Which are the top Musical Theatre Schools? and why?

[Katymac]

I was talking to DD's teacher about this and it seems so subjective.

Everyone talks about Urdang, Laine & Bird as being good; but why? Is it based on the number of graduates with jobs? If so is that qualified by comparing the number of students who started (or finished) the course.

So if a college has 25 pupuils in a year group & 15 got jobs, that's much better than a college with 100 pupils where 50 got jobs (I think)

How do you judge colleges (I haven't seen league tables)?

[islandofsodor]

I'd put Arts Ed up there with that group look in most west end programmes and you see Arts Ed graduates- and personally I see Urdang as a dance not a musical theatre college.

I think it is to do with percentage of graduates getting jobs however figures can be deceiving. For example colleges who don't offer a post graduate diploma like Bird can train a student for 3 years then they go off to go a one year post grad at for example Mountview and they get the credit.

[pg]

I think this is fraught with difficulties. You might be able to see a general trend with schools and see that they do have graduates in shows etc. but it would be unwise to rely on statistics to make decisions. Lots of reasons why statistics are tricky things:

1. Not every performer puts where they trained in their show biography (or even tells the school what they are doing). The school may not have accurate numbers.
2. Success changes from year to year - depending on teachers, students, fashions and chance
3. It depends what is being cast in any particular year - and whether the school's strengths mean that they have a number of suitable graduates for a particular show
4. - most importantly, it is not the school that gets employed, it's the graduate. It depends on the skills, talent, suitability, availability of the graduate fitting in to the needs of the show being cast. That will constantly change and the numbers themselves won't reflect this.

...following on from 4... just because lots of graduates from a particular school get employment doesn't mean the you/your dc will. Conversely, your children could be the ones that buck the trend. Success doesn't come from osmosis - performers are not more successful because they trained with successful peers.

I think considering any course with an accreditation by a respected, independent body is the way to go. Within this choice there will various practicalities to be considered: Costs, location, grants/bursaries, accommodation, whether you like what you see at showcases and shows - and perhaps most important of all: whether it feels right.

[Welsh Mum]

I agree with pg = there are the obvious indicators like accreditation, but basically the place that is best for you is the one that suits you the best. Talented individuals will probably get much the same in terms of training from lots of colleges but their experiences when training will be best if that institution "feels" right for them. I have a healthy respect for "gut" feeling

[Katymac]

I agree about the statistics btw; but the Gov still think it's a viable way of judging performance (league tables etc)

But I was talking (seperatey) to 2 casting people who said when looking at CVs (& the applicants had just finished college) they only considered a few colleges as "they knew what they would get"j which I found disappointing but I suppose has paralells with top unis

It was just something I was cogitating

[pg]

But I was talking (seperatey) to 2 casting people who said when looking at CVs (& the applicants had just finished college) they only considered a few colleges as "they knew what they would get"j which I found disappointing but I suppose has paralells with top unis

The trouble is, if you spoke to two more different casting people, you would be quite likely to get different preferences.

I understand the cogitating, but try not to let it do your head in

There are no official league tables for performance based courses as far as I'm aware. The courses are assessed for being suitable training for the profession - after that it's rather down to the individual's luck, temperament, skills, contacts, perseverance and business/marketing skills (and a good agent). The school will have some bearing on the contacts and possibly some influence on skills and perseverance. Their own reputation will have some bearing on which agents come to shows - but that's a bit hit and miss as well. Temperament is up to the individual and luck is...luck.

[Katymac]

Oh they didn't name the same schools even

I guess I was just messing about with the definition of 'good'

I think the number of graduates with jobs vs the number of graduates would be a reasonable measure; it is for other courses (incl Arts based ones)

I also think it would be useful to know how many people auditioned each year compared with how many people got a place (on a college by college basis)

[Katymac]

So baring in mind "and personally I see Urdang as a dance not a musical theatre college"this - which other colleges are dance rather than MT

[pg]

I think the number of graduates with jobs vs the number of graduates would be a reasonable measure; it is for other courses (incl Arts based ones)

I'm not meaning to be difficult (honestly ) but I just don't think that "jobs" is measurable in the same way for performers as it is for other graduates.

Some performers will have a job that lasts a day, some will have a job that lasts 9 months, some will have 18 jobs in a year, some will have none, some will have 1 job that lasts 18 months. Performance careers are so different from other careers - even though the job market has changed for many other areas too.

