USC Application Status (1 Viewer)

[Ryan C.]

I called up USC today and learned some cool news. My application is now at the admissions comittee and they are hoping to have all of the letters sent out by April 1st.

Wow! The time has finally come!

 

[grabbag]

I suppose it shows one's serious commitment to USC that one would go through the trouble of studying for and taking the GRE, when none of the other top schools request it. ADMISSIONS at USC doesn't even unilaterally require it, if I'm not mistaken. "It's a departmental thing," I was told.

 

[maozbrown]

I think UCLA requires it if you have a GPA below 3.0, but that's it. To be fair, though, I don't think it carries much weight in your application to USC. And that sucks, because I actually did rather well after all that studying.

 

[Jayimess]

Originally posted by grabbag:
ADMISSIONS at USC doesn't even unilaterally require it, if I'm not mistaken. "It's a departmental thing," I was told.

It's for the Graduate School, not the School of Cinematic Arts.

In other words, USC, not Cinematic. You have to get a 1000 and have a 3.0 over your last two years of UG to get into USC.

It's your portfolio, creativity, resume, etc, that gets you into film school.

 

[maozbrown]

So there's no advantage to having a 1600 GRE score over a 1000?

 

[Icarus Ascending]

Okay. Remember before we were all completely psychotic? When we had "Common Sense"? Let us recall this "Common Sense" and engage it as we consider Maoz's question.

"There's no advantage in having a 1600 GRE score over a 1000?"

A reasonable question for a tightly-wound ball of anxiety (of which, yes, I am one). But I don't think we need a USC admissions person to answer our question. (Although if you need verification, you can check out a USC department head's answer to a similar question posted on John August's website some time ago.)

Of course having a 1600 GRE is an advantage. It's not as if the department doesn't see the score (they do), and it's not as if any serious person thinks intellect isn't helpful in making art (it is).

That said, this IS art school, not academia, so, excepting Critical Studies, scores are never the be-all and end-all.

In other words, if you got a 1600, great, it'll help. But as long as you have a 1100 or so, they'll look at your supplements, which gives you an extra-intellectual chance to shine.

So, if I may call the kettle black for a sec--relax. Yoga, Yoda, whatever helps. All will be answered soon enough. And what's the worst that happens? They say "no"?

There are many paths to enlightenment. Many paths.

--IA

 

[maozbrown]

With all due respect, Icarus, I'm not simply asking the question because I'm in an ephemeral state of anxious irrationality.

I originally planned on applying to the Peter Stark Program and asked this very same question to an administrator from that department. She told me that there is no difference between a 1600 and an 1100 (the minimum for getting into that program).

I simply wanted to confirm this with other people, since my experience has been that administrators occasionally contradict themselves.

I am fully aware that having a 1600 GRE can only be advantageous with respect to the Graduate School (as it opens you up to more merit-based awards), but it seems absolutely plausible that the School of Cinematic Arts would not factor the GRE score into the film school application if it is intended only as a filter of eligibility.

That said, you're most likely right. My assumption is that the GRE score plays some role (albeit a minimal one) in the film school application package, but I would not be completely shocked if, in fact, the admissions committee for the Production program does not take it into account (especially since the administrator from the Stark Program said that is the case for that division).

I simply wanted confirmation, since Jayimess seems to be knowledgeable about this.

 

[maozbrown]

To be accepted to the USC Graduate School (of which, administratively, the School of Cinematic Arts is a part), you need a minimum 1000 GRE score. According to its web site, the Peter Stark Program requires a minimum 1100 to be considered for that particular program. If I recall correctly, the Production program doesn't specify a minimum GRE score, so it probably defaults to the Graduate School's...1000.

And I agree andinofilms...if the GRE score plays any role at all in assessing an applicant, it's most likely a very small role.

 

[Icarus Ascending]

Maoz et al,

Sorry if I seemed condescending earlier. There's just such a sense of panic wafting through the boards these days, ya know?

