Part Time Vs EMBA

OCR is On Campus Recruiting.

The school can tell from their database whether you were a PT MBA or FT MBA graduate, but when you are looking for a job yrs later, it wouldn't really matter whether you did your MBA PT or FT.

I am pretty sure EMBA is distinctively different from regular PT or FT MBA degree (meaning it's not the same piece of paper. A FT or PT MBA student typically lists just MBA on the resume but EMBA students have to put EMBA on the resume)

Why does it cost more? I guess it depends on the program (if it does cost more) because like you said it covers for weekend expenses, but some programs have international experiences and other programs (i.e. - Tuck EMBA apparently travels to different Fortune 500 companies and hold seminars or classes on foreign locations)

Experience and classes? A lot of bschools put PT and FT MBA students in same class (especially for electives) but EMBA students only take courses with EMBA students because they operate on different calendar. So it should be a different experience.

Which one is better? Again, it's based on individual need. If you are relatively young (even in early 30's), PT MBA is probably better because courses will be more relevant to your needs and also your classmates will be around your age, etc. If you are older and you are in charge of running a segment of your business (and you are almost always in office), EMBA is probably better for similar reasons.

Also, in schools like Booth, PT MBA is flexible. You can take ANY electives you want. In EMBA, you cannot take any electives, it is a fixed general management curriculum. EMBA is much easier to get into if you have the years of experience. Booth weekend MBA's average GMAT score is 700, almost comparable to the 710 of full time program. EMBA fees typically include lodging and meal charges, PT fees don't. Wharton EMBA costs 173K and Columbia EMBA costs 149k - compare that to Booth's PT MBA for 100k (you pay for your own lodging/meals).

Just to clarify nink, I believe all PT FT EMBA programs give you the same piece of paper, that just says MBA...

So I guess unless your company us paying for the EMBA why would you do that vs PT? I am not clear..

I thought Wharton EMBA allowed electives?

Posted from my mobile device

I think you may be right. Although when i visit EMBA FAQ site for all the top schools, they don't answer whether your degree says EMBA or MBA but all the tier2 and tier 3 schools clarify that it will simply say MBA. I guess it's a strong selling pt on their part.

Mainhoon, EMBA courses emphasize especially on leadership and management. If you are not in position to run a company at this pt of your career, you should consider PT MBA. Like I said, the course offerings are more relevant for non-executives.

Probably, I am not sure. I was referring to Booth.

Damn, that Wharton EMBA must be a cash cow!

Anyone here has any insights on the Berkeley-Columbia EMBA? How is that different from the regular Columbia EMBA? It seems Haas does not have an EMBA of its own...

Anyone want to pitch in Kellogg Parttime vs Booth Parttime vs Haas Parttime.. They are all seemingly equal...

Can some one add thoughts to Part time Haas/Kellogg/Booth vs McCombs EMBA? I am in Houston and I can see the travel component being a downside for these part time programs but would like to know what you think? Any one here flying for part time programs?

It depends. If you plan to continue to work in Texas the regional networking of UT would be better for you. Even if you go to a great school like Haas/Kellogg the network may not benefit you as much in Houston. Not to mention UT has an EMBA offered in Houston. Also, you may want to consider Cornell-Queen's EMBA which is offered in Houston. But it may also face the same limited network your top choices face.

Can someone explain the differences between Columbia EMBA and Berkeley-Columbia EMBA? I read that with BCEMBA you get two degrees, is that one from Haas and one from Columbia? Anyone in these programs please opine.. Thanks