neo12345 wrote:
I think you should leave out the Economist and Business Week, they are not really credible sources. Their ranking methods seem very odd, and they deviate significantly from the true value of an MBA. For example, starting at the top of the list, BW places Chicago above Harvard and Stanford ???!? And Economist places Darthmouth & Haas above Harvard and Stanford?
You can debate whatever metrics you like, but most people are interested in a ranking which shows the post-graduation opportunities available, and the Economist and BW are wrong almost from top to bottom. I believe these rankings use an "employer feedback" method, which doesn't make sense. For example, I'm sure Deutsche Bank is upset they cannot hire H/S/W grads for their mediocre salary, so probably prefer the Haas/Columbia grads.
I think U.S. News is the only rankings which truely reflects the public perception of the degree, the quality of the admits, and the quality of the post-graduation opportunities.
Right, clearly the only way anyone could be ranked ahead of Harvard or Stanford is if employers game the rankings out of spite. Get a life.
A couple of things:
- Salaries between the schools you named are statistically indistinguishable
- "Employer feedback" is also used by your beloved US News ranking
- The Economist measures things like salary increase and career opportunities, while US News relies on GMAT scores and admissions rates
Literally everything you said is wrong. We are all dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.