Schools that have grade disclosure

why do they do that? Bizarre. why would 51% of the student body collectively agree that only 20% of them will look good (in a manner of speaking)?

Feel free to call this a little bit abstract, but it's almost like the difference between capitalism and socialism. Do the kids who work hardest deserve to be rewarded for it? In my opinion, yes.

Additionally, business school grades can serve as an equalizer among students from different backgrounds. At a school where there is no grade disclosure, it seems to me that interview slots would be selected primarily based on pedigree and performance in the far past (undergraduate institution and work experience). In my opinion, if the kid from Indiana University and Big 4 accounting works harder and gets better grades at Wharton than the kid from Princeton and Goldman Sachs, then the kid from Indiana deserves to see the fruits of his labor.

Could you imagine if they tried to do this at the Undergraduate level? If employers couldn't see the grades of undergrads, what other information would they have to recruit based on? Where they went to high school? Their SAT scores? Both of these are highly correlated with economic background and race.

Proponents of grade non-disclosure mention that it fosters teamwork and allows students to take classes that they are really interested in, rather than classes that they think they will excel at. I buy this argument for the University of Chicago, as the GSB does not have a core curriculum. However, for almost every other school - there is a set core curriculum for first years. If first years are all taking the same classes, and recruiting for internships which may well turn into full-time offers, why not allow first years the opportunity to disclose their grades? They can take whatever classes they want their second year once internship recruiting is out of the way.

Although I won't personally be weighing this as a deciding factor in my search for school, I must say that grade non-disclosure policies certainly do annoy me.

Michigan - non grade disclosure
Tuck - I believe doesn't have grade disclosure

RF

Stanford has grade non-disclosure and I couldn't be happier. There's obviously a big amount of book learning here, as there is anywhere. But the thing I love most about this place is the people-I really want to maximize the amount of time I spend with them, and maximize the amount I learn from them. GND allows me to do so.

Its voted for at Kellogg. There is a forced curve 40% A, 50% B, and 10% C, but I am not sure how many teachers stick to this since supposedly its almost impossible to get a C and in some classes lots of people earn As. Personally I think this is better than at a school where only the top 10-20% are known. Here as long as you do the work you will graduate with a decent GPA. I have been told that the only companies that care here are the big consulting firms and major IB companies.

I would definitely not consider this a factor when choosing schools...especially after I learned how it really works here vs at other schools. Personally I would rather have a 3.5+ and get to talk about it than have GND where I would need a 3.8+ needed for the top 10% honors.

terp are you sure they vote for disclosure ? last time I checked, they vote overwhelmingly for non disclosure.

94% of students voted for non disclosure in 07 :
https://media.www.whartonjournal.com/med ... 7915.shtml

Pretty comprehensive if you ask me.

MIT has "optional" disclosure. If I understand correctly, the university won't release the grades but if students want to put it on their resume they can. APparently, v .few students put it on the resume...

similar to what terry12 said, having GND allows students to focus on what REALLY matters in business school, forming the connections/network, researching your career, participating in experiential learning (case competitions, part-time consulting, starting your own business, etc), and taking chances (outside of core classes). The last thing I want to see is everyone panicking about grades and missing out on everything else that school offers. This is not undergrad anymore, and book learning is no longer the most important aspect of school.

with that said, people here (at Haas) still study pretty hard. They'll learn after a semester, according to the 2nd years.

my 2 cents.

I can tell you that having grades disclosed doesnt really make people very driven for grades here. Everyone pretty much knows you are getting an A or B (like most b-schools) and the only people gunning for all A's are the same ones who would be so they could get on the dean's list or whatever.

I think it isn't really much of a factor. I remember that when visiting schools with GND policies tried to say that without worrying about grades you are free to take what you want without worrying about getting a bad grade if you do poorly. I have not heard of a single 2nd year not taking a class they wanted out of fear of getting a bad grade...I think its more spin.

Even at schools that disclose grades, 2nd years will no longer care about grades. Their jobs should be set by that point in time.

The way I see it - where it really helps is for 1st years. If you don't come from a pedigreed or elite background, it allows you to work hard during your first year and even the playing field a little bit for consulting/banking jobs (probably the only 2 career paths that care about grades).

well, don't know about Kellogg, but currently Haas people are still worrying about classes (even with GND). But yes, like terp06 said, by 2nd year, no one cares. I'm just hoping people stop caring earlier so I can stop studying.

And yes, only consultants and bankers care, but there is a smaller percentage of them here, and even they voted for GND (last year it passed at a 98% rate). Must be a West Coast mentality thing.

I'm a fan of GND although I am applying to both types of schools. Regarding the Princeton/Goldman guy vs. Indiana/Big4 guy, the harsh reality is the employers will likely choose the Princeton/Goldman guy despite grades so I'm not exactly sure how much of an equalizer it is. An Indiana/Goldman guy is a different story though.

So you're saying if the Princeton/Goldman guy had a 690 GMAT and a 3.0 B-School GPA - he'd stand a better shot than the Indiana kid with a 760 and a 3.8 B-School GPA? One is trending upward and one is trending downward.

Tuck does not disclose grades.

mmm I'm not sure if introducing different gmat scores is fair since we're just talking about bschool gpa. I think Princeton/Goldman/760/3.0 bschool gpa guy trumps Indiana/Big4/760/3.8 bschool gpa guy in terms of banking or consulting recruiting. I'm not saying that's the way it should be, I'm just trying to think how recruiters think. I don't know how low gmat + low gpa would play into it.

Most recruiters know a lot of former bankers and consultants will go to bschool as a vacation (and not try very hard regardless of GND or GD). This doesn't mean they won't work hard and be stars when they get out.

I would not be surprised if they chose the Princeton/Goldman guy, especially if it's a "prestige oriented" job like the top consulting or banking firms. One has to realize that B-school academic work is NOT hard at all, compared to undergraduate classes, and the grades are inflated to begin with (the "B+ average"). On top of that, if someone worked their butt off to get a 3.8 GPA, as an employer, I would wonder what that student has done in the school in terms of leadership and career oriented training. Because if you are studying that hard to get a 3.8, you are sacrificing time where you can be doing leadership in conferences and clubs, and/or doing case competitions, industry research, sitting on non-profit boards, informational interviews, etc.

If you're just looking to hire someone who's book smart and can get his job done as an individual contributor, then yes, high GPA and GMAT are the way to go. If you're looking for a leader who have proven themselves in leading teams, projects, and organizations and have hands-on training, then the resume is more important than the GPA.

oh yeah, one more thing. MC and Banking firms will probably ask you for your grades anyway after the 1st or 2nd round of interviews. The GND policy ONLY applies to on-campus interviews. Outside of that, any firm (Google will also ask) can ask you and it's up to you to decide whether you want to answer.

In that sense, the bankers and consulting people can still get their 3.8 GPAs and tell the recruiters, while the others will never get asked. So yeah, if you think about it that way, having GND or not doesn't really matter other than getting that 1st round interview on campus.