i read his post like black history < 'regular' history...
so i mean when he named ****ty courses he should have just said "history"

You know what i mean?

Ahh, I get you. That really depends on what his actual thoughts are; only he knows. He could really think that black history courses are crappier than regular history courses, or he could also think regular history courses are just as crappy, but just put down black history courses since it popped into his head first.

From the context of his post, since he put literature in there as well, I think he meant gen ed courses in general, since they tend to be easier and not as technical as, say, accounting or statistics.

[QUOTE=chendawg;29903397] I think he means that having a law degree does not give you a license to practice law, passing the bar does.

[QUOTE=JulesDeane;29944881] Well, if semantics were that important, then he should have also corrected me for doctors as well, as doctors have to pass another set of board exams during residency after they get their MD in med school in order to practice in their specialty. It's common knowledge that one has to pass the bar after law school.

I think most people understood my point, which was that possessing an MBA doesn't grant a person the right to practice any specialty or take the exam to practice a specialty.

This post at poets and quants should sober up some potential applicants.

http://poetsandquants.com/2011/11/17...top-schools/2/

Interestingly enough, the median gmat for Harvard's _applicant pool_ was 701 and Berkeley's was 710.

the bolded did not happen. DUCY?

I meant it as an example of a course that has very little value in the field of employment the graduation is to be used in. Black history seemed more useless to an MBA than "general" history and thus seemed a more apt example. Another example would have been "Cooking with cauliflower".

Just out of interest, how much weight should be given to businessweek rankings?

http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/rankings/

especially part time ones. My MBA is from the University of Washington which supposedly is now top 10, yet they ranked Chicago Booth 17th for part-time(!) Does anyone actually pay attention to these?

Apparently the #1 school for part time MBA's has an applicant GMAT median of 540. I suppose I answered my own question on how much credence to give to businessweek's rankings.

I think those are one of the more credible ones along with USNews, but this is prob the best: http://poetsandquants.com/2010/12/14...-in-the-u-s/3/

*Also no idea about part time, but this seems better: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsa...-time-rankings

just got back from looking at some schools. interviewed at tuck and did a full day of class visit, tour, admissions Q&A etc. i loved every aspect of it and hoping things go well there. i also visited yale som and got to sit in on two of the core classes, and while i enjoyed it, it was very different and i think i fit better at tuck. i also went to an info session at columbia yesterday and i was actually on the fence about applying there (i'm pretty worried about cost of living in nyc while paying 50k a year and not working) i really liked what i heard and am definitely going to apply. it's prob higher on my list than yale. now i only have to write amazing essays and get lucky lol. happy to answer any specific q's about the schools if anyone has any from what i saw.

seems really difficult to get a firm grip on rankings but i feel like as long as the school is consistently ranked in that group i'm not sure if it makes much of a difference at all if it's 7 here, 3 here, 15 here et cetera.

can you elaborate on this? Im applying to and visiting Yale next week, and thinking about Tuck.

the thing that sticks out to me most about Yale is its class size. seems to be about a 1/4 of the class size in other top ranked business schools, which is attractive to me.

also applying to Columbia and visiting next week, can you elaborate here as well please?

how did you dress for these visits? upper end of business casual?

generally what did you learn about these places that you couldn't have from online resources / virtual tours / internet forums etc?

As Im formulating my final decisions on where to apply, Im primarily concerned with the networking / "recruiting" opportunities along the path to venture capital.

Im probably sticking my neck out there by stating venture capital as my post-MBA industry of interest. Ive heard generally AdComs dont like this (they think its trendy, money motivated, and most applicants rarely have any idea how the business works / how to get into it).

As a career changer though, Im just being honest and cant really say with a straight face that I actually want to do anything else, so all my chips are in the middle on this one.

Any current MBA students have any input or insight on the VC / startup community events / guest speakers / VC/PE clubs at their school? And how I might measure or utilize this to decide what schools to shoot for and how I might shape my application towards that?

oh and jsnipes hit me up via PM if you wanna cross reference any useful info or essay material or whatev on Columbia or Yale as I am def applying to those schools as well.

not going on order here but i was actually really surprised how much i learned by going in person. when i visited college in hs i basically just remember it as "wow everywhere is awesome" and so i was kind of cynically going to check out these as much to show interest (and hit any checkmarks that admissions has) as i was to really learn more because i had read a lot about all of the schools i was applying to through various articles, online resources, clear admit school guides, friends who attend the schools etc. i didn't get to sit in on a class at columbia but i sat in on classes at tuck and yale som, and had pretty extensive interaction with students at all three schools. they also all had pretty frank info sessions with adcom members at all three schools so there was some good "from the horse's mouth" info at all three as well.

i'm applying to almost all smallish programs besides columbia (tuck is 500ish and same as yale, darden is 600? duke is what like 8?) and i agree it is definitely a positive for the most part and i agree is attractive. as far as the differences between tuck and yale i really felt like the entire tuck program seemed to be run just super efficiently and very businesslike--for example all students are issued the same laptop so they have super efficient IT, can swap out all parts, batteries etc flawlessly as well as deal w software issues, and every single study room (of which there are a tonnn) are equipped with a big monitor and quick connect for that specific laptop and already pre rigged. the school updates everybody's outlook calendar with every speaker that will be on campus, companies that are recruiting and their events so every morning you wake up and your calendar is synced to whatever is going on there as well as whatever you put in yourself. and this may be an unfair characterization as well but just from the students that i interacted with tuck students seemed to be more....focused is the wrong word but seemed to exhibit more leadership (god i hate all these cliche words but struggling to hit exactly the right note). yale som students seemed to be really smart and more interesting whereas i felt like tuck students seemed to be smart and some kind of mix of more business-focused and charismatic?

