唉,别说什么什么的逼谁谁报中欧,好像报了就能录似的,看不惯一群天天说哪个学校好哪个学校不好,今天报这个不报那个的同学,能不能录还不一定呢.中欧是FT 22名了,不是你因为别的学校学费高,才打算申请的.WHY CEIBS这个问题,你以为那么容易就答了的?是骡子是马,要拉出去才能知道.
正在申请或准备申请长江的朋友们，要仔细掂量掂量袋子里的银子够不够？此外还要想想，长江的PROGRAM是怎么在一年里IMPROVE了50%的。（其学费一年里长涨了50%！）
http://www.ckgsb.com/proj_mba/index_mba.php?btn_id=6
my god!!!!
这种学校也配收那么贵得学费。
长江的MBA是三年三个价：12万，15万，22万
随心所欲。
这下完了。。。
22万会吓退很多人的，不知道他们怎么想的。。。谁还读得起啊，除非给奖学金。。。
：-（
长江值这个价吗？
长江的教授都是华人教授。除了个别冒尖的，大部分都来自美国二三流的学校。据反映有的教授英语口语都很差。长江基本招收不到国际学生，绝大部分都是本土生员。具有相同的文化和教育背景。缺乏国际化的视野。学生也就上课使用chinese english,其余时间基本都是用国语交流。在这种环境下，英语能力很难有提高。长江也没有获得国际权威认证，没有真真意义上的exchange program.也就是单向花钱让学生出去转一圈，所以名额极为有限。而且存在极大的不确定性。长江mba项目是由老李的基金会拨款，但经费有限。学费涨价也是为了贴补财政紧张的不得已的手段。有人误以为长江是老李的，所以毕业后可以自由进出他名下的企业，那就大错特错了。试问他的毕业生有几人能进入老李的企业。
List of Professors from CKGSB:
Operations management
Chen, Hong, University of British Columbia. He also visited HKUST and Tsinghua
Zheng, Yusheng, Wharton.
Li, Lide, Yale/MIT.
Finance,
Lang, Hsieng-Ping, Chinese U.HK/NYU/Michigan State/Ohio State. Visited at Chicago and taught at Wharton as well.
Huang, Ming, Stanford/Chicago
Cao, Huining, UC Berkeley/UNC, Chapel Hill. visited OSU
Marketing,
Jiang, jeongwen, Washington University at St Louis/HKUST/NUS.
Sun, Baohong, Carnegie Mellon University/UNC-Chapel Hill, visited UC Berkeley
Zhao, Hao, Rutgers, visited HKUST
Zhang Shi, UCLA/Duke
Accounting:
Liu, Jing, UCLA
Xiang Bing, HKUST
Qi, Daqing, ChineseUHK
Xue, Yunkui, Shanghai Finance and Economics
Strategy,
Zeng, Ming, INSEAD at Singapore
OB,
Liu, Wei, came back directly after PhD from UMaryland
Lee, xiujuan, NUSingapore
CKGSB professors are very strong in OM, Finance, Marketing and Accounting. Much better than their counterparts in any Chinese schools with the exception of HKUST. However, they are weaker in OB and Strategy.
List of Professors from CKGSB and schools that they have tenure track positions:
Operations management
Chen, Hong, University of British Columbia, HKUST
Zheng, Yusheng,Wharton.
Li, Lide, MIT, Yale University.
Finance,
Lang, Hsieng-Ping, Chinese U.HK, NYU, Michigan State and Ohio State.
Huang, Ming, Stanford. Chicago
Cao, Huining, UC Berkeley and UNC, Chapel Hill.
Marketing,
Jiang, jeongwen, Washington University at St Louis, HKUST and NUS.
Sun, Baohong, Carnegie Mellon University, UC Berkele, UNC-Chapel Hill
Zhao, Hao, Rutgers
Zhang Shi, UCLA, Duke
Accounting:
Liu, Jing, UCLA
Xiang Bing, HKUST
Qi, Daqing, ChineseUHK
Xue, Yunkui, Shanghai Finance and Economics
Strategy,
Zeng, Ming, INSEAD at Singapore
OB,
Liu, Wei, came back directly after PhD
Lee, xiujuan, NUSingapore
List of CEIBS faculties and schools that they had tenure track positions
Operations Management
Linda Sprague, OM,
Fang, Yue, OM,
Finance
Chang, Chun, Finance,
Gao, Yan, Finance,
Tse, Kalun, Finance,
Xu, Xiaonian, Finance,
Zhang, yiming, Finance, University of New Brunswick, Canada, and Department of Economics and Finance, City University of Hong Kong.
Zhu, yu, Finance, no academic bacground
Accounting
Ding, Yuan, accounting, HEC
Xu, Dingbo, accounting, HKUST
Marketing:
Willem burgers, used to be at HKUST
Linda Price, HKUST and Insead
Linda Sprague, HKUST
Liang, Neng, Marketing, Loyola collge of
Zhou, Dongsheng, marketing, CUHK
Keith Goodall, OB, Judge Institute
William Mobley, OB,
Pedro Nueno, OB, IESE,
Fernandez, Juan A. , OB, used to be at ESCI,
Xiao, Zhixing,
Xin, Katherine,
Howard Ward, OB, no PhD, no academic background,
Arthur Yeung, OB/HR, no real academic background, an adjunct professor at U. Michigan does not count.
