Ultra Elite List

I am curious how a median can be 716. A median of 715 seems possible if there is an even number of cases, but 716 sounds strange to me.

120% Agree with you Hjort.
Let's assume that upenn overestimated the median and turned a 715 into a 716, anyway that is still a high target knowing that half of students scored better...

Even I remember thinking that 716 seems odd for a median but I did not dig deeper, after seeing both your posts I went to Wharton's page and checked and they state Average is 716. Maybe BW made an error?

https://mba.wharton.upenn.edu/mba/admissions/dates/#profile

Class Overview
Total Applicants: 5,622
Total Admitted Applicants: 1,219
Total Enrolled: 825
Male: 67%
Female: 33%
Minority Students of U.S. Origin: 27%
U.S. Citizens: 58%
U.S. Permanent Residents: 6%
International Students: 36%
Full-Time Work Experience: 99%
Average Age: 28
Average GMAT: 716
GMAT Range (middle 80%): 670-760
Average GPA: 3.5
GPA Range (middle 80%): 3.1-3.8
Countries Represented 60

I agree that 716 is probably close to the median. Considering that the SEM of the test is roughly 30 points, knowing that the median about 710-720 is useful information.

What is SEM?

Standard Error of Measurement- an estimate of the distribution of scores that an individual would be likely to get if she took the test an infinite number of times without any learning effects.

Thanks Hjort. Got it!

Another good resource for comparing business schools is the "CEO Production" thread that discusses the education biographies of executives at many major corporations.

https://gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=13835

I have recently added more CEO information for each of the ultra elite schools.

Hi,

The GMAT range for elite schools is normaly 670-750. Are there any exceptions to it? I have read somewhere that atleast 2,200 people scored above 750 last year. Where do those guy end up?

I have another question, one of my friend has 710 GMAT, 3.5 years full time strong work experience and a great story for interviewers (this guy comes from a minority group in Pakistan and struggled his way up). But his final GPA is only 2.5 because he was busy doing some part time work and could'nt concentrate on his studies. Also he has a fabulous academic career besides his final year poor GPA. And he is also relying on some funding or scholarship money for his MBA as he can't afford to pay his tution. What are his chances?

Part of the explanation to your GMAT range question probably lies in the following:

1) Prospective Ph.D. students also take the GMAT; the median/average at top schools is higher for Ph.D. applicants than MBA applicants. (Personal experience: 760 didn't get me everywhere I wanted and I sent an application to only 1 of the top 7 schools.)

2) Schools typically disclose 20-80 ranges, so in the case of 670-750, 20% of admitted applicants may have scored higher than 750, which is 240 people in the case of Wharton alone (based on 1200 admitted applicants). This should add up to a lot. (Of course, many of those 240 also got admitted at H/S/Kellogg/...)

(As pointed out by gayathri's post above, the range disclosed is probably more often 10-90 than 20-80, which would shrink the # of my Wharton example to 120, still many people.)

I agree that a significant percentage of the top scorers are probably Phd candidates. At least of the high scorers are probably "professionals" who are taking the test to help develop GMAT training materials and are not bona fide MBA applicants. Some of the top MBA scorers are probably more interested in money than prestige so they are willing to take a scholarship at a school with less prestige. Some of the top scorers could have exceptionally strong GMAT scores but little else so they probably go to lower cluster schools as well.

Another great resource for information on business schools is the Ambassador forum.


Hjort

you can conjure up a list all you want of top business schools but unless the student puts in the effort to make the most out of his/her experience at school, then these rankings don't mean anything. At the end of the day, it's all about the perosn. The brightest and the most active student at ASU Carey WILL have a brighter future than somebody at HBS who spends two years thinking that they will be secure because they got accepted. I work with plenty of MBAs who went to Wharton, Stanford, HBS, and they are just incapable in the workplace. On the flipside, I also work with tier 2 mba grads who excel so much more.

it's not about what the school can do for you. It's really about what YOU do while you're there

I urge people not do think of these lists as, "if I don't get into these top schools, then I'm worthless" that's not the case. You can make any school capable depending on how much effort you put in.

We are in agreement that the qualities that a given student brings with her when she enters school and over the course of her academic career are a key factor in the return (in a broad sense) she receives from her investment.

However, I also believe that schools can be viewed in a crude sense as massive input-output functions. Given a particular level of input (in terms of personal qualities such as intelligence, ambition, drive, charisma) an ultra elite school tends to provide a higher level of output than that same input invested in a school that ranks much lower in terms of reputation. Note that this is intended as a positive assertion with regard to the effect of reputation on outcome, not a normative one.

I just noticed on the main homepage of gmatclub.com that Tuck and Columbia were switched. Tuck is now an Ultra Elite and Columbia is an Elite.

Can someone explain the rationale behind this?