Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

i need your ideas about those B schools are they worth their universities reputation

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, June 30, 2003 - 04:21 am: Edit

Do you mean for postgraduate or undergraduate?

By Ader (Ader) on Monday, June 30, 2003 - 06:10 am: Edit

whatever but i'am mainly concerned with the postgraduate

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, June 30, 2003 - 11:19 am: Edit

The study of Business is regarded by many of the older universities in Britain as a "mickey mouse" degree, of no scholarly value. Comparatively few of the heads of companies on the FTSE 100 have degrees in Business. So a lot of the business programs at the top universities are new, and some of them are little more than cash cows for attracting rich foreigners who like to waste money.

The best postgraduate Business program in Britain is at the London Business School. They have a very good program there, comparable to Insead/Sloan at MIT or Stern at NYU. The Cranfield School of Management also has a decent MBA program, but it is quite a way behind LBS. Oxford's business school is new and Cambridge's (the Judge Institute) is even newer. They are literally just finding their feet, and their names must carry some cache if nothing else. Imperial College Management School is nothing special, but it is one of the leaders in the small number of decent UK schools with MBA programs (Warwick, City, Manchester, Edinburgh and the ones I've already mentioned).

By Yahni (Yahni) on Monday, June 30, 2003 - 09:20 pm: Edit

Ader,

I would definetely agree with Areal, both Oxford and Camb. very prestigious even two of the most prestigious universities in the world. So does Imperial, however Imperial is very nice for mostly for science and engineering although they have a strong business program. However, if you are really interested in business, the best place is definetely LBS, which is something like Insead, Harvard, Stanford, or Kellog business school. LSE is of course very strong in economics and have world class repution. Both LSE and LBS are colleges of U. of London like Imperial.

On the other hand nothing can be bad about with all these schools (Loxbrige), they all have a very strong global reputation especially oxford and cambridge. Eventhough I really do not know Said school and Cambridge but I am positive that they should also be fine.

By Ader (Ader) on Monday, June 30, 2003 - 10:37 pm: Edit

don't you think that eventhough they are stil new, they could as much importance as the oldest and the biggest one

By Yahni (Yahni) on Monday, June 30, 2003 - 11:22 pm: Edit

Ader, the time is very important for a university/program to develop. Once it is as old as 50 years, you are right it is no more important because it gives lots of graduates and lots of important people.

However, for Oxford and Cambridge, whatever program it is they should be fine. But once again, in business and economics, I would say london, it is one of the best (even maybe the best) in the world.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 - 06:03 am: Edit

The Oxford and Cambridge business schools are very, very new. The Said Business School was founded in 1996, and the Judge Institute of Management in 1990. Not many of their graduates are in positions where they can have reached the upper echelons of the business world just yet.

By Pds112 (Pds112) on Tuesday, July 01, 2003 - 09:27 pm: Edit

Oxford is the most prestigious univ. in the world. Cambridge is close to Harvard and Yale in prestige. Imperial College is a great college, but if you go outside England, no one has heard of it, and an Oxbridge degree will look better. You can't go wrong in this schools, but Oxbridge will give you a more classical experience that has more of a degree.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 - 03:53 am: Edit

Pds112 - do you not read anyone else's posts? Imperial College has over 20% of its students coming from outside of the UK. Just because you have never heard of a university, does not mean that nobody outside of the UK has heard of it. Do not be so ignorant.

By Yahni (Yahni) on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 - 07:39 am: Edit

Pds112,

Yesterday, I was at DMV. In the line, I met with a gentleman, he was from Pakistan. I told him that I am a student at Stanford and thinking of going to Imperial for post graduate studies. He told me that Stanford is a great place but Imperial is excellent. If an avarege person doesn' t know IC in US doesn' t mean that IC is not known in the world.

On the other hand, I agree with you about Oxbridge. Besides, Cambridge definetely more prestigious than Yale, Princeton and even Stanford. Maybe even Harvard.

But I strongly beleive that nowhere else in the world can be as good as Stanford both academically and socially) But of course this is just my opinion. And Areal, I think Internationals are even more around 30% at Imperial, I am not sure though.

By O71394658 (O71394658) on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 - 11:50 am: Edit

Most business employers know the best business schools in the world. They probably wouldn't be too impressed with a UK business degree. Maybe a Sloan or a Wharton degree, but not so much as an Oxbridge or other UK degree (except LBS).

By Diablo (Diablo) on Monday, September 15, 2003 - 10:39 am: Edit

Imperial College is having a new Business School built, and is already 2nd in the UK for Executive MBAs. The MSc in Finance course at Imperial is excellent and is going to be huge in the next few years when the new business school gets up and running. Oxbridge Business Schools will pale in comparison. LBS - watch out...there's a new kid in town....

By Diablo (Diablo) on Monday, September 15, 2003 - 10:41 am: Edit

Oh yeah....and Imperial has a huge global reputation....the person above who wrote about the fact that 30% of the intake is international is correct. Imperial attracts students from around the globe and kicks Oxford ass in the leauge tables every year (we're working on cambridge...)

