之所以对Darden和Tuck这样的学校不待见，我觉得和这两所学校的教授长处在教学而非研究有关。 我没有细看单项的衡量标准，但是出paper量肯定有关。 -- by 会员 ieric (2011/3/16 22:29:58)
应该不是的
Specialty Rankings: These rankings, including executive M.B.A., are based solely on ratings by business school deans and directors of accredited master's programs from the list of schools surveyed. They were asked to nominate up to 10 programs for excellence in each of the areas listed. Those schools receiving the most votes in each specialty are listed and are numerically ranked in descending order based on the number of nominations they received as long as the school/program receives seven or more nominations in that specialty area. This means that schools ranked at the bottom of each specialty ranking have received seven nominations.
其实一个例子就是Kellogg的Marketing排名，一直是第一，但是Kellogg的Marketing已经多年没有什么像样的Research了。最近才刚刚招了一个专门作Research的。他们的Marketing PHD找工作很难.
另一个例子Stanford,业界传说他们的市场部教授在外面找工作没有学校要，听说不qualify。但是他们的Marketing排名还是很高。真正水平高的这排名是体现不出来的。按上面的排名方法的解释，这都只是一些印象分而已。
有一年据说哪家大的排名按照Publish的页数算学校的知识水准，结果，似乎是杜克拿了第一，大家都笑晕了。但是有人拿这个宣传了很多年呢。
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-3-23 20:54:28
发表于 2011-3-28 15:09:37