There are plenty of examples of graduates who have not worked at all in their first year after graduation and have gone on to have successful careers. There are plenty of examples of graduates who have had early success with high profile jobs and then a dip. It's just so very, very varied. Plus, a job is a job - but some jobs are SO much more significant than others - usually depending on the contacts made.

Although it is very common for graduates from other courses to get jobs that are "only" 12 month contracts now (whereas some years ago the jobs would have been permanent), performance is probably the only area where significant, career enhancing engagements can last just a few days.

[Katymac]

Then how can it be measured?

It is important to be able to judge education to some extent

[riverdancefan]

Could it be something to do with the selection process?
Bit like grammar streaming I suppose...
If you begin by having the best and most talented, promising students, maybe the odds are more will graduate and get successful jobs?
The top (most popular) schools and colleges can sift through the 100's of applications and basically cherry pick !

Those lower down the pecking order so to speak will end up with students that really don't have that extra something?
I have no idea, it's just a surmise. And I have see students leave from colleges I would not consider sending DS to and go straight into work which has been continuous,

When teachers have the best material to work with.. The place would attract the best teachers and reputations of colleges and schools would become a self-fulfilling prophecy..
I'm talking probably 18+ here and not the 16+ courses.

I don't think it's worth tying yourself up in knots about as it will drive you nuts, visit, attend end of year performances, look at the standard and think "yes, my DD would easily nail it here " or not as the case may be and apply ....

[pg]

If someone whose opinion you really trust, who really knows your DD, and who really knows the schools and the industry makes a recommendation - then that is worth taking seriously. If not, and you feel you are floundering in the dark:

The courses that have accreditation by CDS have been measured. They have all been deemed to provide suitable training for the profession. There aren't that many of them.

Once you have the choice narrowed down to those courses (because some hopefully knowledgeable people have given them the thumbs up) then it is up to the individuals applying to narrow the applications down (if they can't afford the time and money to audition everywhere) by the things that are important to them.

I honestly think that's the same for most Higher Education courses. Don't most people read the prospectuses and make a choice?

That might be course content, how it is funded, the fact that you thought the shows there were brilliant, the fact that there are alumni you admire or whose careers you envy, the feel of the place on an open day, the ability to find affordable housing, how far away from home it is - whatever it is that's important to you. You can do that, because they are all "suitable" in terms of career and profession, so you can make personal judgements based either on your own views on how they equip people for the profession - or on more mundane, practical matters. Then, once you apply and audition you get another chance to assess the place. Then you wait to see whether they want you.

For many applicants some of the decisions about where to go are taken out of your control because of not being offered a place. If you are offered a place at all or some of those you have applied to then you will have your experience at audition to add to your list of pros and cons. Most people get a "gut" reaction though I think.

How people have done in previous years can only ever be a rough guide, because they are not you. Unfortunately (or fortunately) "you" is what you are selling at the end of the course and however well the school has equipped you for the profession, they cannot control what jobs will be available upon graduation.

[Robsmumma]

I am a big believer in the 'gut feeling'.
My DD has auditioned at numerous colleges. Some she liked the feel of some she definitely didn't. After previous experiences I knew if she didn't like the feel she wouldn't want to go there. She even turned down funding last year because she KNEW attending would have been a waste of time and money!

She has been extremely lucky this year to be offered a DaDA at her favourite, but also loved a couple more and would have been happy to go there. Every child is individual and your DD will KNOW where she wants to go!

Lol even DaDA' s are expensive, just posted a cheque for £600 off for uniform/bits and pieces eeek!

[FelixGirl]

I completely agree with everyone above......any of the accredited colleges offer great training, have excellent teaching staff and access to top choreographers! Beyond that it's up to the student to make the very most of the opportunities available there!! That's why the "gut" feeling is so important....

I also agree that someone who knows your DD and her capabilities really well (her dance teacher??) should be the person to give you the most practical advice....she should know where the best place for your DD would be.......DD's dance teacher was VERY straight about where she thought DD would or would not fit in!

You have to narrow down the choice...otherwise it all becomes far too bewildering, and you find yourself going around in circles. Once we had the teacher's recommendation, combined with our own requirements of accessibility and feel, we were down to four colleges and those are where DD auditioned (plus her Plan B option of course!!).

[Katymac]

Someone you trust, that's it isn't it

Her teacher freely admits she is out of date and the only dancer she has sent off was a boy to the Brit school as that is what he wanted

"You have to narrow down the choice...otherwise it all becomes far too bewildering, and you find yourself going around in circle" this is where we are at, round & around & around we are going