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, September 15, 2003 - 11:01 am: Edit

kicks Oxford ass in the leauge tables every year

I don't agree with using the league tables as an objective measure of how good universities are, but this statement made me sit up. What a complete and utter load of BS. In 2001, for the first and only time since the league tables were published, Imperial moved ahead of Oxford. Three sets of rankings have been published since then in which Imperial is 3rd and 4th.

How about this for a genuine statistic - the average Imperial College student has A-levels that wouldn't get them into Oxbridge. Interesting, eh?

I recommend you check your facts before posting again.

By Diablo (Diablo) on Thursday, September 18, 2003 - 08:31 am: Edit

So, you don't agree with leauge tables, yet you quote figures from them describing "average" students from Imperial. Interesting...yes.

I'm sure that you know already that selection policies take much more than A-Level grades alone into account when sifting candidates for admission. You could also argue that as a pure Science and Technology Instiutute our gardes can hardly be compared to Universities that have more than Science and Technology to offer, especially as fewer and fewer candidates are taking up scientific, mathematical and technological A-Levels.

Well, thank you for your gracious invitation to check my facts; I'm sure you'll be delighted to know that I took your advice. Looking at the various leauge tables, that you also no doubt have browsed for your "facts", I can't help but notice that Imperial and Oxbridge have A-Level intake points that are incredibly close. This must mean that if the average Imperial student wouldn't get into Oxbridge with his or her grades, then by such logic, the average Oxbridge student shouldn't be studying at Oxbridge at all.

This poses certain other questions; such as on what grounds do students with less than the average Oxbridge grades get into Oxbridge Colleges? We could argue the toss about social standing, social exclusion and nepotism affecting Oxbridge entry....but it's been done to death before.

It seems you have picked up something of a superiority complex about Oxbridge. I can understand that, considering your imminent ascendency to the dizzy heights of Peterhouse, but must question the basis for Oxbridge's stance vs. other Universities. It may be argued that such a superiority complex is derived from an inherent inferiority complex. Oxbridge is not miles ahead of the pack.....ergo freak events such as Imperial jumping ahead of Oxford in leauge tables won't go away. Indeed, Colleges like Imperial I'm sure, will one day take prime position in such leauge tables. I anticipate your reply to this matter by stating that I have revealed my opinions in this post, some based on fact, some on well...conjecture.

Anyway....I seem to have rambled on for a bit there. You can rest easy in your seat now Mr Tex, or can you? The veneer is thinning on Oxbridge's lustre.....

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Thursday, September 18, 2003 - 09:01 am: Edit

The points score of an average student at Imperial College in 3 A-levels: 27.9

The points score of an average student at the University of Oxford in 3 A-levels: 29.5

The average offer made by the University of Oxford to prospective students, based on 3 A-levels: 28-30 points.

I hardly have a superiority complex about Oxbridge. I have in previous posts acknowledged that it isn't the mythical land of learning which you seem to be accusing me of thinking that it is. How does defending Oxbridge from a misguided attack imply some sort of mental disorder?

And if you want to argue about nepotism and social exclusion affecting admissions, go ahead

By Diablo (Diablo) on Thursday, September 18, 2003 - 11:02 am: Edit

Again, my counter to the "points mean prizes" argument in comparing Oxbridge and Imperial was given in the statement concerning the incompatability of subjects taken at Imperial and Oxbridge due to Imperial's specialisation.

I have no intention of starting up a debate about society and Uinversity entrance statistics for Oxbridge. It's been done before and I'm sure Oxbridge is starting to look more closely at their College's entry guidelines.

A mental disorder? No...more a state of mind. As for being misguided, I take Voltaire's approach to personal opinion.

By Africaccc (Africaccc) on Saturday, September 20, 2003 - 12:39 pm: Edit

Do some research before paying top $ in the UK. Reputation not enough!
I for one am NOT applying to do Political Science or the Social Sciences in Cambridge after reading what the QAA says. This is the UK government's own quality watchdog for unversities - hardly biased!
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/revreps/subjre...01_textonly.htm

Several colleges got top marks... but not Cambridge because of bad management and bad coordination on the SPS Social and Political Sciences Courses course. Confirmed by Cambridge itself in its newspaper:
SPS Tripos about to "CRACK" http://www.varsity.cam.ac.uk/8025694E0073CFEB/Pages/2712000_Morechaosin.html
“SPSed off!”
http://www.varsity.cam.ac.uk/802569...RIPOSABOUT.html
And the QAA lists other Universities getting straight As (bottom of page, like Oxford, King's College London, Warwick, York, Nottingham. Anyone else got good recommendations, views????

This QAA report destroys my illusions. Just goes to show you, buyers beware! Reputations can change!
I read in my econ history that Technische Universität in Charlottenburg Berlin used to be considered the best University in the world (at the turn of the century). Not so any more!