School v. School: NYU Stern or Columbia Business School?
What happens when you pit two of the New York metro’s top business school’s against each other in a head-to-head duel of MBA might? It’s a school vs. school showdown, as we compare Columbia Business School to the Stern School of Business. Let’s take a deeper dive! Continue reading…
How NYC Business Schools Help the Underprivileged Applicants
Pursuing an MBA is a shrewd move for anyone looking to earn a competitive salary right out of school. Though attending a renowned school can up the price tag of earning an MBA, it may also increase the overall return on investment. According to an article in U.S. News & World Report, “… graduates of top-tier business schools usually earn higher starting salaries than their peers who went to lower-ranked schools.”
It’s not jut the opportunity to have a lucrative job right out of school that makes a high starting salary appealing. An enviable starting salary could mean more earning potential down the line. However, a top-tier school may seem out of reach for low-income applicants. After all, how can you enjoy the return on investment if you can’t afford to invest in the first place?
Luckily, many prestigious business schools offer resources for students from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Below, we’ve outlined the resources available for low-income applicants at five of New York City metro’s best business schools.
How NYC Business Schools Help the Underprivileged
Columbia Business School
Columbia Business School offers need-based awards to many students, which may result in anywhere from $7,500 to $30,000 in tuition support. Nearly half of applicants receive need-based scholarships, which are automatically renewed at the start of the second year. Columbia students can also apply for private and federal loans. To create incentive for students to choose careers in public and nonprofit fields, the school offers a Loan Assistance Program for students who utilize their education to pursue these paths. Students are eligible to apply for this program for up to five years after graduation. Depending on the extent of students’ debt, they may receive anywhere from $2,000 to $10,000 of annual support. Columbia students may also receive merit-based scholarships, such as the Columbia Fellows Program, which may cover full or partial tuition and is granted to applicants with an outstanding track record in leadership and creativity.
Stern School of Business—New York University
NYU’s Stern School of Business offers a variety of scholarships for high-achieving applicants. According to the school’s website, nearly a quarter of students who enter the full-time MBA program receive a merit-based scholarship. There are also additional merit-based opportunities for students coming from different backgrounds and perspectives. Scholarships like the Advancing Women in Business Scholarship and the Forte Fellowship are particularly geared toward female-identifying students, to support women in business. The ROMBA Fellowship aims to help LGBTQ students succeed in business education. The Consortium Fellowship exists to increase the number of minorities such as Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and African Americans in business school as well.
Gabelli School of Business—Fordham University
At the Fordham University Gabelli School of Business, graduate students may be eligible for federal financial aid, merit scholarships, or a variety of graduate assistantships. Awards based on academic excellence range from $10,000 to full tuition. Exceptional students may be eligible for awards like the Dean’s Premier Scholarship, which includes a $20,000 living stipend, and may include a stipend toward one of Fordham’s global programs. Students can also apply for a plethora of need/merit-based scholarships, like the Hitachi Diversity and Inclusion Scholarship, which seeks to help underrepresented minorities finance their education.
Rutgers Business School, Newark and New Brunswick
The Financial Times ranked Rutgers Business School among the top 50 MBA programs for return on investment in 2017, citing a 130 percent increase in salary for students within three years of completing their degree. Moreover, the school’s website states that, “More than 80 percent of Rutgers students receive some form of financial aid.” Moreover, at $31,011 per year (not including fees), this program is far more affordable than many other prestigious schools. Students can apply for federal or private loans, grants, and an array of scholarships. In addition to the awards offered by the Rutgers Business School Graduate Scholarship Fund, the Rutgers website lists 30 fellowships, scholarships, and partnerships. The Ralph Bunche Fellowships, for example, provide tuition remission, and a $15,000 living stipend to minority students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds.
SC Johnson Graduate School of Management—Cornell University
Around 30 percent of entering the SC Johnson Graduate School of Management students receive some level of scholarship support. Scholarships like the National Society of Hispanic MBA’s (NSHMBA) and the TOIGO Fellowship specifically seek to help underrepresented minorities. The MD MBA Dual Degree Program and Lee Family Scholarship supports students on the rigorous path to receive their MD/MBA. Additionally, Cornell’s Park Leadership Fellows Program awards full tuition to up to 25 MBA applicants annually. The award is granted based on personal and professional achievements, academic performance, social contributions, and leadership. Students can also apply for federal and private loans.
