<p>“Notre Dame is a very strong brand no matter where you go (including NYC) and, in every region of the USA, there is definitely a cadre of strong ND supporters and employers who know the quality of their students/grads.”</p>
<p>I don’t believe this number is very large.</p>
<p>Not where I live and I live near a major city.
Catholics care I guess, but even then not where I live.</p>
<p>Most employers don’t have a clue about Notre Dame, and most employers don’t read bw.</p>
<p>I’m just throwing this out here because it’s data.</p>
<p>Notre Dame has about 11,400 students.</p>
<p>800 students at Notre Dame are from California.</p>
<p>200 students a year, from California, go to Notre Dame.</p>
<p>That’s objective data.</p>
<p>That’s smaller than the senior year class at Lowell High School in SF…one of the best high schools in the US. 200 students from California is fewer than the students at 1 class at one high school in SF.</p>
<p>Very few people give a crap about Notre Dame. I don’t mean to pick on Notre Dame. Most people don’t give a crap about any of these schools after the age of 23. (Unless they are parents of high school students). Well, maybe a few alumni care. :)</p>
<p>Notre Dame
Residence Percent
Illinois 11%
Indiana 8%
Ohio 8%
California 7%
Texas 6%
Pennsylvania 6%
New York 5%
Michigan 4%
Florida 4%
New Jersey 4%
Foreign countries 3%
Minnesota 3%
Missouri 2%
Wisconsin 2%
Virginia 2%
Maryland 2%
Massachusetts 2%
Kansas 2%
Georgia 2%
Connecticut 1%
Washington 1%
Arizona 1%
Iowa 1%
Colorado 1%
Kentucky 1%
Tennessee 1%
Nebraska 1%
Louisiana 1%
State unknown 1%
Oklahoma 1%
Oregon 1%
North Carolina 1%
Alabama 1%</p>
<p>Now that the mass hiring of of HYPS English majors has proven to be an unmitigated disaster for Wall Street and the nation, maybe they’ll rethink their blind allegiance to a few “elite” schools and hire some common folks with some actual training. But I doubt it. And the cycle will be repeated with the next scheme.</p>
<p>Courage? Because why, they’re at risk from being beat up by a bunch of soft-bellied tweed-wearing elbow-bepatched eggheads? I hadn’t gotten notification that we were sending a squad out to punish them, but it probably just slipped my inbox. I hope BW hired extra security for their editorial offices!</p>
<p>No. I have just have this feeling. I just know that if I talk to employers all over the country…all these employers…would come to the same conclusion, “Finally. The ranking that reflects our views.”</p>
<p>And this from an employer in Northern California, “Is the Notre Dame that is ranked number 2 in the country, Notre Dame of Belmont, California? I totally agree with this ranking. I beg for these students to work with me. They are so good with cash registers”.</p>
Uh…the people giving Temple a “C” for facilities were your own seniors. The student survey were done months ago so the new building might not be factored in. However, it doesn’t help that your seniors also gave Temple “C’s” for Teaching Quality and Job Placement, resulting in a 96th rank in student survey. On the other hand, Michigan was given an “A” for facilities for the past two years when the main b-school building was a big construction site. So much for the reliability of student survey.</p>
<p>My biggest criticism for the BW ranking is that it relies too heavily on the student survey (sounds like Princeton Review?). BW polled the graduating seniors and received a 28% response rate. The student survey counted for 30% of the ranking.</p>
The only “real world” metrics used for the BW ranking were “Recruiter Survey” and “Starting Salary”. Let’s see how these 4 schools performed in the “real world”:</p>
<p>[Correction] post #26 was based on 2008 data.</p>
<p>For 2009, Temple received “C” for Facilities, “C” for Teaching Quality and “B” for Job Placement for an over 101th rank in Student Survey.</p>