Strategy
Fryxell, Gerald E. , Strategy, HKUST,
Zhang weijiong, strategy, came back directly after PhD
Park, Sam, Rutgers, the
Economics
Alfredo pastor, IESE,
Rolf Cremer, Economics, used to be at
Wang, Jianmao, Economics, came back directly to
Wu, Jinglian, Economics, a well-known economist in
Xu, Bin, Economics,
Zhang Guohua, economics, no information
You should notice that faculties from CKGSB had been on tenure track at schools like MIT, Stanford, Chicago, Wharton, UC Berekley, Duke, UCLA, Carnegie-Mellon, NYU. UNC Chapel Hill, Ohio State, Michigan State, UBC, Rutgers, HKUST, ChineseUHK, Washington, U., Rutgers
CEIBS faculties has been on tenure track at schools such as
Texas A&M, Loyola college of Maryland, U. of Minnesota, U. of Florida, Insead, Amherst College, Massey University of New Zealand, University of New Hampshire, University of Tennesse, University of Oregon, Rutgers, Nyenrode
I only include schools in which these people had tenure track positions. For example, Professor Lang Hsien Ping served on the faculty at Wharton as a lecturer and served on the faculty at Chicago as an visiting professor but those do not count. He was never a tenure-track faculty at Wharton or Chicago. Similarly, Professor Arthur Yeung was an adjunct Professor at U. Michigan and that does not count either as there is no academic requirements for an adjunct professor. I will be surprised if Howard Ward or Arthur Yeung get tenure track offers from a top five hundred schools in US. Unfortunately, the Chinese media does not understand the difference.
From the web page of CEIBS, there is no message that Linda Sprague served on the faculty at MIT or Harvard. She has a Harvard PhD and an MIT Bachelor degree and did serve on the faculty in Stanford but it is not clear that whether it is a visiting position or not.
I believe that Professor Sprague is unlikely to be on the tenure track in Stanford. The two best journals in OM is operations research and Management Science but I cannot find any of her publications there. If you check professor Chen Hong, Professor Zheng Yusheng or Professor Li Lode, you will find each had more than ten papers in these two journals. You may ask others how Professor Sprague would compare with Professors Chen, Zheng and Li.
Finally, CK has decided to charge RMB 220,000. There must be a reason. It is still cheaper than top US schools. If the market is willing to pay such a price, then leave it to the market to decide. There is no reason to stop people from paying the price they are willing to pay. If someone is willing to pay 1 million RMB to buy a PP watch, it is their problem, not yours.
楼上那位是长江招生办的吧？嘿嘿。
FYI, guys, I once phoned CK to ask application info, one officer implied they would give each student who might get the admission schorlarship, but to my inquiry of the exact sum they might offer, he commented they would give in accord with different cases, in a word, no confirmed program yet.
I only include schools in which these people had tenure track positions. For example, Professor Lang Hsien Ping served on the faculty at Wharton as a lecturer and served on the faculty at Chicago as an visiting professor but those do not count. He was never a tenure-track faculty at Wharton or Chicago. Similarly, Professor Arthur Yeung was an adjunct Professor at U. Michigan and that does not count either as there is no academic requirements for an adjuct professor. I will be surprised if Howard Ward or Arthur Yeung get tenure track offers from a top five hundred schools in US. Unfortunately, the Chinese media does not understand the difference.
From the web page of CEIBS, there is no message that Linda Sprague served on the faculty at MIT or Harvard. She has a Harvard PhD and an MIT Bachelor degree and did serve on the faculty in Stanford but it is not clear that whether it is a visiting position or not.
I believe that Professor Sprague is unlikely to be on the tenure track in Stanford. The two best journals in OM is operations research and Management Science but I cannot find any of her publications there. If you check professor Chen Hong, Professor Zheng Yusheng or Professor Li Lode, you will find each had more than ten papers in these two journals. You may ask others how Professor Sprague would compare with Professors Chen, Zheng and Li.
Finally, CK has decided to charge RMB 220,000. There must be a reason. It is still cheaper than top US schools. If the market is willing to pay such a price, then leave it to the market to decide. There is no reason to stop people from paying the price they are willing to pay. If someone is willing to pay 1 million RMB to buy a PP watch, it is their problem, not yours.
Finally, CK has decided to charge RMB 220,000. There must be a reason. It is still cheaper than top US schools. If the market is willing to pay such a price, then leave it to the market to decide. There is no reason to stop people from paying the price they are willing to pay. If someone is willing to pay 1 million RMB to buy a PP watch, it is their problem, not yours.
说It is still cheaper than top US schools有意义吗？
人家美国人一个月赚多少，我们一个月赚多少？？？
有钱去美国和欧洲读好的。。。为什么要在长江？
难道长江的教授比欧美还好？
难道长江的教学环境比欧美还好？所以，market will give CK a lesson...
that's the only thing will happen to 2005 CK MBA program.
现实一点。。。这本身就是一个现实的社会。。。
FYI, guys, I once phoned CK to ask application info, one officer implied they would give each student who might get the admission schorlarship, but to my inquiry of the exact sum they might offer, he commented they would give in accord with different cases, in a word, no confirmed program yet.
Tell you the truth, I will try to get the offer from CK and I would not care how much they will offer for the schorlarship...