Caught: Why Business Schools Might Lie to Improve Rankings
School rankings from sites like Forbes or U.S. News & World Report are often a crucial factor for students before they decide where they should pursue a degree. Using a combination of rankings, standardized test scores, job placement after graduation, and tuition costs, among other crucial factors, a school ranking a quick and succinct look at the relative merits and weaknesses of MBA programs throughout the country—and the world.
There is a lot riding on these rankings: not only do perspective MBAs often make decisions about where to pursue their degree based on these reviews, but graduates can use these rankings to demonstrate the quality of their degree to future employers. With such high stakes, organizations like U.S. News that compile these rankings rely on the accurate reporting of data from each business school.
So, what happens if the information is inaccurate, or worse? Data like student satisfaction and post-graduate salary—which can be so crucial in informing a prospective MBAs choice of school or program—is reported directly from the business schools, which often presents a conflict of interest potential. With so much at stake, would a school ever lie to increase their spot in the ranking?
Unfortunately, it seems the answer is yes. Just last week, the Online MBA program at Temple University’s Fox School of Business—a program that was consistently ranked in the top spot in U.S. News’ Online MBA ranking—vanished from the list. According to the initial announcement, new information had revealed that just 20 percent of Fox students in the Online MBA program had actually submitted test scores, a number that had initially been reported at a perfect 100 percent. Since the formula used by U.S. News weighs test score averages more if over 75 percent of students have submitted them, this inaccurate reporting from Temple Fox would have given the program an undeserved boost in the school ranking.
In the wake of Temple’s removal, questions continue to arise about the lengths schools go for good rankings/Photo via PhillyMag.
In the days since the initial announcement of Temple’s removal from the ranking, even more questions came out regarding the accuracy of Fox’s data. Further investigation found that Temple had reported 100 percent of students taking standardized admissions test for every year since 2014—a suspicious jump from the 25 and 33 percent that had been reported in the years prior. Since the test scores data submitted turned out to be inaccurate, it seems wholly possible that the data had also been misreported for the three years prior; the same years that Temple Fox held the top ranking for Online MBA programs.
This isn’t the first time it’s been discovered that business schools and even undergraduate programs have falsified or reported inaccurate data to boost its rankings. In 2013, Forbes was forced to remove four schools from its ranking of “America’s Best Colleges” due to inaccurate reporting: doctored SAT results from Bucknell University, false acceptance and graduation rates from Iona College, among others. In 2012, George Washington University lost its ranking on U.S. News’ “Best Colleges” list when it was discovered they were inflating the high school grades of their incoming students.
GWU was one of several schools in the past few years to submit false data for a rankings boost/via Huffington Post.
The problem may be even more far-reaching than some may suspect. In 2013, a survey of 576 college admissions officers found that 91 percent believed other colleges to be guilty of falsely reporting their admissions data. Even the school ranking creators themselves are shocked by this trend. In 2013, U.S. News editor Brian Kelly commented, “The integrity of data is important to everybody … I find it incredible to contemplate that institutions based on ethical behavior would be doing this.”
In 2005, the Association to Advance Collegiate School of Business (AACSB) took a deep look into this trend to examine why the issue of falsifying business school data might be so widespread. “Because rankings of full-time MBA programs are commonly presented under the label of ‘best b-schools,’ the public has developed a narrow definition about the breadth and value of business education,” the report states. Since most media rankings don’t consider factors like faculty research or doctoral education, MBA programs have become more likely to invest in more visible aspects of the program, such as facilities and marketing campaigns, which don’t actually deal with the quality of the degree. As a result, even high-quality programs may earn a lower media rank than they deserve based on the factors considered, adding pressure to do what it takes to earn a school ranking that matches what they perceive as the quality of the degree.
“Plenty of people apply to a school because it has reached the summit of a ‘best-of’ ranking, just as many people will see a movie or buy a book after it wins an award. That’s human nature,” Columbia Business School dean Glenn Hubbard told Fortune. “We want to experience the best.”