<p>For 2009, the response rate was 27% for the student survey which still counts for 30% of the overall ranking. However, BW combined the 2009 student survey (1/2) with the previous two years (1/4 each) to arrive at the student survey score.</p>
<p>Btw, a “real world” look at the #1 ranked school, according to BW:</p>
<p>For MBA Feeder School Rank, BW “drew on our 2004, 2006, and 2008 MBA surveys to create a “feeder school” measure showing which schools send the most grads to the 35 top MBA programs identified in previous BusinessWeek rankings.”</p>
<p>You read it right. This metric measures the feeder schools to the top 35 MBA programs (not top 10 or even top 20), schools like #30 Vanderbilt (Owen) with a 47% acceptance rate, 2.75-3.77 GPA and 570-710 GMAT score (mid-80%)… real hard to get into.</p>
<p>Yeah, take that ranking with a very large grain of salt.</p>
<p>Business “Weak” has really crappy rankings and it weights the student survey as 30% of its rankings which is absurd. Other more important factors (recruiter survey, anyone?) paint a better picture as to the best places to pursue a UG Business degree. These are pathetic and should be taken with spoonfuls of salt. And to the kid who said he was relying on these rankings in his decision to attend Notre Dame over Penn… you must be lying because you sound far too stupid to have ever gotten accepted by Penn. I hope you were kidding =)</p>
<p>Quakeroats: 'Business “weak” ’ haha, love that, here’s too the Ivy league schools that got shafted! We need to stick together… even if you go to UPenn.</p>
<p>BW and US News both have crappy rankings. But triangulating between two crappy rankings probably gives us marginally better information than reliance on either, at least as concerns the relative reputations of the institutions. Here’s the composite (average) undergrad business school ranking among schools ranked in the top 50 in both BW and US News:</p>
<p>Rank/school/USN-BW Average ranking undergrad business:</p>
<ol>
<li> Penn-Wharton 1.5 </li>
<li> Virginia 3.5 </li>
<li> Michigan 4</li>
<li> MIT 4.5</li>
<li> Berkeley 4.5</li>
<li> Texas 8</li>
<li> Cornell 9.5</li>
<li> Notre Dame 9.5</li>
<li> NYU 10</li>
<li> UNC 10</li>
<li>Emory 11</li>
<li>CMU 12.5</li>
<li>WUSTL 14.5</li>
<li>USC 15.5</li>
<li>Indiana 15.5
16, UIUC 17.5</li>
<li>BYU 18.5</li>
<li>Boston College 21</li>
<li>Wisconsin 21.5</li>
<li>Wake Forest 22</li>
<li>Georgetown 22.5</li>
<li>U Washington 23</li>
<li>Babson 24</li>
<li>Maryland 26</li>
<li>Penn State 29.5</li>
<li>Ohio State 29.5</li>
<li>Case Western 34.5</li>
<li>Wm & Mary 36.5</li>
<li>SMU 36.5</li>
<li>Texas A & M 36.5</li>
<li>Bentley 37.5</li>
<li>RPI 39.5</li>
<li>BU 39.5</li>
<li>Georgia Tech 43</li>
<li>Syracuse 44</li>
</ol>
<p>Both Berkeley and Michigan got “B” ratings for “Teaching Quality”.
Either Berkeley and Michigan students are much harder graders or jaded by the fact that grade deflation seems prevalent…</p>
<p>Regarding Berkeley’s Haas:
“The Undergrad View: Haas wins accolades for programs, less so the steep grading curves and fierce competition.”</p>
<p>Whiners…:rolleyes:</p>
<p>
Studying business for undergrad (essentially an MBA-lite) and then going on to get a full MBA seems like a waste to me…but I understand that an MBA is now a prerequisite to top paying jobs.</p>
<p>^ id be interested if anybody knows if this is true or not, because i agree going to an undergrad B school is basically as much, if not more, business education than an MBA so it does seem redundant. the few people i know who went to undergrad business schools never went back for an MBA anywhere, yet still have above and beyond what you would consider a high-paying job. </p>
<p>but that’s a debate for a different thread i suppose.</p>
<p>oh, and @kwu: no. i didnt bother to read the rest of his nonsense, but i figured he had to be kidding</p>