As soon as I get the CK offer, I would play open card with Ceibs people, and tell them if I were offered by Ceibs, I would not hesitate to change my mind even without schorlarship...
Reason is simple, I lost my trust in CK as CK is loosing good candidates via stupidly trying to test the marketing reaction...
看不懂，难以想象
With the exception of London Business School and Insead, Europe does not have any good business schools. Insead has been around for only 40 years.
CK cannot compete with the US top 25 business schools now. However, in the near future, with the commitment of Li Ka-Shin foundation, CKGSB should be comparable with reasonable US public schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State.
If you can get in LBS, Insead or top 25 US schools, then you should go there. If you get admitted in schools such as OSU, PSU, MSU, then CK could be a better choice for some people.
Again, I do not think we should feel so inferior relative to US or Europe. Yes, we are not as good now in terms of our economy. However, we need to put things in perspective and do not be short-sighted. China had enoyed a superior economy in most of the last two thousand years with the exception of the last three hundred. If China keeps developing at the current speed, we should be an equal player with US and Europe in about fifty years. Remember, it took Han Dynasty 70 years to develop and eventually beat the Huns out of Northern China. Europeans and Americans will be humming to come over to China to study then.
What I like about CK is its ambition, self-respect and self-confidence. CK's root is in china and it demands all the permanent faculties to spend 100% of their time in China. We Chinese are as good as Europeans or Americans. With a good system, we can perform as well. We can. We must. We will. Of course, Rome is not built overnight and only time will tell if CK is successful.
For people who think 220,000 RMB is too high, you probably should contact the admissions office to see if there could be help with scholarships or zero-interest loans. US schools oftern provide student loans or scholarships for qualified individuals.
to bargain with CEIBS by the offer of CK is not a good idea... Adcom, I bet, never think of CK as one of its competitors, the one result is that you are a good negotiator, nothing else.
The fact CK raise its tuition might be the strategy of segmentation and target market after compeletly SWOT analysis. CEIBS will not be thought as the most expensive B-school in Mainland China any more, at least right now. It is the right and best oppotunity to apply CEIBS, I m think it will also raise its tuition next year, due to the fast growing ranking.
花则不累 is right. Bargaining using another school's offer may backfire.
CEIBS is a pioneer in MBA education in China. They had this great idea while no body realized there was a market for MBA education in China. In this respect, it deserves the ranking by FT.
However, China has a big platform for many players to be successful. CKGSB differentiates from other Chinese schools in emphasizing high caliber research about Chinese Business from an international perspective and deep knowledge about international operations from the Chinese perspective.
Let's hope that CEIBS and CKGSB both become leading world class business schools, in the league of Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, Chicago and MIT. China deserves a few heavy weights.
it is normal to increase tuition fee by 4-5% annually and it is what most business schools all over the world do. but, soaring from 150k to 220k.......just doesn't make sense.
also get confused by grossman's words. it is good to hear someone cry out his ambition - at least we should not deny his courage. but only courage is not enough to be successful, or even to survive. Shouldering world top business school is not achieved by empty talking such as "we can, we will and we must", or charging a high fee, or any single-sided expectation. Sadly i found nothing concrete in grossman's words but exactly what as mentioned above any mature or sensible business should avoid.
ckgsb should bear in mind that market will not be altered by one single business and market will not spare those who run off track.
With the exception of London Business School and Insead, Europe does not have any good business schools. Insead has been around for only 40 years.
CK cannot compete with the US top 25 business schools now. However, in the near future, with the commitment of Li Ka-Shin foundation, CKGSB should be comparable with reasonable US public schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State.
If you can get in LBS, Insead or top 25 US schools, then you should go there. If you get admitted in schools such as OSU, PSU, MSU, then CK could be a better choice for some people.
Again, I do not think we should feel so inferior relative to US or Europe. Yes, we are not as good now in terms of our economy. However, we need to put things in perspective and do not be short-sighted. China had enoyed a superior economy in most of the last two thousand years with the exception of the last three hundred. If China keeps developing at the current speed, we should be an equal player with US and Europe in about fifty years. Remember, it took Han Dynasty 70 years to develop and eventually beat the Huns out of Northern China. Europeans and Americans will be humming to come over to China to study then.
What I like about CK is its ambition, self-respect and self-confidence. CK's root is in china and it demands all the permanent faculties to spend 100% of their time in China. We Chinese are as good as Europeans or Americans. With a good system, we can perform as well. We can. We must. We will. Of course, Rome is not built overnight and only time will tell if CK is successful.
For people who think 220,000 RMB is too high, you probably should contact the admissions office to see if there could be help with scholarships or zero-interest loans. US schools oftern provide student loans or scholarships for qualified individuals.
我不知道你是否知道奖学金和助学金的区别。
赞同你中国要自强的观点，但别把问题的角度提得太高，老老实实做自己的工作，做一个合格的螺丝钉，机器就能好好运作。比如我厌恶日本人，但人家的确比我们强大，有好多东西不得不先学习，好的习惯不得不养成。你要引用历史的话，欧洲的发展源自于一次又一次的革新，日本的崛起也是源自于明治维新，包括周朝、秦朝的崛起也源自于阿拉伯国家把新的科技引入到中国。不如别人的地方是需要我们虚心引入学习再超越的。小日本当年不就是在唐朝的时候一批批地向中国人求学、请老师的么？
要想成功是要耐得住的，盲目的冒进、自大，后果很严重。:-)
题外话：你提到了汉朝驱赶了匈奴，知道给欧洲带来了什么影响么？哈哈。
长江好象还没有获得国际权威认证吧？
找的也是一帮走穴的教授吧？？
For a good B-school, we do not care how high the tuition is.