Whether or not placement in a school ranking truly represents the quality of a degree, it’s easy to see why the pressure is on for many admissions departments. A better school ranking can increase the number of applicants, providing for a more competitive, and diverse applicant pool, which creates a better quality admitted class. The cycle continues: success of these graduates can improve the possibility of future funding, providing more resources for the program and encouraging even more applicants to apply down the line.
“Rankings have become omnipresent in higher education, and they have enhanced the competition among institutions,” said Terry W. Hartle, senior vice president at the American Council on Education, in 2013. “And in any highly competitive environment, there is always a temptation to cut corners.”
For now, the Fox School of Business has been removed from the U.S. News Online MBA ranking. Concerns about false data continue to be evaluated, as organizations like AACSB continue to seek solutions and make recommendations for best practices when it comes to the collection and reporting of admissions data. In 2017, the AACSB publication “On Academic Rankings, Unacceptable Methods, and the Social Obligations of Business Schools,” suggested that schools and organizing bodies work together to find a method of data collection that includes “transparency, interpretability, and the empowerment of individual decision makers by whatever criteria truly suits their individual needs.”
For prospective students, its important to acknowledge this troubling but widespread trend as they make important decisions about where to earn a degree. While school ranking remains an easy way to compare programs against each other, students should consider not just the accuracy of the data but also the kind of factors reported in media rankings. While it seems possible that the number one program in a media ranking may not truly deserve that position, the real top program- the best for each individual’s needs and career goals—will always deserve first place.
Stanford Reigns Supreme on New Financial Times Global Ranking
INSEAD hoped to top the Financial Times MBA rankings for the third year in a row, but it wasn’t to be. The Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB) gets top bragging rights this year, returning to the number-one spot it has held only once before, in 2012. INSEAD was knocked to number two, followed by the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, which held steady at number three. London Business School (LBS) reclaimed some ground this year—coming in fourth—after a rare fall last year out of the top five. Harvard Business School (HBS), meanwhile, ranked fifth, its lowest showing since 2008.
Rounding out the top 10 this year were the University of Chicago Booth School of Business at sixth (up from ninth last year); Columbia Business School at seventh (unchanged from 2017); China’s CEIBS at eighth (up from 11th); MIT Sloan School of Management at ninth (up from 13th); and UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business at 10th, (also up from 13th).
Perhaps the greatest victors of this year’s FT rankings were two-year MBA programs, which occupied nine out of the top 10 spots. More two-year programs moved up or maintained their position this year than moved down (31 compared to 21). In contrast, more one-year programs lost ground than gained this year (14 up, 21 down).
“It’s great to see the continued strength of the two-year MBA format in this year’s FT rankings, a format that allows for a truly transformational and immersive experience,” said Clear Admit Co-Founder Graham Richmond. “LBS’s move back into the top five isn’t surprising in light of the program’s continued strength in job placements, new facilities, curriculum redesign, and location at the heart of business and innovation in Europe (even as Brexit looms),” he continued. “While HBS’s position is inconsistent with Clear Admit’s Decision Wire-based data on applicant preferences, it’s the increasing gap in the FT ranking between Stanford and HBS that seems noteworthy.”
As always, the bearing a given ranking should have on your own choice of schools depends on how closely the methodology used to arrive at that ranking aligns with what you deem most important. So just how does the FT compile its list each year?
Understanding the FT Ranking Methodology
The FT ranking is based on surveys of alumni three years out from graduation, school data, and research rank. Alumni responses inform eight criteria—including average income three years after graduation and salary increase compared with pre-MBA salary. Together, these eight criteria account for 59 percent of the overall ranking. School data inform another 11 criteria—including various measures of diversity such as percentages of female and international faculty, students, and board members. Together these criteria make up another 31 percent of the ranking. The remaining 10 percent of the ranking is based on research rank, calculated according to the number of articles by full-time faculty in 50 internationally recognized journals, weighted relative to faculty size.
Record-Breaking Salaries Put Stanford GSB on Top
Stanford, which ranked second last year, managed to unseat INSEAD this year thanks in part to the record-breaking salaries reported by its alumni. The average Stanford alumnus salary three years after graduation was $214,742, up $20,000 over last year’s figures and the highest recorded since the inaugural FT ranking in 1999. Stanford grads’ average salary also represented a 114-percent gain on their pre-MBA salaries, also the highest increase among ranked schools. That a significant proportion of Stanford grads head into highly lucrative hedge fund positions helped it outdistance its rivals in this regard.
