ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
楼主: leon53
打印 上一主题 下一主题

关于长江的认证与排名

[复制链接]
51#
发表于 2011-4-30 21:52:02 | 只看该作者
你去算算CK每年的EMBA的现金流有多少,就知道东方广场那点钱根本不算什么。我个人怀疑把这个大厦买下来都够了。
52#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-4-30 22:30:47 | 只看该作者
你去算算CK每年的EMBA的现金流有多少,就知道东方广场那点钱根本不算什么。我个人怀疑把这个大厦买下来都够了。
-- by 会员 sxf112233 (2011/4/30 21:52:02)



东方广场本来就是李先生和董先生投资的······
GOOGLE的。
和自己的选择无关,或者不是站在选择学校的角度,如果我们单从看机构发展的角度看,CK和CEIBS这两个发展思路不同的学院,再将来10年后,会各自是怎样的一个状况,或者地位?哪位同学能说点看法。(PS:非以个人择校立场)
53#
发表于 2011-4-30 22:33:02 | 只看该作者
我个人觉得CK可能是 斯坦福,CEIBS可能是 HARVARD。2个模式。
54#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-4-30 22:41:51 | 只看该作者
哈,很精彩的评价。
55#
发表于 2011-5-1 00:26:11 | 只看该作者
ck可能是tuck,ceibs是mit,能成harvard的估计是清华
56#
发表于 2011-5-1 07:53:03 | 只看该作者
Tsinghua will be like Said School of Oxford. PKU will be like Judge School of Cambridge

CEIBS will never be MIT with its faculty but will be more like Tuck/Darden/Harvard.

CKGSB's ambition is Wharton/Stanford/Sloan/Booth but they need to do more China related research. So far all the faculties in CKGSB have published mostly in Western journals and got tenure there. They need to sit down and provide new knowledge for business in China.
57#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-5-1 08:19:40 | 只看该作者
Very interesting to get idea from you guys.
I think the why Alex said CEIBS is like MIT, the reason should be the fine tradition of scholarship.

So, according to grossman' estimate, which CK would be BOOTH/Stanford in the futher. Thus the priority is to win a NOBEL prize
(Or something like that) , but not any kind of ranking, acreditation. Is that correct?
58#
发表于 2011-5-1 09:35:51 | 只看该作者
It is more about good independent thinking and knowledge creation.

Chinese scholars should not just explain why Government policy is alwasy the best. Instead, they should provide criticism and a different point of view. CKGSB tries to look at issues from private entrepreneurs' standing point.

Private independent enterprises are the targeted sectors of CKGSB! Of course, CKGSB weclome ambitious businessmen from all sectors but what differentiates it from all other schools is its focus on private independent enterprises.
59#
 楼主| 发表于 2011-5-1 14:07:16 | 只看该作者
Quite agree with you. But still, I think in terms of practical evidence, some significant prize is MUST, if the goal is to be a school like BOOTH.

In terms of criticism about policy, I don't think it's a smart option for a school based in mainland, especially when located in Capital city.
60#
发表于 2011-5-2 01:24:09 | 只看该作者
yes. Tsinghua can move ahead if it can change its mindset.

One day we will have respect for tsinghua if its president can say that Tsinghua is a top school because our faculties have made significant contributions to human knowledge. Not something like we are number one because our government said so.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:


近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-3-4 20:06
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部