For a stupid B-school, we do not care how high the scholarship is.
CKGSB is a start up so it needs time to be recognized as an important player. Mr. Li Ka-shing is giving back to help the community and we should applaude his long-term vision. What makes a great business school?
1. top notch faculty
2. top notch students and a successful and influential alumni network
3. top notch administration, facility including admissions, placement and corporate center.
With Li's money and influence, it will be easier for him to get the first two quickly. however, the last one is harder as no one in China had the experience of building a top business school so everything has to start from scratch. I guess that is what a start-up is supposed to be.
CKGSB is a start up so it needs time to be recognized as an important player. Mr. Li Ka-shing is giving back to help the community and we should applaude his long-term vision. What makes a great business school?
1. top notch faculty
2. top notch students and a successful and influential alumni network
3. top notch administration, facility including admissions, placement and corporate center.
With Li's money and influence, it will be easier for him to get the first two quickly. however, the last one is harder as no one in China had the experience of building a top business school so everything has to start from scratch. I guess that is what a start-up is supposed to be.
这位长江的托，到目前为止你一直在吹嘘长江如何如何的好，但都没有令人信服的根据。你一会儿吹嘘长江，一会儿又用什么 just start up 来为长江开脱，叫人如何相信你。到目前为止长江的两界学生中，就有不少人对你所谓的 top notch 的东东颇有微词。长江能找到你这样的托也说明它的 stupid
For a good B-school, we do not care how high the tuition is.
For a stupid B-school, we do not care how high the scholarship is.
连你这样的死党都倒戈了。。长江真的没希望了。。
哈哈哈。。。
不好长江正因为我相信长江愚蠢的提高学费会吓跑一群好的学生。。。而好的学生才是一个商学院成功的基础
For a good B-school, we do not care how high the tuition is.
For a stupid B-school, we do not care how high the scholarship is.
With the exception of London Business School and Insead, Europe does not have any good business schools. Insead has been around for only 40 years.
CK cannot compete with the US top 25 business schools now. However, in the near future, with the commitment of Li Ka-Shin foundation, CKGSB should be comparable with reasonable US public schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State.
If you can get in LBS, Insead or top 25 US schools, then you should go there. If you get admitted in schools such as OSU, PSU, MSU, then CK could be a better choice for some people.
Again, I do not think we should feel so inferior relative to US or Europe. Yes, we are not as good now in terms of our economy. However, we need to put things in perspective and do not be short-sighted. China had enoyed a superior economy in most of the last two thousand years with the exception of the last three hundred. If China keeps developing at the current speed, we should be an equal player with US and Europe in about fifty years. Remember, it took Han Dynasty 70 years to develop and eventually beat the Huns out of Northern China. Europeans and Americans will be humming to come over to China to study then.
What I like about CK is its ambition, self-respect and self-confidence. CK's root is in china and it demands all the permanent faculties to spend 100% of their time in China. We Chinese are as good as Europeans or Americans. With a good system, we can perform as well. We can. We must. We will. Of course, Rome is not built overnight and only time will tell if CK is successful.
For people who think 220,000 RMB is too high, you probably should contact the admissions office to see if there could be help with scholarships or zero-interest loans. US schools oftern provide student loans or scholarships for qualified individuals.
honestly and personally, i do think these words make some senses to some extends, at least for the good English expression and logic reasoning...haha...
the problem is that he/she stands for a completely wrong position, which is so called CK...haha...my dear, share with you the following words,
出师未捷身先死,长使英雄泪满巾.
长江在定学费的时候，应该是认真考虑到了生源的博弈选择了。
个人的一点愚见如下：
对一个中国学生，恰好五年的工作经验，有很多人最后一年的月薪达1-1.5万，那么五年下来，可以积蓄10万元我想问题不大，但极少的人能达到22万。如果能挣那么多钱，这些人可能会考虑要不要去读MBA了。
也就是说，需要向别人/银行借钱，至少10万。
或者是学生的工作年限更多，6-10年才能积余到这么多钱。但如果是工作年限超过5年，则很多人都要结婚买房，买房成了这些人的负累，需要还银行按揭。依然需要借钱。
这使得绝大部分人都要借钱去读书了。
不过，我希望22万对长江不要有负面影响。依然期望它能成长，为中国培养出更多的高端商业人才。
感觉：长江有点儿急躁！须戒！
CK不是有点急躁的问题了,坊间的流言很多关于不正当竞争的事情,三倍薪水挖人,搞得转来转去还是原来那一帮子老人.我们大可不必在意这些流言,真正相信的只有我们自己的眼睛.
中欧这几年的进步是前些年踏踏实实做学问的结果,而且现在真正走上了国际化和本土化结合的独特模式,这点在我们与exchange学校的比较中可以看出来,更让大家高兴的是,中欧自己的文化也慢慢的形成中,认同感和归属感的增强,让每个同学都感觉到了"集体".同学们的凝聚力同时对学校也有了更高的要求.学校借10周年之际,向所有人表明了励精图治的决心和勇于挑战自我的胆魄.