Stanford also far outdistanced its U.S. rivals in terms of the international exposure it affords its students. More than 25 percent of the latest graduating cohort did an internship abroad—compared to an average of 4 percent at ranked U.S. schools. Overall, though, Stanford ranked 32nd for international course exposure, down 14 places from last year. But in other measures of diversity, Stanford made gains, including its international faculty (41 percent), international board (25 percent), and international students (41 percent). In this last figure, too, Stanford set itself apart from its U.S. rivals, the majority of which have recruited fewer international students. Although the average proportion for ranked institutions is down by only one percentage point to 38 percent, the FT noted.
Research Scores Hold HBS, LBS Back
Both HBS and LBS saw their average salaries three years out increase by approximately $14,000—to $192,133 and $167,897 respectively. That climb helped LBS return to the top five this year, but sharp drops in each schools’ research ranks worked against them. Harvard’s research rank plummeted from third to 16th—contributing to its fall to fifth in the overall ranking. “This year’s research rank is based on articles published in 50 academic and practitioner journals by full-time faculty since January 2015, but several Harvard faculty last appeared in these publications in 2014, too long ago to count,” the FT noted. LBS, for its part, dropped from 12th to 27th in research rank.
Rice Business, Olin, Georgetown McDonough, Cornell Johnson See Big Gains
Just as two-year MBA programs fared well with regard to their one-year rivals this year, a select group of individual schools saw big gains this year over last. Rice University’s Jones School of Business jumped 19 places this year, from 64th to 45th. This surge can be attributed primarily to strong salary growth. Average salary grew from $130,189 to $139,189, contributing to a 118-percent increase over pre-MBA salary (up from 97 percent last year).
Washington University’s Olin Business School rose 18 spots, from 68th to 50th. The St. Louis school saw significant gains in average salary ($122,709) and increase over pre-MBA salary (107 percent). Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business jumped 10 spots, from 40th to 30th, thanks also in part to increased average salary, as well as improved research rank (up 10 spots to 17th) and various diversity measures. And Cornell University’s Johnson Graduate School of Management also moved 10 spots up in the ranks, from 27th to 17th, due in great part to a significant increase in its research rank, up 13 places to fourth overall.
Spain’s Schools Slip Out of Top 10
In less celebratory news, two of Spain’s top-tier business schools slid out of the FT’s upper-most ranks. IESE slipped from 10th to 11th. Though its graduates’ average salary increased year over year, the increase was slight. Moreover, it slipped seven spots in terms of percentage increase over pre-MBA salary. Research rank, too, fell by five spots over the previous year.
IE Business School, meanwhile, fell out of the ranking altogether—from eighth last year. This is because it couldn’t gather a representative sample of the school’s alumni to take part in the FT’s survey.
As always, those of us here at Clear Admit encourage prospective applicants to use a school’s performance in these and other rankings as just one of many measurements to determine the MBA program that will best fit your individual needs.
You can view the complete Financial Times 2018 Global MBA Rankings here.
This article has been edited and republished with admissions from our sister site, Clear Admit.
2018 Trends: New York City’s MBA Future
It doesn’t take a stable genius™ to figure out that New York City is the world’s most highly sought-after 22.82 mi² strip of land to pursue an MBA.
As is the case with most prime real estate, the stakes are high and the competition fierce. For many prospective business schoolers, the decision to step into the gauntlet is one made with a healthy sort of trepidation.
Hefty price tags and cutthroat admissions present real barriers for prospective students and deter more than a few. Still, many equate the New York MBA experience to a dream scenario—or a Gordon Gecko-style fantasy, replete with the promise of a staggering salary, an attractive range of employment opportunities, and prime placement in a city of constant progress.
How does the dream stack up to reality? Schools weigh in on 2017 trends for graduates, many of whom report satisfaction with employment offers. Let’s take a look at how MBA graduates are getting the most of their newly minted degrees!