i also had really drank the kool-aid on yale's integrated core but after having gone to classes at tuck, with more of a traditional core class set, and the integrated approach at yale (and listening to columbia's pitch on a more traditional core class approach) i felt like the more traditional route may benefit me more since i don't have formal business experience in that it absolutely forces you to learn and do the basic stuff like accounting, modeling, cap markets, etc etc.

columbia just seemed really no nonsense, straightforward and thorough in their approach to teaching business school and while i have heard some stories of it being really cutthroat i do think that for me personally a traditional and thorough approach to learning the fundamentals would be really good. so that's kind of what sold me on applying.

as far as dress goes--at tuck i wore a suit with a tie because i was interviewing (and everyone else did the same, girls in pant suits). i went to yale next and wore the same thing since i figured it was the same and i was overdressed i think, the only other person wearing a suit was an ex marine who also felt overdressed, but i will say the type of candidate i was around at yale was different than the ones i encountered at tuck in kind of the same way (way more non-profit or non business focused candidates...not that that's a bad thing i am interested in some NP stuff as well). when i went to the info session at columbia i wore a suit with no tie and felt appropriately dressed (was prob dressed a little more than average but didn't feel overdressed at all and felt confident/fine/whatever)

i would be really careful with that for sure. i think without having experience in the industry colleges know that it will be extremely hard for you to get into VC necessarily unless u have a lot of other tech/entrepreneurial experience (not sure they will see poker as explicitly entrepreneurial) and columbia specifically said in the info session that they will reject the application if they don't think the goals are accomplishable--the example he gave was someone who had worked at the world bank, seemed very introspective, reccomendations said very thoughtful nice etc and wanted to be an equities trader. he was like 'this guy won't get that job...so this app will get rejected even tho it could have 750 gmat good gpa etc'

i do think that all the top schools have good networking in general but i don't know much specifically about VC. i feel like being in cali (at stan or haas) or nyc schools would prob be best though.

the thing that i've continually been told is that whatever ur short term goals are they must more or less follow logically from your past. so if u can do that, then i think you will be good. if you can't it will be tough to make that VC sell.

Just wanna give this post a massive +1. Best chances for VC are, not surprisingly, HBS and Stanford. As for applications, I don't endorse lying, but chances are a lot better with a non-VC story for most candidates. Once you get in, it doesn't matter what your stated career path was.

yeah thanks those were solid responses jsnipes.

Ive been following a lot of VC blogs and such and from what I gather MBA -> VC is a bit of a stretch absent prior working relationships, so Im comfortable phrasing VC in the context of a long term goal, short term Ive just got to determine what lends itself most to that long term goal (startup / entrepreneurial management seems like a good fit). a plus is that ive got a startup business underway atm but doubtful that it will ever see the inside of a VC pitch office.

on that note, Ive got killer "stats" so far, killer reccs, and killer (literally) work experience, the last thing I want to do at this point is make an AdCom say "wow great everything so far, now lets look at his career goals...hmmm, nope, he's dreaming, **** can it, NEXT"

never tell the truth to an admissions committee.

Yeah, I've pretty much got to hop on the bandwagon. I am at Booth, and even recruiting for VC, and it is definitely a small world which is hard to break into. It happens to be that my school is incredibly supportive of VC, offers a ton of opportunities and runs a ton of VC events, including meetings with all the major Chicago VCs and treks out to Silicon Valley. Still, they warn you that it's a difficulty journey and that only 7,000 people in the entire world have full-time positions in VC.

The best advice I've gotten thus far, by someone who interned at Kleiner last summer, is that you, as a wannabe VC are a nuisance to them. They make so much money and already have such brilliant employees that you are nothing but a time suck to them. Your only edge is to learn something that they don't know, and when you get your 30 seconds, show them that they simply don't know variable A about industry B. Your current asset is: time. They want people who can add value in ways they've never even considered. So, in order to break in, you need to do their job for them in a sense...conceptualize an angle they're not currently pursuing, put some dollar values on it, and prove why you're the person who knows the most about it and how you'll execute.

As for the applications, I think you could get away with Entrepreneurship or VC at Booth, but really harm yourself at more traditional schools. I got into school touting my marketing background (which I honestly believed I would pursue at the time). But if you have a Banking/Consulting/traditional background, I would unquestionably use that as your focus. The only way I'd encourage you to push entreprenurship is if you have low scores, need to gamble to stand out, and have started up something something really crazy/interesting that gives you a great story. Outside that, I'd keep it focused.

Ezra

appreciate the sound advice Ezra, but im fresh out of the USMC with no business background

its all a total shift for me, my background is "leadership" and im using an MBA to essentially launch my career, whatever that ends up being.

+1 to this. In fact, it seems super obvious to me. Just say your goals are whatever is the most plausible extension of your background that will get you into the school. No one is going to go dig up your application when you apply to IBs after saying you want to work in a nonprofit .

i should say that i always tell the truth to AdComs. But I recognize that I am an idiot for being honest. Honesty is my achilles heel: it's a terrible strategy for admissions.

how are other poker players that are applying approaching or using the black friday situation in their essays?

i feel like i have to talk about it but am still working on the best way to frame it. i don't want it to look like bschool is a knee jerk reaction to BF (and i think i can do this bc i took gmat in march and had been thinking about bschool) but that it also represents a 'natural breaking point' to move in a new direction and answer the 'why now' aspect. thoughts?

are you afraid that AdComs have any clue about Black Friday? Don't mention it. Definitely don't imho