好的地方我们没有必要天天四处宣扬,但是正视自己的弱点才是需要勇气的.学校根据同学们对教授的评价,直接换教授.而同学们也对本土的年青教授展示了宽容和帮助,每个学校都有同学们自己认为好的和不如意的教授,但是这种双方互动真正表现出了顶尖商学院的大气和风格.
学校给我们每个交换学生几个任务,寻找中欧可以借鉴的地方,推荐其他商学院中的优秀教授.踏踏实实,敢于面对自己的弱点,去改进,是学校的态度,踏踏实实用自己的表现去提升中欧,是我们每一个同学的默契.我们有理由相信,这样踏实的作风会让中欧的下一个十年更辉煌.
Let's have some constructive discussion. Suppose that you are appointed as the Dean of CKGSB and Mr. Li Ka-Shin has given you two billion RMB. (Harvard has an endowment of 2 billion dollars) What are the steps that you would take to build the school?
here is my suggestion:
1. Hire the best faculty with excellence in teaching and research that you can get. Build a campus and get certification of the programs from the ministry of education.
2. Differentiate the school from others and get the best students that fit with the school's vision well. Make a careful design of the curriculum that emphasizes the strength of the school and execute the course delivery well.
3. Build MBA program as the core of the school. using the faculty's connection to build exchange program with European and US top schools
4. Build EMBA and EDP program as revenue programs that help to make the school sustainable. Exchange with top foreign schools.
I believe this is what CK is trying to do. If you guys have better ideas, you may put in your 2 cents here as well.
有道理。。。引以为戒。。
有则改之，善莫大焉。
有道理。。。引以为戒。。
有则改之，善莫大焉。
连你这样的死党都倒戈了。。长江真的没希望了。。
哈哈哈。。。
不好长江正因为我相信长江愚蠢的提高学费会吓跑一群好的学生。。。而好的学生才是一个商学院成功的基础
我可不是什么死党。 我只是觉得当初我面试时问过他们这个问题，招生办得说应该不会涨，数月过后，居然涨这么多。 说话太不算话了吧。
我也不是被逼得要靠中欧。 只是670分申请长江，长江还要我重考gmat,好像我得考分低了似的。 后来我问了一下04的学生，它们说去年的很多700以上的高分都是进校以后重考的， 这让我感到很失望，这不是再做假吗？ 我实在是不懂他们为什么这样看重 gmat
闻所未闻的奇事,太离奇了吧?你说的重考GMAT是真的么?
不会吧？我认识的一个人，根本没有G成绩，都许诺会录取，就今年。还有没交齐资料的，都是他们的校长亲自面试那，可见他们根本不在乎G成绩，不然就是校长太有空了。
看来长江的名声是要臭了。。。
闻所未闻的奇事,太离奇了吧?你说的重考GMAT是真的么?
关于学费的问题, 可能是提高的快了一些.
但是今年的offer应该是和奖学金的通知一起发的, 所以你拿到offer的时候可以自己选择.
涨学费和打国际市场有什么干系啊？难道成本要从这个7万里面出来的？我觉得大可以在收学费的时候立两个标准。很多外国大学对本国学生的收费和国际学生的收费是双重标准的。什么22万不是大问题，哪个学校的学费涨幅会一下子提高50%？
1. CKMBA and CKEMBA have already received approval by the ministry of education. See http://www.ckgsb.com/chinese/index.php?article_id=664&l1=&ddbtn=. On the contrary, CEIBS has never received approval for its degree programs. The ministry of education acknowledged that CEIBS's degrees are recognized by a European agency, EFMD. Please check with the academic degree office of the Ministry of Education for details.
2. It takes time to receive international recognition by practitioners. CK has been around since 2002. However, in academic fields, CK is recognized already in several fields including Operations Management, Finance, Marketing and Accounting. Professor Chen Hong, Huang Ming and Cao Huining have published papers with CK as their employer in journals such as Operations Research, Management Science, American Economic Review, Journal of Financial Economics, Review of Financial Studies and Journal of Business. They have chaired sessions, presented and discussed papers in conferences such as American Accounting Associtaion, American Finance Association and Western Finance Association.
3. CK had exchange program with Wharton and UNC last year. CK will be working on additional exchange programs with Virginia, Insead, Columbia.
4. CK is exploring its cooperation with INSEAD. CK is also working on an English EMBA program that targets international audience. CK had talks with Columbia, Wharton, UCLA about sending their students to take classes from professors such as Huang Ming, Zhang Shi, Li, Lode, Larry Lang and Baohong Sun. CK is open to the idea of hiring faculties of non-Chinese origin but the condition is that they have to be full time at CK. This is the so called reciprocity. When western schools hire Chinese faculties, they are required to serve full time there as well. While I tend to hesitate to criticize other schools, one fact about CEIBS is that its permanent faculties are very weak.
5. CK will have its first class graduated in March. At this moment, CK stresses quality rather than quantity. One Lee, Chang-Hao can beat 14 top Chinese and Japanese go players. If CK can produce a few business leaders in the same league as Li, Ka-shin, CK will be very happy.
6. CK's faculties is the best in Asia. HKUST have some areas that are comparable, for example, marketing. As Professor Ming Huang said in his article, for academics who want to go back to China, the best choice is CK due to its emphasis on high quality research.
