Interesting take bb,
I see both sides of the coin here. On one side, those who have a 700+ GMAT and a solid profile should apply with their GMAT. On the other side, you may have some applicants who have phenomenal professional experience, have shown a lot of professional growth and who have great LORs who may just not be great at taking standardized exams. They may also not have the time to give to prep as they may work 40+ hours per week with a spouse and kids.
It was actually Darden, and I verified on their website, that they are doing a pilot for the 2020-2021 application cycle where they are offering a standardized exam waiver for those who have:
1) A strong undergraduate and/or graduate record including performance in analytical coursework or disciplines
2) CPA or CFA designation or other professional certification/discipline
3) Master's or advanced degree in an analytical discipline
4) Seven (7) or more years of progressive, professional work experience in an analytical field
5) Strong performance on a U.S. college admissions test (SAT and/or ACT) or a national exam administered for admission to bachelor's study in other countries.
Maybe MIT is having similar thoughts in that there are various ways to determine if someone is ready for the MBA journey without the need of the GMAT/GRE?
bb
MIT Sloan has removed the GMAT/GRE requirement for all 2020-21 Applicants!Quote:
Standardized tests, such as GMAT, GRE, EA, TOEFL, IELTS, are a component of the application process and play an important role in our holistic evaluation process. However, in view of challenges brought about by the coronavirus pandemic, we will allow candidates for the 2020-21 admission cycle to submit their application without the test and review their submitted material as is and without negative inferences. If admitted, candidates will not be required to take a test.
https://mitsloan.mit.edu/mba/admissions/how-to-applyPretty crazy! I am wondering if it is Good or Bad? On one hand, anyone can apply who wishes to pay the $250 application fee.... so seems good but does it make it harder for people to stand out now? would over-represented groups be even more over-represented? Does it make easeir for people from weird or unique backgrounds to get in?
Edit:
Personally I am mixed on this change. I think the threshold for entry is definitely lower with this change. As the result, the applicant pool will definitely go up and the diversity will go up as well (potentially good) as people from a variety of backgrounds will apply without a need to have a 3-month prep period for the GMAT/GRE. At the same time, I feel this change so late before the deadline (less than 2 weeks until R1) is really really not helpful for the serious applicants who have worked hard and are in teh submission stages of their application. I feel this change is a bit desperate to be so last minute, esp when GMAC has just announced GMAT can be taken online again for 1 extra retake and GRE has been chugging along pretty well all this time. I feel the folks who have struggled with the GMAT should definitely find this as super positive news. At the same time, considering the competition and how hard it is to get into MIT Sloan, people who have struggled with the GMAT are not likely to get in anyway and I feel this will be a lot of crushed dreams and done mostly to drive up applications... care to disagree?
P.S. Since other schools require GMAT anyway still (and some have applied already to a few with R1 deadlines), this only makes a difference to a few users who got 660 with a great profile. However, those who are applying to Booth, Wharton, etc are going to take the GMAT anyway and this makes hardly any difference to them. It changes things a bit for R2, giving R2 applicants some additional strategies as I feel a few other schools will follow MIT Sloan so there may be a few options to apply without the test scores.
Posted from my mobile device