QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesQuoteOriginally posted by: HyperGeometricStanford MBA 2009 Class Profile says:Total Applications 5741New Students 362 (note that offers exceed enrollment) Harvard's Profile:Total Applications 8,661Total MBA Enrollment 900 (note that offers exceed enrollment) Harvard's avg entering class GPA 3.66MIT avg GPA of entering class of 3.5.It appears that the number of MBA applications have dropped dramatically in last 5 years while slots have remained fixed... the value of masters degrees (MBAs and MFEs) are gradually being recognized for being dubious (as I've always said in other threads). But you don't need to make insinuations about what the admissions rates are: it is basically 7% at Stanford and 11% at Harvard in 2008-9. Businessweek and US News publishes an annual issue that spells out all the rates. http://education.yahoo.com/college/esse ... lAdmission
Stats cut and pasted from above web site: * In last year's admissions cycle, the acceptance rates of the top schools remained very low. Stanford was in the single digits, accepting only 7% of its applicants (7,047 students applied for 364 slots).** * The Ivies remained intensely competitive, with acceptance rates of 11% for Columbia and 13% for Wharton, Dartmouth and Harvard. Last year Dartmouth received 14 to 15 applications for every first-year spot. Wharton and Harvard had the greatest number of applicants--just over 8,400 for both schools.Ok, so supposed this is true, and all MFE and MBA's are worthless, regardless of schools. What is someone at that stage of life supposed to do then?It's like a catch 22. There's a flight to safety, employers want the most experienced people to work for them, your at the stage where that portion of your career hasn't started, and you are deciding to either go to higher education, or wing it and find some job. I don't think the best advice would be to find any random job you can to weather it out.Because 1, you most likely will not find what you want to do. 2 the experience is not really gonna contribute to push you in the direction you want to go. 3 the wage is bad anyway given the economic conditions.If the bad conditions persist, all these people will have more accreditations than you, and assuming they are no less resourceful than you, can at least find a job just as bad as yours. If things do improve, your additional experience is not gonna contribute to where you want to go, also, you'd still have to go to school to be on par with them on paper, at which point opportunity costs will be increasing. And the debate of the degree of significance of rankings and signaling effects aside, they do contribute to an employer's hiring decision however small.Hence, i think it just makes sense to get your degrees done and out of the way so that there are no biases against you, or blocked opportunities in the future, and i think the earlier the better.And lastly, being a "change leader" wasn't quite what i wanted to say in my last post, although i'm not quite sure only PhD's can be considered change leaders. Most outstanding people in the industry don't have PhD's, nor do most leaders from any country. I think it's a completely different skill set needed to succeed at the challenges of life, as opposed to the challenges provided by a very academic undertaking. And if you got the former part down, then even though an MFE may be a rough set of tools to use to go into the world, but its enough to get all your bases covered, and i don't think you can get any more prepared for uncertainty than that.