7. The administration at CK had lots of exprience in business education. Many of them helped to built CEIBS and were hired by CK due to that experience. Professor and Dean Xiang Bing single handedly built PKU's EMBA degree from nothing to a program with a revenue of 100 million RMB. He is a great visionary.
8. With the support of Li Ka-Shin, the campus is not a problem. It should be ready around next year. However, these days it is hard to get a land approved even with Li Ka-Shin.
开始还觉得这个grossman英语不错，对长江也算是忠心耿耿，不过，最近发现每次他都要把李先生的扔了多少钱在长江挂在嘴上，这就比较令人生厌了。如果以为有钱就能买来好教授好生源，就能办成一个好的商学院，那不禁令人怀疑长江办学的思路和价值观了。
老老实实做人，
踏踏实实做事， 是长江的风格。胸怀宇宙，袖顿乾坤，是长江的理念。
二十一世纪办学，什么最重要？思想。
1. CKMBA and CKEMBA have already received approval by the ministry of education. On the contrary, CEIBS has never received approval for its degree programs. The ministry of education acknowledged that CEIBS's degrees are recognized by a European agency. Please check with the academic degree office of the Ministry of Education for details.
Here is the information Benbenmao mentioned in his message
授予国外学位与香港特别行政区学位的合作办学在办项目名单
上海交通大学中欧国际工商学院 | 欧洲管理教育发展基金会 | 工商管理硕士 | 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0 |
here is what I said:
"On the contrary, CEIBS has never received approval for its degree programs.The ministry of education acknowledged that CEIBS's degrees are recognized by a European agency. Please check with the academic degree office of the Ministry of Education for details."
The degree awarded by CEIBS is through 欧洲管理教育发展基金会. CEIBS is accreditated by EQUIS. I checked on the web page and found this link: http://www.mba-courses.com/equis.htm. I also found the following excerpts which are interesting:
“…EQUIS has now accredited 4 institutions and more than 150 management education academics and professionals have participated in peer review assessments around the world. The impact upon institutional development and quality improvement has already been considerable.”
The Ministry of Education acknowledges the fact that the degree awarded by CEIBS is through欧洲管理教育发展基金会. The degree awarded by CEIBS is not through the Ministry of Education of
I am not saying that the degree from the Ministry of Education is that important. Maybe CEIBS did not apply. Indeed, I personally do not care much about recognition by any official agencies. As long as the market recognizes that CEIBS education adds value. That is good enough. I am merely stating a fact that the CEIBS degree is not awarded through the Ministry of Education and the issue of approval is moot. On the other hand, if someone stated CK's degrees are not approved by ministry of education, he/she should call up the Ministry of education and gets the facts straight before he/she posts these kinds of messages.
老老实实做人，
踏踏实实做事， 是长江的风格。胸怀宇宙，袖顿乾坤，是长江的理念。
二十一世纪办学，什么最重要？思想。
你地同我地讲甘地咩野，HAN番啦。如果真系同你所讲地一样，点解有人同人地打电话闹交。
把22万不当回事的主就会把长江当回事？
涨到22万就能发展国际市场？
发展国际市场一定要以伤害中国市场为代价？
好样的，中欧申请定了。
唔系卦，我湖北乡下。揾食唧，大佬。唔通姐姐你系广东人？而家我学紧上海话，同北姑一样，识听唔识讲，只会讲一句：格个小姑娘门槛老精。
In the end of the day, The school which can produce the best set of World Class Business leaders is the best school. That is going to take 20 years to be determined. Let's wait and see.
浩浩兮长江，
巍巍兮中华。路漫漫其修远兮，
吾将上下而求索。Mr. 落花流水,
Let me give you a tip in your future arguements:
字字有来历，
事事讲清楚。you have claimed that CEIBS have a similar set of faculties as Professor Zheng, Yusheng, Chen Hong, Huang Ming, Zhang shi etc. but you have difficulty to come up with a single name. That is very damaging and make your arguments very weak.
BTW, CEIBS is a very good school and I have lots of respect for CEIBS. But CK is the future, the one. That is why many people in CEIBS administration has decided to switch to CK.