Rather than speculating or trusting one of the USC administrators, let us turn to Howard Rodman, chair of the MFA and BFA programs in screen and television writing at USC, for an answer. His description of an ideal candidate can be found by following this link:

http://johnaugust.com/archives/2005/how-to-get-into-film-school

The Google is my friend.

--IA

 

[KelMo]

Just an Update:

I spoke with admissions at Peter Stark and they did receive all of my materials, despite what the website said, so I didn't get in because of merit, which is much easier for me to deal with than an administrative snafu!

For all those still waiting to hear back: their form rejection letter is not the most well written document on the planet, but have hope, you were not the first person rejected!

Fingers crossed for everyone out there.

 

[Jayimess]

You need a 1000 on your GRE to get into USC, not the film school.

I didn't know Stark requires 1100, but as far as I know, the other disciplines don't put too much weight on it.

Here are my stats, though I hate to put them up here...but hey, I gotta look out for you guys.

Overall GPA: 3.27
Junior Senior GPA: 3.89 (I dropped out for five years after a year below 2.0, but then came back with all 4.0s for my last semesters, except my first semester back, when I got a 3.4)
GRE: 1290 composite (scored slightly higher on math than verbal, though I can't recall the exact figures), 4.5 writing

My classmates and I don't really discuss this stuff, because it doesn't matter. It's the work you do here that matters. But those whom I have spoken with have done the same, a little worse, a lot worse, or better.

A 1600/6 and a 4.0 won't pave the way to film school if you're seriously lacking creativity.

Period.

Keep a cool head, y'all.

 

[Jables]

Got my form rejection letter for the Stark Program today. As soon as I saw it today, I knew what it was, so that definitely softened the blow. The form letter, indeed, was as awful as described here.

 

[filmschoolorbust]

Is no one here interested in trading personal statements? Now that notification time is upon us I really want to see how my statement stacks up.

 

[SeattleCinemaniac]

Filmschoolorbust,

I'm going to level with you. When it comes to trading personal statements, I strongly recommend you NOT to do so. The reason I object to the idea so strongly has to do with the rigorous anti-plagiarism policies that any accredited higher education institution enforces.

If I were to disclose the contents of my personal statement to ANYONE else, the admissions department could read that document and say, "Hmm, this statement looks suspiciously similar to the one submitted by this other applicant." Since there is no way to tell who plagiarized whom and graduate schools lack the budget, interest, and time to properly investigate such matters, common sense dictates that the solution they implement is to send rejection letters to both applicants. Unfortunately, I don't have any statistics or other hard evidence to support my claim. That's just my opinion.

If you want to run that risk by swapping personal statements, be my guest. For my sake, I prefer to improve my application on my own. Color me paranoid over under sideways down. That's just my policy.

You have my respect for applying. Most people simply do not realize how much courage, determination, and fortitude it takes to make it even this far, much less get accepted. Should you find yourself rejected, the best recommendation I can make to you (or anyone, for that matter) is to add experiences to your resume, expand your field of schools to which you apply the next time, and keeping blasting those applications at those schools until at least one of them accepts.

I hope this helps.

Have a good night,

J.G.

 

[Jayimess]

What he said. Don't do it.

 

[redpokiepenguin]

Dear all,

I too got my rejection letter which is ironic considering I just got back FROM USC. Literally...got back 2 hours ago. It had the general stats of why my GRE/GPA, etc. might not have been up to par. Really I feel like they're just trying to decrease some of the calls asking "Why didn't I get in?"

I'm not really bummed. I wanted to really go, but I like other places better. Also, the Director I spoke to said that people usually don't get in the 1st time, so keep on trucking folks.

 

[maozbrown]

Hey redpokiepenguin,

I'm sorry to hear that, but it's good that you still have options. Which program did you apply to at USC?

 

[Allen Ho]

Does anyone know if USC interviews people?

 

[maozbrown]

I was told they don't.

 

[Allen Ho]

That's kind of weird...considering they don't ask for a portfolio submission.

 

[Jables]

USC is definitely the most detached application process that I've had. They don't ask for much, and then never really talk to you. At least most of the other schools have phone interviews or in-person interviews with candidates.