I am not student from both schools. I suppose I am not bias. 1. As my understanding, class of 2009 means these student joined IESE in 2009 and will graduate in the end of 2010 or early of 2011(i am not familiar with IESE, so just from common sense); This is the 1st reason I prefer to trust that report. 2. My exp taught me to believe authority. In that case, who is the best person to know your school? I think it is your career office. That is why I never trust "so called" third-party like BW. 3. Data on Said in BW is too odd. For example, School-facilitated activities: 11 %, Graduate-facilitated activities: 9 %, No information provided by graduate: 81 %, pls add them. The result is over 100%(101%). what happened? Although I know the career office of Said is not strong, 11% is really unbelievable, honestly(Actually, if the number is 30-40%, i think it is acceptable) I never say IESE is not good. I know it is a top school indeed although its brand in mainland is not very strong. But from the data(not the data you show but from websites of schools), I don't know what is the obviously advantage of IESE to Said. Don't be so bias....... Actually, I believe in EU, except Lbs and INSEAD, resources of other "top" schools are similar. This means these top schools are in the same level. It really depends on personal situation to select anyone out of them -- by 会员 pursueMBA2010 (2011/7/21 18:25:24)
1 class of 2009 是2009年毕业,因为我是class of 2013, 今年入学。 2 任何数据只能做参考,我知道,但IESE 和said 数据差距那么大就说明了一定的问题。 没有问题的话不可能出现那么奇怪的数据,学校也会觉得丢人。 既然这么糟糕的数据能一直在那挂着,是不是也是在said的默许之下?? 3 101%的数据很正常,四舍五入造成的。 |