楼上的，我记得长江说是十年达到全球前十的，而不是你说的二十年吧。
有钱能使鬼推磨，呵呵，鬼都过去了。玩笑啊。
当长江的执行校长李杰大言不惭地对申请者承诺长江会在不久的将来进入top10的时候，他没有给出任何的support, 除了李嘉诚先生的钱以外。在许诺高额、不限名额的奖学金之后，如今忽而又把学费涨了。整个长江的招生计划和宣传中充满了变数和随意，充满了为达目的而不择手段的商人气息，数字游戏--长江的校风。请问是否要对申请人负些责任？
我们需要的是那些能够关心她的申请人的需要，理解他们的理想与困苦的学校，不是这类好大喜功的学校。
“好雨知时节，当春乃发生”。这是国家教育部门首次批准中外合作办学机构独立颁发中国的高等教育学位，是中国教育改革的一项重大突破。对于长江商学院而言，这个喜讯是加快长江商学院大踏步发展的“及时雨”，更是广大师生共同期盼两年已久的甘霖！
自2002年11月获准成立以来，在国家教育主管部门的亲切关怀下，在李嘉诚基金会的大力支持下，在广大长江师生的共同努力下，长江商学院取得了长足发展，在国内管理教育界声名鹊起，赢得了学界、商界的广泛赞誉。这次的专业学位正式获准，更是体现了教育部和国务院学位办对我们的大力支持，和对我院锐意探索创办新型一流商学院的道路和成绩的充分肯定。
两年多来，我院坚持按国际一流商学院标准办学，从全世界范围内聘请近20名顶尖商学院一流教授常驻任教，致力于提供真正意义上的“中西贯通”的管理教育。5批共540名EMBA学员和102名MBA学生、上千名高层管理培训课程学生，在这里接受最先进的与国际同步的管理新知，交流和提升中国本土的管理智慧。
“为中国建立世界级商学院 为中国培养世界级企业家”是长江商学院矢志不渝的奋斗目标。我们期待着全体长江人以昨天和今天业已取得的成就为再次浩荡出发的始点，朝着激动人心的伟大目标继续奋进。
“好雨知时节，当春乃发生”。这是国家教育部门首次批准中外合作办学机构独立颁发中国的高等教育学位，是中国教育改革的一项重大突破。对于长江商学院而言，这个喜讯是加快长江商学院大踏步发展的“及时雨”，更是广大师生共同期盼两年已久的甘霖！
自2002年11月获准成立以来，在国家教育主管部门的亲切关怀下，在李嘉诚基金会的大力支持下，在广大长江师生的共同努力下，长江商学院取得了长足发展，在国内管理教育界声名鹊起，赢得了学界、商界的广泛赞誉。这次的专业学位正式获准，更是体现了教育部和国务院学位办对我们的大力支持，和对我院锐意探索创办新型一流商学院的道路和成绩的充分肯定。
两年多来，我院坚持按国际一流商学院标准办学，从全世界范围内聘请近20名顶尖商学院一流教授常驻任教，致力于提供真正意义上的“中西贯通”的管理教育。5批共540名EMBA学员和102名MBA学生、上千名高层管理培训课程学生，在这里接受最先进的与国际同步的管理新知，交流和提升中国本土的管理智慧。
“为中国建立世界级商学院 为中国培养世界级企业家”是长江商学院矢志不渝的奋斗目标。我们期待着全体长江人以昨天和今天业已取得的成就为再次浩荡出发的始点，朝着激动人心的伟大目标继续奋进。
我发现我和长江的一些人有些共同的特性，就是玩文字游戏，只是道不同，道非道，非常道。。。
现在有一些疑问，这里想问清楚一下：
1. 我查询过相关的法规，好像要授予我国的高等学位，就必须要依照教育部所定的法规，就连中欧也不例外（咦？怎么这么像《大腕》的一句台词？）中欧就是因为不参加，因此直到2002年才被教育部承认其颁发的学位，此前的是要去交大补考相关科目，获得除中欧学位外的一个同等学位证明。要颁发我国的高等教育学位，这就意味着要参加额外的考试，好像还要有学位论文。不知道长江的毕业生是否也要这样做。
2.长江颁发的学位，是否与汕头大学有关？是否是作为独立商学院还是隶属于汕头大学？
3.中外合作办学机构？我只知道一个是李嘉诚海外基金会，中方是什么啊？
请予以回答，谢谢。
题外话：我家里有一些文革时期发行的书籍，其中一些赞美之词、写作手法和这则新闻如出一辙。我个人对于长江目前所处的遭遇深表同情，之所以搞成现在的样子，我觉得只是他们少数人员的错误，弄得考生很生气，后果很严重。在到达成功彼岸以前，是要静下心来耐住性子认真做学问的，无论风吹浪打，着我心中轻舟一叶。儒家的一些思想毕竟有它的一番道理，古人诚我不欺。
我发现我和长江的一些人有些共同的特性，就是玩文字游戏，只是道不同，道非道，非常道。。。
现在有一些疑问，这里想问清楚一下：
1. 我查询过相关的法规，好像要授予我国的高等学位，就必须要依照教育部所定的法规，就连中欧也不例外（咦？怎么这么像《大腕》的一句台词？）中欧就是因为不参加，因此直到2002年才被教育部承认其颁发的学位，此前的是要去交大补考相关科目，获得除中欧学位外的一个同等学位证明。要颁发我国的高等教育学位，这就意味着要参加额外的考试，好像还要有学位论文。不知道长江的毕业生是否也要这样做。
2.长江颁发的学位，是否与汕头大学有关？是否是作为独立商学院还是隶属于汕头大学？
3.中外合作办学机构？我只知道一个是李嘉诚海外基金会，中方是什么啊？
请予以回答，谢谢。
题外话：我家里有一些文革时期发行的书籍，其中一些赞美之词、写作手法和这则新闻如出一辙。我个人对于长江目前所处的遭遇深表同情，之所以搞成现在的样子，我觉得只是他们少数人员的错误，弄得考生很生气，后果很严重。在到达成功彼岸以前，是要静下心来耐住性子认真做学问的，无论风吹浪打，着我心中轻舟一叶。儒家的一些思想毕竟有它的一番道理，古人诚我不欺。
虽然我今年放弃申请了。。但到这里来看看人就觉得很有意思。。
特别是看到PIZI的帖子。。哈哈哈哈哈
人工置顶。。。
让长江招办的人好好学习，天天看看。。
