Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Imperial vs. Birkbeck vs. Cass vs. Warwick vs. French University Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AfghanistanBananistan)
    Shows how much you know. Tuck is at Dartmouth, Sloan at MIT and Booth at Chicago. Just look at any ranking and they are all in the top 10 worldwide for any business related program, just like the universities they are attached to are more famous world wide (esp more than Warwick). Tuck was the first ever business school and Booth has most other firsts (ie MBA and other stuff, as well as rated the best by US employers). I dont go to either yet know that.

    I also dont get what you are on about in the remaining part of your post. Are u saying that WBS and Imperial are not exclusive or that the US ones are? It is just that you seem to be arguing with me but what i have been saying is that the UK schools are not selective compared to the US and are not worth the money because in the global world of MBA's (where most students in the UK are foreign so will work abroad), these UK schools are not that prestigious. Afterall, in the business world prestige is what matters to employers.

    To add a qualifier i got into Imperial and WBS for postgrad business and turned them down for the reasons mentioned.
    Tuck being a top 10 for MBA in the world is highly debatable. It maybe is a top 10 b-school in the US, but not the world.

    In the US, there's what they call, T7, which comprise the top 7 business schools, namely: Harvard, Stanford, UPenn-Wharton, Northwestern-Kellogg, MIT-Sloan, Chicago-Booth and Columbia. Then outside the US there are: INSEAD-France/Singapore, LBS and IMD in Switzerland. All these schools comprise the top 10 business schools in most people's book.

    Dartmouth-Tuck, Berkeley-Haas, Duke-***ua, Michigan-Ross and Yale-SOM are all great business schools though, but neither one of them can lay claim to be a 10 in the world. at least not for now.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobnob)
    In this case wouldn't it have made more sense to look at the records from 1968 onwards?:confused:
    LoL...

    the HBS database covers all the names of their graduates dating back from 1930. so what's your point?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by ILIGAN)
    LoL...

    the HBS database covers all the names of their graduates dating back from 1930. so what's your point?
    That there was no such thing as a Warwick graduate before 1968. So if you're comparing how many HBS students were graduates of Oxford, Warwick, Imperial etc, you should start your comparison at a point when all of those universities actually existed. Otherwise the results will be biased towards the older universities.

    Edit: Just to clarify, I wasn't questioning your point (I don't know enough about business schools in general and HBS in particular to do that), I was just pointing out a flaw in your method of comparison.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bhatsunil)
    Warwick unheard of in US? thats a simple " lie"

    Can you guys explain why Wharton would have undergraduate partnerships with Warwick in the first place?
    Warwick is a member of both PEM and GMAC.

    How many of you have heard about AACSB?

    Howard Thomas, Dean of Warwick Business School, began his term July 1, 2009 as chairman of the board of directors of AACSB International.The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)is the world’s most prestigious accrediting body for business schools and largest advocacy association for management education..




    >>>>>>> And people here say Warwick is unheard of in USA!!

    You have a very good point, bhatsunil.

    Warwick may be is not well-known in the mainstream US but for those who have heard of it, they surely would have found it highly respectable. In fact, according to the news, it was even Wharton who contacted Warwick to be their partner in the UK. Wharton could have done that to LSE or Imperial or UCL, but they did not. Just shows how respected Warwick is for those who are in the know.

    http://www.wbs.ac.uk/news/releases/2...on/and/Warwick
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobnob)
    That there was no such thing as a Warwick graduate before 1968. So if you're comparing how many HBS students were graduates of Oxford, Warwick, Imperial etc, you should start your comparison at a point when all of those universities actually existed. Otherwise the results will be biased towards the older universities.

    Edit: Just to clarify, I wasn't questioning your point (I don't know enough about business schools in general and HBS in particular to do that), I was just pointing out a flaw in your method of comparison.

    Okay, I see your point now; thanks for clarifying that. but even with the young age of Warwick's existence, you can still see that it's been sending graduates to a top US b-school, far, far more than what its peer unis have been doing. my point is: If Warwick isn't respectable, it would not have sent graduates to a top b-school at a large number. that's like sending 2 or 3 peeps to HBS every year, as opposed to something like 1 for every year from LSE and 1 for every 3 years from Imperial.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Is NYU STERN a good business school?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by laissezfaire)
    Is NYU STERN a good business school?
    Yes.
    It is good for Finance.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AfghanistanBananistan)
    Shows how much you know. Tuck is at Dartmouth, Sloan at MIT and Booth at Chicago. Just look at any ranking and they are all in the top 10 worldwide for any business related program, just like the universities they are attached to are more famous world wide (esp more than Warwick). Tuck was the first ever business school and Booth has most other firsts (ie MBA and other stuff, as well as rated the best by US employers). I dont go to either yet know that.

    I also dont get what you are on about in the remaining part of your post. Are u saying that WBS and Imperial are not exclusive or that the US ones are? It is just that you seem to be arguing with me but what i have been saying is that the UK schools are not selective compared to the US and are not worth the money because in the global world of MBA's (where most students in the UK are foreign so will work abroad), these UK schools are not that prestigious. Afterall, in the business world prestige is what matters to employers.