2018 New York City MBA Trends
Columbia Business School
According to the school’s most recent MBA employment report, less than 2 percent of Columbia Business School graduates reported salary as the primary reason for accepting an offer. While the honestly of that polling answer pool is debatable, Columbia School of Business is the king when it comes to starting salaries on our list, with median salary of $125,000. Of the graduating class, 93.2 percent of students accepted employment offers within three months. Approximately 28 of 1,019 total students stepped aside to create their own companies. Per the standard with many of the NY-area schools, the largest portion of graduates selected financial services (34.4 percent) as their field of choice, followed closely by consulting (33.1 percent) and media and technology (15.6 percent). Companies such as McKinsey & Company, Amazon, Goldman, Sachs & Co., and Morgan Stanley welcomed a majority of Columbia’s finest.
The boastful salary expectations, unsurprisingly, are tempered a bit by the costs of the CBS MBA program. The current estimated budget for Columbia MBAs comes in at $107,749 in the first year, of which includes over $21,000 for room and board. Tuition in isolation, however, costs $71,544 for the first year. Looking at a degree at any New York City school, never mind an Ivy League institution, means cost of living has to be taken in heavy consideration, which can vary greatly from borough to borough.
Fordham University’s Gabelli School of Business
About 88 percent of students in the Fordham Gabelli School of Business graduating class accepted employment offers within six months after graduation. Starting salary rates were below Columbia’s, at an average of $84,593, with an average signing bonus of $15,536 and additional compensation of $14,510. That average salary figure is an approximate 13 percent drop from the previous year’s reported averages.
Out of the many fields MBA students typically chose this year, Fordham students favored less predictable fields: just under 50 percent went into financial services, while 11 percent earning employment in consumer products, technology, and media, respectively. Unlike MBA graduates from many other NYC schools, however, only 5 percent of Gabelli students went into consulting, signifying a deeper trend of tech continuing its encroachment on MBA talent.
Compared to many other schools on this list, Gabelli’s distinct advantage is cost. The first year of the MBA program currently costs $49,645: more than 30 percent less than the cost of the Columbia full-time MBA tuition.
NYU Stern School of Business
This may shock you, but, NYU Stern MBA students are doing pretty well, with an average starting salary of $121,146 in placement of some of the most prestigious institutions in finance (32.4 percent), consulting (26 percent), technology (16.8 percent), real estate (3.5 percent), and retail (3.2 percent). Around 83 percent of those students landed jobs in the Northeast U.S., while nearly 10 percent of graduates found positions in Asia, Europe, and South America. Nearly half of all job offers were the result of an internship facilitated by NYU.
Like the trend at Gabelli, NYU grads jumping into tech has been steadily climbing over the past few years, rising from just 6 percent of employed grads from the Class of 2014, to 17 percent for the most recent class. The incremental increase coincides with the school’s recently added Tech MBA.
Stevens Institute of Technology School of Business
In a metro brimming with very successful business schools, the Stevens Institute of Technology School of Business separates itself with an incredible employment placement rate of 94.9 percent; the best placement among all business schools in the country, according to U.S. News & World Report.
The Stevens MBA faculty claim to provide “exceptional career services much earlier than other universities.” 90 percent were employed in the industry of their choice. Starting salaries fell between $88,805—$125,000. Companies such as Goldman Sachs, Protiviti, PwC ,and Prudential offered employment opportunities for these students.
Cornell University’s SC Johnson Graduate School of Management
About 93 percent of students from Cornell‘s Ithaca and NYC campuses received employment offers within six months of graduation. The average base salary was $125,578, which was an increase from previous years “driven by salary growth in consulting and finance.” Chosen fields for students were finance (38 percent), consulting (26 percent), and general management (21 percent). Out of the 122 companies that sought 2017 graduate students, the top recruiters were Citi Group, Amazon, Deloitte Consulting LLP, Ernst & Young, and McKinsey & Company.
Even Cornell MBA students in an internship were earning some of the best salaries in the country, pulling in a reported $8,764 per month. Those figures out over a 12-month rate are more than triple the average intern salary, according to Glassdoor data.
Columbia Research Warns of Chinese Housing Crisis
A surge in the Chinese housing market may have massive cultural implications, according to research from the Columbia Business School. Costs have outpaced both Chinese national incomes and global housing prices, and “become an issue of concern for the Chinese government and its citizens.”
