the audition, in the Newspaper, on their websites, etc. I made reasonable inferences and estimates based upon known fact. None of this is science. We speculate to alleviate stress. So what.
I think most take what is written here with a grain of salt. I know I do.
Yes but I also think coming back more than once to try to prove the same point invites a challenge. I am with you about grains of salt. Just write with grains of salt at the same time. That makes for easier digestion. I try hard to do that because I think it is fair. I know what I know and I also know what is impossible for me to know. Makes for better discussion to have a fair frame of reference.
Words that I used, such as “this is pure speculation” “If” “may” “Might” are quite well-seasoned!
Hang on a minute. The OP was looking for guidance about less-competitive schools, not a detailed analysis of fabricated Tisch admissions numbers. Columbia College was a helpful suggestion. The statistical wrangle, not so much. I realize many of you here have a long history with one another and that there are sore points. I wish, though, that posters would reflect a bit on whether they are actually asking/answering a question or just fighting for their own point of view, for dominance.
Shall I throw in a bomb about Moo just to relieve the tension? 
Looking for those words in posts 18, 21, and 26. Trying hard to stay with you and I’m fine with opinion. Just want to be sure that things are represented fairly.
@Transmom I have two D’s who have attended talent based programs at NYU, so I’ll share what I know. For both Tisch and Steinhardt a student is considered 50-50 for talent and academics. So basically both are considered equally important to gain admittance. In reality, your application is considered by both admissions for academics and by a separate department based committee for talent. The department that auditions candidates will get a list of applicants that are accepted academically after they have finished the audition process. That “academically accepted” list is cross checked against the list of students who are accepted talent wise. If a student is not accepted talent wise, they are out of the running. Nothing else will be considered. It won’t matter how high their test scores or grades. The only time there will be any back and forth between the two lists would be if a candidate was accepted talent wise, but not academically. Then the department may try to go to bat for a student. If they were close to meeting academic standards, perhaps a highly talented student may have a shot if the department appeals on their behalf. But in most cases those students will not be able to be accepted. But a student with great grades will not have any edge if they were not first accepted talent wise.
Thank you uskoolfish. I apologize for ruffling feathers and any insult anyone felt.
I agree that information changes over time in terms of college admissions! So, if one has a kid who went through the process more than three years ago, some things (not all) will have changed! Let’s keep in mind, however, that even if one’s kid went through the process three years ago, they may have a kid currently attending that college three years later and still know a thing or two about the school. Further, some of us continue to follow this information over the years even if our kids have graduated…hence, the number of posters who have stayed on this forum for years and pay it forward (I have been on this forum for over 12 1/2 years and I am not the only one who can say that!). In my case, I follow this information because I have been advising applicants in my role as a college counselor for 11 years and so I try to keep up!
By the way, I think uskoolfish gave a good explanation about NYU, that one needs to pass artistic muster separately without even considering their academic qualifications, which are another hurdle they must pass.
In any case, my main point is that size of program doesn’t dictate odds. One should examine admit rate. Even then, so many other factors come into play when considering how selective a program may be or not. And as many have said, it is not an exact science. In my opinion, schools that have acceptance rates in the single digits are very difficult odds. MOST BFA in MT programs have admit rates in the single digits. But I do think overall, there are some MT programs that are harder to get into than others (even if the admit rates are low at them all), in terms of depth of applicant pool, reputation, and other factors, but even then, it is not very accurate because we have all seen people admitted to so called top programs and rejected at ones many would think were not as difficult to get into!
In answer to the OP, I think it is safe to say what constitutes a more or less difficult admit is a touchy subject, and one for which you will receive a different list depending upon who is asked. Short of giving you a list like Columbia College-- that has open enrollment – any other lists will likely offend someone.
I recommend consulting one of the many MT College Coaches on this topic. (And I know even this piece of advice will not sit well with some). They should be in a position to better answer your question, at least about offers and applications in recent years. If the coach is skilled, they may even be able to give guidance about what would be an easy admit for your child, given his/ her strengths, etc.
You can also inquire directly of the school. Many (but not all) give this info freely when asked.
To look OUTSIDE of musical theater…and just general college admissions…when people discuss the selectivity of a college, they look at acceptance rate, not size of school. It is not necessarily easier to get into a bigger school.
(numbers rounded in examples)
Example: Duke University has 6600 students and an acceptance rate of 12%. For fall of 2013, 30,546 applied, and 3,801 were accepted. Drew University has 1500 students and an acceptance rate of 77%. For fall of 2013, 3,439 applied and 2,656 were accepted. Duke is much larger than Drew and accepts more students than Drew, but is far more difficult to get into than Drew.
Example: Cornell University has 14,400 students and an acceptance rate of 16%. For fall of 2013, 40,000 applied and 6,222 were accepted. Cornell College has 1,100 students and an acceptance rate of 59%. For fall of 2013, 2,500 applied and 1,471 were accepted. Cornell University is much larger than Cornell College and accepts more students than Cornell College, but is far more difficult to get into than Cornell College.
Size doesn’t dictate selectivity.
Now, back to MT programs, what becomes trickier is that almost all the BFA in MT programs have very low acceptance rates in the single digits. So, size of program and also acceptance rates don’t necessarily dictate their selectivity. Other factors come into play and it is far harder to predict one’s “chances” of admissions. Yet, I think many would agree that certain MT programs are GENERALLY more difficult to get into than others (but it is truly not an exact science and can be hard to predict for certain!!)…example: most believe that getting into U of Michigan’s BFA in MT program is harder to get into than Millikin’s even if both have low acceptance rates. Most assume it is harder to get into CMU’s MT program than into Viterbo’s. Another example is that BOCO (a large program) is considered to be a more difficult admit than SUNY Buffalo’s MT program. I also think the applicant pools OVERALL (though there is overlap) differ between UMichigan and Millikin or between CMU and Viterbo or between BOCO and SUNY Buffalo. I think a case could be made that the artistic odds at certain BFA programs are more difficult than other MT programs, putting aside BOTH size of program and acceptance rates.