    To add a qualifier i got into Imperial and WBS for postgrad business and turned them down for the reasons mentioned.
    No that only shows how unknown (except for MIT) these names are in Europe. I don't understand why you talk about business degrees and MBAs? What does an MBA have to do with anything? MBAs are for poeple that already have jobs. I am a student and I am looking for a well respected degree in finance.

    Also, I don't understand why you keep chattering about business degrees. I want a degree in quant. finance and not in business. I want to do something demanding dude :-)

    I think there is a general problem with the UK/USA higher education system. If I where english I would go to France or Germany to study for free and then come back later (unless I get accepted to Oxford/Cambridge or to a well respected school in the US) as the other universities do not seem to have any advantage over regular universities in France/Germany.

    There are so many threads here where ppl ask if cass is better than birkbeck etc. Why do you even consider studying there if you lose 15-20k for sure?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Well, the fact of the matter is that even-though you don't like the US/UK education system, US dominates for finance. My lecturer @ LSE said that the top 6 departments for finance are in the US.
    Let's just think about it, most theories, concepts they're all invented over there. Europe hasn't really given a lot to quant finance, except for 'Bachelier'. Apart from that I don't recall any other major developments. It would be a bit stupid if you just ignored facts, just b/c you don't like the US/UK education systems. US dominates, followed by UK and then Conti Europe probably light years behind for finance. Are you French by any chance?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes I am French. Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to insult anybody, I am just considering everything I have heard so far. The facts are:
    1. higher education is not free in the UK/US
    2. higher education is (almost) free in France and Germany (almost sure about that)
    3. finance degrees are among the most expensive ones
    4. according to most people here there is no advantage in studying a MSc Finance from a university which does not have an outstanding reputation (Oxfort, Cambridge, Columbia etc)

    From that follows that it would be better to study in France, to save the tuition fees and still have an equivalent degree. So unless you hold an offer from one of these top universities you might just as well go abroad.

    In the end it's all a bit of a caluculation: Will a degree from Imperial guarantee you a position where you earn 20k more in the first year? Considering what people have said here I believe this is highly questionable. Second of all, after 5 years in the job you will be evaluated on your performance in the job an probably not on where you have studied. Finally, people here say that you won't get into a good PHD programme if you don't come from a top uni. Which leaves no advantage at all to study at a not top university (Imperial, Birkbeck etc) in the UK/US. The "problem with the higher education system in the UK/US" I talked about was that they still want you to pay a lot of money, but why if there is no advantage?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    If you're just looking for 'Brand value' then the above mentioned unis, i.e. Oxbridge make sense, perhaps LSE,LBS too.
    Eventually, it boils down to what you want. Do you want to get your foot into the door of a top i-bank? Then maybe you're 20k will be well spent. However, if you're thinking in terms of getting value for money and a good student experience, I'm not sure it will justify the huge price tag. The truth is that a lot of students are willing to take the risk in the hope they'll land that dream job. The better the institution, the greater the probability of achieving that, assuming they meet all the other requirements. I'm myself, not a huge fan of all this commercialisation of higher education, but with a huge influx of students in UK/US they know they can do this.
    If the fee is 20k, it doesn't mean it's 20 times better then a uni charging 1k. It might even be the opposite!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Warwick is a good school, but lets not kid ourselves people. With the exception of LBS, I would take the the top 20 Bschool in US over any school in UK. For me, Tuck, Berkeley, NYU, Yale, Cornell and the rest that round out the top 15 US Bschools are much harder to get in and are more prestigious than Insead and IMD. LBS is probably the only schools that can be mentioned on par with the the top 15 US MBA schools. I have friends who got rejected from the top 15 US programs in consecutive years, and finally gone the Insead and IMD route. In general, its hard to objectively compare European Bschool to US due to 1 vs. 2 year difference. And FT ranking are not to be taken seriously because there is no way Lancaster is an overall better business school than Cornell.

    (Original post by ILIGAN)
    Tuck being a top 10 for MBA in the world is highly debatable. It maybe is a top 10 b-school in the US, but not the world.

    In the US, there's what they call, T7, which comprise the top 7 business schools, namely: Harvard, Stanford, UPenn-Wharton, Northwestern-Kellogg, MIT-Sloan, Chicago-Booth and Columbia. Then outside the US there are: INSEAD-France/Singapore, LBS and IMD in Switzerland. All these schools comprise the top 10 business schools in most people's book.

    Dartmouth-Tuck, Berkeley-Haas, Duke-***ua, Michigan-Ross and Yale-SOM are all great business schools though, but neither one of them can lay claim to be a 10 in the world. at least not for now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flugestuge)
    Yes.
    It is good for Finance.
    Its borderline top 10 MBA program in the US, which means with the exception of LBS, arguably better than any European Mba program.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.