Calling UCLA Fall 2009 Applicants

Yea, I have applied to some top 7 full time programs, but I have only had an interview from Chicago, no responses from Stanford, Harvard, and Columbia, and turned down by Wharton. So I was just considering other options. I would like to make a career change in investment management, or something similar, and hence the applications to full time program. But I have heard of people making career change from part time programs as well, so I was just wondering what other folks on GMATclub thought.

In this economy, if your employer pays for about 75% of the cost and they don't require you to stay with the company for more than 2 years, i would def do it part time.

Doing full time will be favorable if the economy and job market is in better shape but right now, there's too much risk involved.....

Yeah I have the feeling part-time admissions isn’t as competitive as full-time either. My old roommate applied to UCLA, Haas, and USC part-time programs. Got into Haas and USC (his background was entertainment, so I think they liked him for his non-engineer status…he says Haas part-time is all technology folks.). He has a low 3.0 gpa, and a 700 gmat. About 7 years of solid work experience, no direct reports though.

If you’re work is paying for 75% of it, then I think part-time is a pretty good option. Up to you. I think its unlikely that we’ll be seeing those 120k offers from I-banks in the near future. And those consulting positions will probably see a lot more competition because of the drought of finance jobs. Part-time does seem like less of a risk.

Another thing is that just because one does MBA part time, it doesn't mean that they won't have other opportunities.

Sure, my alma mater NYU stern doesn't allow access to job fairs to its PT students. But unless your goal is really to get into ibank or consulting, you can use head-hunters around the time you will be matriculating. On a resume, MBA is still a MBA. They won't discriminate for the most part.

Hello folks! I visited the UCLA Fully Employed MBA (FEMBA) info session yesterday. I must say i am very impressed by a few things: 1) All courses are taught by the SAME professors that teach the full time courses. I know this is not always the case with other part time MBA programs. Even HASS has adjuncts and part time professors teach their Weekend and Evening MBA courses. 2) UCLA offers schedule options, including all day Saturday, weeknights, and combination of a weeknight and Saturday morning. 3) The cost is reasonable ($30k per year for 3 years), especially if your employer will foot part of the bill. 4) As an alum you can take electives for life without paying the course fee (you must pay for books and parking); I think this is a wonderful idea....especially for a nerd like me! 5) Their global access program, its kind of like a thesis one has to do in a group, sounds great.....very practical. 6) They offer half courses in intensive week long, 3 hr a day, sessions.

Just thought I share this.

hi, read your posts...im in the exact same position as you are. i am also looking to switch careers into investment management and so applied to a couple ft programs. however, i recently changed jobs and my employer will pay for 100% of pt tuition at stern. although i was looking forward to a FT program, the prospect of getting an mba for nearly free is extremely enticing, especially from a top 10 school. however, i too am worried about career changing prospects. is there a certain stigma being a PT mba graduate?

If my employer paid 100% I would jump on it in a heartbeat. I don't think there is a stigma, everyone has his/her opinion on what is best - and there are downsides to both, but very few outweigh a free tuition.

I was told by few that its hard to get into investment management, so going to a top finance program would help. And hence I applied to Stanford, Harvard, Chicago, Wharton, and Columbia. But since it appears that I may not get in to those programs, and since UCLA FEMBA program seems so appealing, I may take my chance there.

Yeah i would think that a top Finance name would help out alot with an investment management position. I think geography has alot to do with it. If you want to be work in LA, or california; I think UCLA makes more sense.

One weakness about UCLA is not alot of big name consulting or investment banking companies seem to recruit out of there. If you have your heart set on Goldman, UCLA wouldn't be the best school. Although doesn't seem impossible.

After looking at their employment report UCLA does seem to have strong connections with companies that have a large presence in southern california. Investment management isn't one of those industries, I think you'd have to do alot of footwork for one of those positions.

I'm an Indian applicant with a Masters degree from a US univ.Do I need to take TOEFL?

I plan to apply for R2.I got this from their website and I believe I qualify for the second one but wanted to know your thoughts.

An applicant can only be excused from taking the TOEFL or IELTS if he or she:
• Holds a bachelor's or higher degree from a university located in the United States or in another country in which English is BOTH the spoken language and the medium of instruction, OR
• Has completed at least two years of full-time study at such an institution

I would assume you do not based on the qualifications above

I have good feelings about my UCLA application .. I believe we should hear back before the end of the year

When is UCLA going to release their 2008 employment report? This is getting really late and I am anxious to see the figures before I consider an R2 application.

I was wondering about this last week and searched for info. Found nothing.

I suspect 2 things:
1) Economy/Job market is so bad that they aren't quite sure whether to release the info. Might be waiting on other schools to release first...
2) Grads are still searching for jobs and UCLA decided to wait a little more so the stats look better

These were my suspicions as well. Doesn't look pretty for schools in this tier.

For everyone sick of waiting, just consider this...

I applied R1 and submitted my app and materials on 10/8. One of my recommenders went rogue, however, and didn't submit her rec until 10/28. This has pushed my application until R2, where I get to wait until possibly March for my ding, as opposed to January. That's right, upwards of five months until a decision! Now THAT'S a wait

What happened to the application status page? It's not working...

https://apps.anderson.ucla.edu/external/apps/admissions/status/

WOW... it's really not working.... maybe they are uploading the results already ...... you can't tell the way they are going this year...... I mean, application deadline was earlier, a new audio essay was there, maybe they wanna beat the decision deadline too......
Or instead of this wishful thinking, there is just a tech-glitch in the system... .. who knows wazzup but I so hope that it's the former one......

Wow, 67% invite rate for R1 so far for gmatclubbers? Congrats and hope the remaining 4 of you will still get an interview or get admitted without one!