首先祝贺长江被正式批准为“工商管理硕士授予单位”。但是，作为一个商学院更重要的是要得到市场和学生的认可，毕竟花去那么多银子和时间不是去仅仅得到一个学位而已，如果仅是为了学位不如考国内其它的商学院，那样不仅有学位而且还有学历。
一个优秀的商学院主要的工作不应该只是集中在宣传上，应该把精力用在教学和学生的就业指导上，这样才能够得到大家的认可，长江要求有5年的工作经历，我想，工作过5年的人不会仅仅为了一个学位而放弃多年来辛勤的工作和累计的人脉关系，大家追求的是发掘自己最大的潜能，能够登上自己心中的高峰。而不是为了一个虚名去买单。
不过还是祝贺长江！
万山不许一溪奔，
拦得溪声日夜喧，
到得前头山脚尽，
堂堂溪水出前村。
[宋] 杨万里
大侠,
你这首诗引得太搞笑了. 没必要把自己搞得象个受尽迫害的贞节烈女一样吧!! 实在忍不住要说你几句.句句都是心里话,请见谅. 我下去笑去了:-)
大侠,
你这首诗引得太搞笑了. 没必要把自己搞得象个受尽迫害的贞节烈女一样吧!! 实在忍不住要说你几句.句句都是心里话,请见谅. 我下去笑去了:-)
为什么是受迫害的烈女呢？我从头到尾就看到溪了。
中欧是好样的，希望不要打压长江。中欧和长江都是改革开放的产物，本是同根生，
相煎何太急！长江有长江的追求，中欧有中欧的目标。和为贵，都是在为国家做事。中欧是好样的，希望不要打压长江。中欧和长江都是改革开放的产物，本是同根生，
相煎何太急！长江有长江的追求，中欧有中欧的目标。和为贵，都是在为国家做事。看来哥们喜欢熬通宵阿。早上5点多发这个帖子。不过希望你在另外一个帖子里面，把你0:26的帖子改改，不然不仔细的人看不出你思维的变化，以为你两面三刀的。
有关认证的问题。
看了前面的讨论，好像关于商学院认证的说法很多，自己也有点不知所以；正好今天有点空，就上网查了一下，以下是我查到的结果，希望与大家分享。
1/ 有关教育部的认证
看了一下教育部的网站，没有发现相关的名单；再查“国务院学位委员会”，这个机构性质：“国务院学位委员会办公室是国务院学位委员会的日常办事机构，统筹规划并归口管理全国的学位与研究生教育工作，设在教育部，与教育部学位管理与研究生教育司、教育部学位办公室、“211工程”办公室合署办公，同时承担《亚太地区相互承认高等教育学历、文凭、学位公约》中国国家级执行机构的工作。”看来应该就是这个机构在从事教育部的学位认证工作。
有关已经被认证的“授予国外学位与香港特别行政区学位的合作办学在办项目名单”（截止2004年6月30日），大家可以参见前面出现过的链接：http://www.jsj.edu.cn/mingdan/002.html。因为截止2004年6月，所以没有长江，可以理解。
下面是中欧和长江各自的审批文件
中欧： http://www.ceibs.edu/news/2002/images/0201_degree.gif
长江：http://www.ckgsb.com/upload/image/article/10474785544.jpg
一个是“同意”，另一个是“批准”，究竟其中有没有区别？大家可以自己判断。我的看法是，对于中欧这样的独立的中外合作办学机构，教育很难出示所谓“批准”的文件，中欧也不会这样申请。所以，尽管用词为“同意”，但并不意味着教育部仍未公开承认中欧颁布的MBA学位，中欧也断无再次申请所谓教育部“批准”学位的道理。对于长江，其官方网站称这个“批准”是“国家教育部门首次批准中外合作办学机构独立颁发中国的高等教育学位”，其中“首次”是否确实，无从考证；但是至少从认证文件来看，看不出任何“中外合作办学”的痕迹，所以这一点是很令人起疑的。（当然不排除国务院学位委员会从来不会“批准”中外合作办学机构独立颁布的学位的可能，这样长江若是给自己按上“中外合作办学”的头衔，也就成就了这个“首次”。)
2/ 有关EQUIS的认证
前面的一些发言一直让我很迷惑，怎么可能EQUIS认证的机构连“一个手都数不过来”？我经常在FT上看到一些著名商学院的招生广告，很多商学院都会把这个认证拿出来作招牌。看了一下EQUIS的官方网站：
http://www.efmd.org/html/Accreditations/cont_detail.asp?id=040929rpku&aid=041029wupz&tid=1
上面明确说明：“EQUIS has accredited 82 institutions in 28 countries. ”。而且，EQUIS虽然起源于欧洲，但它已经逐步发展成为一个在国际范围内被认可的重要的认证体系，并且有越来越多的欧洲以外的学位被认证，中欧的MBA应该就是其中的一家。
看来这里有些片面的观点着实让人很担心。
看来EQUIS比我想像的好。我也是在网上查到的消息. 链接为：http://www.mba-courses.com/equis.htm
"EQUIS has now accredited 4 institutions and more than 150 management education academics and professionals have participated in peer review assessments around the world. The impact upon institutional development and quality improvement has already been considerable."
不知道为何和
hurma的不一样. 也许我用的网页不是最新的， 我对此深表歉意。 但两网页差别之大，令人诧异。| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |