There are many different faiths and religions to choose from. Some folks think that's evidence of a lot of people believing the wrong faith, and some think all religion is irrational and foolish. But having met a number of people who believe differently from me, and having tested and reconsidered my beliefs many times over the years, I think there is much more to the matter than the first reaction most people have. As I am a Christian, it should not surprise anyone that I believe in Jesus Christ and the Gospel. But I accept a wide range of dogma as legitimate, even when it's a bit different from my own. And I can even accept religions that seem alien to me as valid in their own right. Six billion people on the planet, there's a lot of possibility that any one of us can't comprehend, but could still be true.
What bothers me, though, is the hate. And I think some of that comes from false belief, the idea that shows up so many places where someone only holds faith because they think they can use it for their advantage; God to them is not King but Butler. Chewing on that point some more, I realize that when we commune with God, we do so through prayer, and that beings me to the question which reveals our heart - what do you pray for? I'm not saying it's wrong to pray for something you need, or something that is very important to you, but how often do you pray to be a better person, to help someone else, or to be more aware of someone else's need?
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Monday, September 27, 2010
Ghandi was Wrong
I have been thinking about the concept of Ahimsa recently. As a Christian, it rings true to me that a person should avoid violence in order to accomplish what matters most.
Yet … yet …
I keep thinking about Jesus’ command to His disciples to obtain swords, after His resurrection. I am reminded that God Himself commanded the Israelites to make war, and that some of the angels worse and used swords. Violence, it seems, has a place in the will of God, though it’s a perilous thing for any man to take it upon himself to decide how and when to take up arms.
Also, I find it interesting to consider how nonviolence pops up over and over in History. Does it do this because the concept is right, or because it is partly wrong, it inevitably fails?
Heresy, I know, to think that peace can be wrong. Of course I don’t mean that, but in fact I mean that nonviolence is not the same thing as peace. Peace is all things being as they should be, which requires Justice to be so. Nonviolence may lead to peace, but it is no sure thing. In fact, chewing on the idea leads me to think that there is a certain threshold for nonviolence to be effective. A nonviolent world may be a paradise, but one nonviolent man may well fail.
Also, nonviolence is unnatural. Nature is full of violence. Predators, chaos, death and destruction all the time.
More to think on …
Yet … yet …
I keep thinking about Jesus’ command to His disciples to obtain swords, after His resurrection. I am reminded that God Himself commanded the Israelites to make war, and that some of the angels worse and used swords. Violence, it seems, has a place in the will of God, though it’s a perilous thing for any man to take it upon himself to decide how and when to take up arms.
Also, I find it interesting to consider how nonviolence pops up over and over in History. Does it do this because the concept is right, or because it is partly wrong, it inevitably fails?
Heresy, I know, to think that peace can be wrong. Of course I don’t mean that, but in fact I mean that nonviolence is not the same thing as peace. Peace is all things being as they should be, which requires Justice to be so. Nonviolence may lead to peace, but it is no sure thing. In fact, chewing on the idea leads me to think that there is a certain threshold for nonviolence to be effective. A nonviolent world may be a paradise, but one nonviolent man may well fail.
Also, nonviolence is unnatural. Nature is full of violence. Predators, chaos, death and destruction all the time.
More to think on …
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Drummond’s Rules of Economics and Politics
The coming election is about the economy, no matter what the political-party-about-to-be-hit-with-a-ton-of-voter-rage claims. Oddly, this is the same myopia which blinded the other political-party-slammed-for-missing-the-obvious in 2006 and 2008; seems to be common for D.C. to be D.O.A. on the basics. There needs to be some basic primer about how money works in political terms, so I offer the following basic rules which drive the political consequence of money:
1. Everything has to be paid for
It’s quite fashionable for politicians to promise whatever the public wants, or at least the targeted voter bloc. But sooner or later, the services and goods have to be paid for, and with real money. Delaying the inevitable only adds interest costs to the total.
2. Taxpayers pay for everything the Government buys
Don’t be fooled when some official tries to say there will be no tax increase for a program, or that it will be paid from by another government or corporation. Other governments serve groups of taxpayers who won’t accept higher taxes either, and eventually the cost will come back around to your country again and hit the citizens. As for corporations, these are made up of people who don’t like paying taxes, and so a corporate tax will result either in higher prices, lower employment, or both.
3. People never like taxes
Joe Biden is a liar and a moron. No one, absolutely nobody will pay a penny more than required in taxes. Folks will pay what they feel they must, they may make virtuous noises to feel better about paying, and they may form mobs and demand that some certain person or group should be made to pay more in taxes, but no one chooses to pay more than they believe they have to pay.
4. Politicians lie to you about how much you have to pay
Politicians will either promise that your taxes will go down, or if taxes must go up, that someone else will have to pay more. Knowing how much people hate paying taxes, no politician planning to stay in office will ever tell you directly that he expects you to pay more.
5. There will never be a system where everyone pays a 'fair' amount of tax
There are several reasons for this fact. First, it’s impracticable in any medium-to-large country, since people will constantly try to reduce the taxes they pay, through resistance, political and legal actions, or just plain evasion and avoidance tactics. Second, no government truly wants a transparent system for collecting taxes, as this will inevitably lead to comparison, complaint, argument and further questions about who gets paid and why. By playing groups against one another, adjusting one group’s tax rate up or down to make it more ”fair”, governments distract the public from figuring out how much it is really gouging them.
6. Revenue is dependent on the health of the economy more than any other factor
This is sometimes missed when planning growth and forecasting revenue, whether by companies or governments. You need a healthy economy overall, in order for your goods or services to produce revenue. For tax purposes it is even plainer – you cannot collect money which is not there. Consequently,
7. The only functional tax rate is the one which maximizes revenue with the least interference with the economy
This is not a new idea. Remember the story warning not to kill the golden goose? The idea is that you pay attention to how folks are doing before you tell them they need to pay you more money. At the very least, tax increases (and ending prior tax cuts are tax increases, semantics won’t save you) should never happen when the economy is in decline, especially during a recession, and only a brain-dead moron would consider them when unemployment is 7% or higher. To bring in tax revenue, you need to spur job growth, because only when people have jobs can you get income tax from them. And to spur job growth, you have to lower the tax rate. Here’s why – the cause of every economic crisis always comes down to consumer confidence. When people stop buying things, the economy collapses, it’s really that simple. And when taxes are high, people worry about them and spend less, which causes businesses to slow down and fail. When businesses slow down, they lay off employees, which obviously raises unemployment. A low tax rate with low unemployment is better for revenue than a higher tax rate with a higher unemployment rate, as should be patently clear. There is a floor rate beyond which revenue fails to improve, but it is undeniable that in any recession, the most effective means to improve employment, and in so doing improve revenues from taxes, is to reduce the tax rate.
1. Everything has to be paid for
It’s quite fashionable for politicians to promise whatever the public wants, or at least the targeted voter bloc. But sooner or later, the services and goods have to be paid for, and with real money. Delaying the inevitable only adds interest costs to the total.
2. Taxpayers pay for everything the Government buys
Don’t be fooled when some official tries to say there will be no tax increase for a program, or that it will be paid from by another government or corporation. Other governments serve groups of taxpayers who won’t accept higher taxes either, and eventually the cost will come back around to your country again and hit the citizens. As for corporations, these are made up of people who don’t like paying taxes, and so a corporate tax will result either in higher prices, lower employment, or both.
3. People never like taxes
Joe Biden is a liar and a moron. No one, absolutely nobody will pay a penny more than required in taxes. Folks will pay what they feel they must, they may make virtuous noises to feel better about paying, and they may form mobs and demand that some certain person or group should be made to pay more in taxes, but no one chooses to pay more than they believe they have to pay.
4. Politicians lie to you about how much you have to pay
Politicians will either promise that your taxes will go down, or if taxes must go up, that someone else will have to pay more. Knowing how much people hate paying taxes, no politician planning to stay in office will ever tell you directly that he expects you to pay more.
5. There will never be a system where everyone pays a 'fair' amount of tax
There are several reasons for this fact. First, it’s impracticable in any medium-to-large country, since people will constantly try to reduce the taxes they pay, through resistance, political and legal actions, or just plain evasion and avoidance tactics. Second, no government truly wants a transparent system for collecting taxes, as this will inevitably lead to comparison, complaint, argument and further questions about who gets paid and why. By playing groups against one another, adjusting one group’s tax rate up or down to make it more ”fair”, governments distract the public from figuring out how much it is really gouging them.
6. Revenue is dependent on the health of the economy more than any other factor
This is sometimes missed when planning growth and forecasting revenue, whether by companies or governments. You need a healthy economy overall, in order for your goods or services to produce revenue. For tax purposes it is even plainer – you cannot collect money which is not there. Consequently,
7. The only functional tax rate is the one which maximizes revenue with the least interference with the economy
This is not a new idea. Remember the story warning not to kill the golden goose? The idea is that you pay attention to how folks are doing before you tell them they need to pay you more money. At the very least, tax increases (and ending prior tax cuts are tax increases, semantics won’t save you) should never happen when the economy is in decline, especially during a recession, and only a brain-dead moron would consider them when unemployment is 7% or higher. To bring in tax revenue, you need to spur job growth, because only when people have jobs can you get income tax from them. And to spur job growth, you have to lower the tax rate. Here’s why – the cause of every economic crisis always comes down to consumer confidence. When people stop buying things, the economy collapses, it’s really that simple. And when taxes are high, people worry about them and spend less, which causes businesses to slow down and fail. When businesses slow down, they lay off employees, which obviously raises unemployment. A low tax rate with low unemployment is better for revenue than a higher tax rate with a higher unemployment rate, as should be patently clear. There is a floor rate beyond which revenue fails to improve, but it is undeniable that in any recession, the most effective means to improve employment, and in so doing improve revenues from taxes, is to reduce the tax rate.
Monday, August 09, 2010
Thoughts on An Unsatisfactory Victory
I’m pretty freaking lucky. Sometimes in a gruesome way, however. One of those ways is the way my cancer was discovered in 2006. The short version is this sequence of events:
1. A kidney stone forms in my urinary tract.
2. I pass said kidney stone.
3. Not being an imbecile, I see my doctor, who schedules a CT scan
4. CT scan reveals I have ruptured my appendix; emergency surgery follows.
5. During the surgery, an unexpected mass is found in my abdominal cavity near the appendix. The mass is removed and sent for testing. The tests come back malignant.
So, in a span of a few days I went from being an annoying, overweight white guy to passing a kidney stone and breaking my appendix, to being diagnised with cancer.
Everything changed. For a while. I quickly experienced a range of emotions and discoveries, including an unprofessional oncologist and a surprisingly compassionate insurance company, but in the end I escaped major surgery and got to keep my hair.
Turns out I’m lucky, really lucky. My cancer was fond during surgery and oh-by-the-way I not only live in a city with one of the leading research centers on cancer, my surgeon sent my tissue samples to MDA for the initial tests.
I revisted my situation after reading about Christopher Hitchens’ own battle with cancer. It’s clear we are very different men. Mr. Hitchens is a very successful writer who has had to deal with a much harder situation than I have had to face. And yet, he too seems to be luckier than some. In my visits to MDA, I regularly see patients and their families, who are facing a much bleaker prognosis than even Mr. Hitchens has had to endure. And knowing this, I regularly face a kind of survivor’s guilt about my own good fortune. No major surgery, no chemo, no nausea, while everywhere I meet and see patients whose future is unknown, who must endure pain and doubt and the threat of death, and whose families suffer along with them. I want to help somehow, but I feel very helpless, and sometimes as if I’m wasting the time and resources of the doctors and nurses who should be focusing on people who really need help.
I have felt well for so long that by mid-2009 I began to worry that I did not have cancer at all. My oncologist ended that idea by showing me exactly where my tumors are residing; just because they’re not causing trouble at the moment does not mean they aren’t there. So while I feel like a normal person, my doctors make sure I never forget that I’m not just like anyone else. And because PMP is rare, with an unknown cause and with a very limited amount of clinical research available, there’s no guarantee that my present well-being will be permanent. That leads to some concern every time I have an unexplained pain in my abdomen or difficulty in urination or defecation. I find myself swinging from thinking that I’m overreacting, to worrying that I’m not telling my doctors something they need to know. This is important for another reason – since my cancer was found early, the doctors have been keeping records on me in hopes of learning more about PMP in the early stages. I can’t say that I’m doing much to help, but it’s better than nothing and just maybe something will come up that will help someone.
My point here is threefold – sometimes I need to vent, first of all. Second, never assume things will always be what you expect them to be, and three, there’s a reason for everything but that doesn’t mean everything will make sense when you try to figure it out.
1. A kidney stone forms in my urinary tract.
2. I pass said kidney stone.
3. Not being an imbecile, I see my doctor, who schedules a CT scan
4. CT scan reveals I have ruptured my appendix; emergency surgery follows.
5. During the surgery, an unexpected mass is found in my abdominal cavity near the appendix. The mass is removed and sent for testing. The tests come back malignant.
So, in a span of a few days I went from being an annoying, overweight white guy to passing a kidney stone and breaking my appendix, to being diagnised with cancer.
Everything changed. For a while. I quickly experienced a range of emotions and discoveries, including an unprofessional oncologist and a surprisingly compassionate insurance company, but in the end I escaped major surgery and got to keep my hair.
Turns out I’m lucky, really lucky. My cancer was fond during surgery and oh-by-the-way I not only live in a city with one of the leading research centers on cancer, my surgeon sent my tissue samples to MDA for the initial tests.
I revisted my situation after reading about Christopher Hitchens’ own battle with cancer. It’s clear we are very different men. Mr. Hitchens is a very successful writer who has had to deal with a much harder situation than I have had to face. And yet, he too seems to be luckier than some. In my visits to MDA, I regularly see patients and their families, who are facing a much bleaker prognosis than even Mr. Hitchens has had to endure. And knowing this, I regularly face a kind of survivor’s guilt about my own good fortune. No major surgery, no chemo, no nausea, while everywhere I meet and see patients whose future is unknown, who must endure pain and doubt and the threat of death, and whose families suffer along with them. I want to help somehow, but I feel very helpless, and sometimes as if I’m wasting the time and resources of the doctors and nurses who should be focusing on people who really need help.
I have felt well for so long that by mid-2009 I began to worry that I did not have cancer at all. My oncologist ended that idea by showing me exactly where my tumors are residing; just because they’re not causing trouble at the moment does not mean they aren’t there. So while I feel like a normal person, my doctors make sure I never forget that I’m not just like anyone else. And because PMP is rare, with an unknown cause and with a very limited amount of clinical research available, there’s no guarantee that my present well-being will be permanent. That leads to some concern every time I have an unexplained pain in my abdomen or difficulty in urination or defecation. I find myself swinging from thinking that I’m overreacting, to worrying that I’m not telling my doctors something they need to know. This is important for another reason – since my cancer was found early, the doctors have been keeping records on me in hopes of learning more about PMP in the early stages. I can’t say that I’m doing much to help, but it’s better than nothing and just maybe something will come up that will help someone.
My point here is threefold – sometimes I need to vent, first of all. Second, never assume things will always be what you expect them to be, and three, there’s a reason for everything but that doesn’t mean everything will make sense when you try to figure it out.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Eighteen: Summary Review, Methodology and Advice to MBA Candidates
If you’re still reading this, please accept my apologies for its length (18 parts!) and breadth. My intention was to not only present a relatively objective review of the AACSB’s accredited online MBA programs on consistent measures which you can check for yourself, but also to show the impact of each category upon the whole, and by showing the top schools in each category, to introduce schools not only in sum but also which perform well in selected areas. Some of the ranked schools stood out over and over again, while others were not at the top, but always did well enough to stay in the chase.
I’d like to take the time here to go over the top 25 programs again, looking at their key focus and why you should consider them. I will follow that section with a review of my scoring methodology, so anyone interested can tally up, weight and calculate scores on their own standards. And at the end, I have a bit of final advice for MBA candidates, from the academic and business perspectives of your MBA pursuit.
So, let’s have a look again at the Top 25 AACSB Online MBA Programs for 2010, in order of rank. The information presented here comes first from the school’s response to the AACSB survey, and then from the school’s website. In the event of conflicting information, the survey takes precedence because all schools in this review participated in the same survey with the same categories in the same time frame.
FIRST: Colorado – Denver (7,830.15 points)
Location – Denver, Colorado
Founded – 2004
Size – 1,207
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $52,444
Average GMAT – 560
# of Concentrations – Nineteen (!)
Student/Faculty Ratio – 14.9
SECOND: Wisconsin – Whitewater (7,416.19)
Location – Whitewater, Wisconsin
Founded – 1868
Size – 650
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $18,118
Average GMAT – 501
# of Concentrations – Seven
Student/Faculty Ratio – 7.2
THIRD: Gonzaga (7,372.01)
Location – Spokane, Washington
Founded – 1887
Size – 288
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $23,640
Average GMAT – 560.8
# of Concentrations – Seven
Student/Faculty Ratio – 6.3
FOURTH: Michigan – Flint (7,164.92)
Location – Flint, Michigan
Founded – 1944
Size – 187
Degree Levels – Two
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $8,881
Average GMAT – 517
# of Concentrations – Eight
Student/Faculty Ratio – 8.9
FIFTH: Nebraska – Lincoln (7,016.55)
Location – Lincoln, Nebraska
Founded – 1869
Size – 381
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $33,332
Average GMAT – 625.5
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.8
SIXTH: Northeastern (6,950.81)
Location – Boston, Massachusetts
Founded – 1898
Size – 774
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $71,620
Average GMAT – 553
# of Concentrations – Eight
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.2
SEVENTH: Worcester Poly (6,948.84)
Location – Worcester, Massachusetts
Founded – 1865
Size – 285
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $53,361
Average GMAT – 595.5
# of Concentrations – Eight
Student/Faculty Ratio – 12.4
EIGHTH: Alabama (6,855.84)
Location – Tuscaloosa, Alabama
Founded – 1831
Size – 408
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $37,786
Average GMAT – 611
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 2.6
NINTH: Florida State (6,821.99)
Location – Tallahassee, Florida
Founded – 1851
Size – 623
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $39,150
Average GMAT – 559.6
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.3
TENTH: Auburn (6,792.18)
Location – Auburn, Alabama
Founded – 1856
Size – 197
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $19,215
Average GMAT – 500
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.4
ELEVENTH: Quinnipiac (6,634.93)
Location – Hamden, Connecticut
Founded – 1929
Size – 199
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $33,580
Average GMAT – 580
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 3.0
TWELFTH: Penn State (6,620.94)
Location – University Park, Pennsylvania
Founded – 1855
Size – 267
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business And Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $58,408
Average GMAT – 640.5
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 3.6
THIRTEENTH: Fayetteville State (6,591.61)
Location – Fayetteville, North Carolina
Founded – 1877
Size – 98
Degree Levels – Two
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $13,207
Average GMAT – 472
# of Concentrations – Six
Student/Faculty Ratio – 2.3
FOURTEENTH: Houston – Victoria (6,512.91)
Location – Victoria, Texas
Founded – 1983
Size – 866
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $27,024
Average GMAT – 442.5
# of Concentrations – Six
Student/Faculty Ratio – 25.5
FIFTEENTH: Georgia Southern (6,495.10)
Location – Statesboro, Georgia
Founded – 1929
Size – 285
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $15,274
Average GMAT – 504
# of Concentrations – Three
Student/Faculty Ratio – 2.3
SIXTEENTH: Alabama – Birmingham (6,443.18)
Location – Birmingham, Alabama
Founded – 1969
Size – 347
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $21,905
Average GMAT – 557
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 6.2
SEVENTEENTH: Massachusetts – Amherst (6,426.50)
Location – Amherst, Massachusetts
Founded – 1867
Size – 1,183
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $21,944
Average GMAT – 617.2
# of Concentrations – One
Student/Faculty Ratio – 10.1
EIGHTEENTH: Morehead State (6,355.22)
Location – Morehead, Kentucky
Founded – 1968
Size – 202
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $15,192
Average GMAT – 400
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.2
NINETEENTH: Florida Gulf Coast (6,194.38)
Location – Fort Myers, Florida
Founded – 1991
Size – 230
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $51,198
Average GMAT – 505
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.2
TWENTIETH: North Texas (6,157.94)
Location – Denton, Texas
Founded – 1961
Size – 665
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $28,948
Average GMAT – 493.3
# of Concentrations – Two
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.4
TWENTY-FIRST: Washington State (6,153.22)
Location – Pullman, Washington
Founded – 1890
Size – 52
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $23,656
Average GMAT – 554
# of Concentrations – One
Student/Faculty Ratio – 10.5
TWENTY-SECOND: Arizona State (6,150.06)
Location – Phoenix, Arizona
Founded – 1958
Size – 1,726
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $60,186
Average GMAT – 587.5
# of Concentrations – Two
Student/Faculty Ratio – 7.1
TWENTY-THIRD: Texas – San Antonio (6,120.89)
Location – San Antonio, Texas
Founded – 1969
Size – 626
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $30,906
Average GMAT – 561.7
# of Concentrations – One
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.4
TWENTY-FOURTH: Suffolk (6,112.81)
Location – Boston, Massachusetts
Founded – 1937
Size – 1,028
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $57,900
Average GMAT – 468.3
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 6.8
TWENTY-FIFTH: Oklahoma State (6,031.20)
Location – Stillwater, Oklahoma
Founded – 1890
Size – 690
Degree Levels – four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $37,326
Average GMAT – 562.5
# of Concentrations – one
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.1
METHODOLOGY
The idea in setting up a ranking system was to record the relevant, consistent and publicly available elements of a school. The first part was to examine the information that could be found by simply looking up the school’s website and AACSB survey. From that, I selected fifteen categories of data which I believe is relevant for an MBA candidate to consider.
I then broke the fifteen categories down into three broad sub-groups, of Major, Useful, and Minor value, then ranked the categories within each. I then assigned relative proportions of the total to the categories, so that the end result would be 100%. This resulted in percentage values ranging from 0.36% to 24.00% for a single category.
I then ranked the schools according to their performance in each category. There were two ways to do this. Schools trying to reach a maximum number (like concentrations, where more is better) were assigned a value equal to the score in a category divided by the maximum (6 concentrations out of 8 maximum possible, for example) times 100 times the percentage value. Schools trying to reach a minimal value (such as tuition, where less is better) were assigned a value equal to the formula as follows: (1-(score-smallest possible)/largest possible) times 100 times the percentage value. As a result, maximum values for each category ranged from 36 points (for the lowest in-state undergraduate tuition) to 2,400 points (for the highest number of available concentrations). The rest was simple addition of scores to reach an aggregate. Anyone interested in their own scoring system can simply add or remove other categories they find relevant, adjust the weighting to suit their focus, and work the numbers the same way. I would just remind everyone that it’s important to use consistent data gathered the same way, which is available for all contending universities. Inconsistent data creates invalid results.
Finally, I’d like to thank everyone for reading my work and for your thoughts and comments, if you feel so inclined. This ranking is not meant to be advice on which school you should choose, but rather a tool to help you see which schools offer strengths that match your preferences. So far as I know, no one else is doing this, so amateur that I am, I like to think this may be of use.
I’d like to take the time here to go over the top 25 programs again, looking at their key focus and why you should consider them. I will follow that section with a review of my scoring methodology, so anyone interested can tally up, weight and calculate scores on their own standards. And at the end, I have a bit of final advice for MBA candidates, from the academic and business perspectives of your MBA pursuit.
So, let’s have a look again at the Top 25 AACSB Online MBA Programs for 2010, in order of rank. The information presented here comes first from the school’s response to the AACSB survey, and then from the school’s website. In the event of conflicting information, the survey takes precedence because all schools in this review participated in the same survey with the same categories in the same time frame.
FIRST: Colorado – Denver (7,830.15 points)
Location – Denver, Colorado
Founded – 2004
Size – 1,207
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $52,444
Average GMAT – 560
# of Concentrations – Nineteen (!)
Student/Faculty Ratio – 14.9
SECOND: Wisconsin – Whitewater (7,416.19)
Location – Whitewater, Wisconsin
Founded – 1868
Size – 650
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $18,118
Average GMAT – 501
# of Concentrations – Seven
Student/Faculty Ratio – 7.2
THIRD: Gonzaga (7,372.01)
Location – Spokane, Washington
Founded – 1887
Size – 288
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $23,640
Average GMAT – 560.8
# of Concentrations – Seven
Student/Faculty Ratio – 6.3
FOURTH: Michigan – Flint (7,164.92)
Location – Flint, Michigan
Founded – 1944
Size – 187
Degree Levels – Two
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $8,881
Average GMAT – 517
# of Concentrations – Eight
Student/Faculty Ratio – 8.9
FIFTH: Nebraska – Lincoln (7,016.55)
Location – Lincoln, Nebraska
Founded – 1869
Size – 381
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $33,332
Average GMAT – 625.5
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.8
SIXTH: Northeastern (6,950.81)
Location – Boston, Massachusetts
Founded – 1898
Size – 774
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $71,620
Average GMAT – 553
# of Concentrations – Eight
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.2
SEVENTH: Worcester Poly (6,948.84)
Location – Worcester, Massachusetts
Founded – 1865
Size – 285
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $53,361
Average GMAT – 595.5
# of Concentrations – Eight
Student/Faculty Ratio – 12.4
EIGHTH: Alabama (6,855.84)
Location – Tuscaloosa, Alabama
Founded – 1831
Size – 408
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $37,786
Average GMAT – 611
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 2.6
NINTH: Florida State (6,821.99)
Location – Tallahassee, Florida
Founded – 1851
Size – 623
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $39,150
Average GMAT – 559.6
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.3
TENTH: Auburn (6,792.18)
Location – Auburn, Alabama
Founded – 1856
Size – 197
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $19,215
Average GMAT – 500
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.4
ELEVENTH: Quinnipiac (6,634.93)
Location – Hamden, Connecticut
Founded – 1929
Size – 199
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $33,580
Average GMAT – 580
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 3.0
TWELFTH: Penn State (6,620.94)
Location – University Park, Pennsylvania
Founded – 1855
Size – 267
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business And Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $58,408
Average GMAT – 640.5
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 3.6
THIRTEENTH: Fayetteville State (6,591.61)
Location – Fayetteville, North Carolina
Founded – 1877
Size – 98
Degree Levels – Two
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $13,207
Average GMAT – 472
# of Concentrations – Six
Student/Faculty Ratio – 2.3
FOURTEENTH: Houston – Victoria (6,512.91)
Location – Victoria, Texas
Founded – 1983
Size – 866
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $27,024
Average GMAT – 442.5
# of Concentrations – Six
Student/Faculty Ratio – 25.5
FIFTEENTH: Georgia Southern (6,495.10)
Location – Statesboro, Georgia
Founded – 1929
Size – 285
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $15,274
Average GMAT – 504
# of Concentrations – Three
Student/Faculty Ratio – 2.3
SIXTEENTH: Alabama – Birmingham (6,443.18)
Location – Birmingham, Alabama
Founded – 1969
Size – 347
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $21,905
Average GMAT – 557
# of Concentrations – Four
Student/Faculty Ratio – 6.2
SEVENTEENTH: Massachusetts – Amherst (6,426.50)
Location – Amherst, Massachusetts
Founded – 1867
Size – 1,183
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $21,944
Average GMAT – 617.2
# of Concentrations – One
Student/Faculty Ratio – 10.1
EIGHTEENTH: Morehead State (6,355.22)
Location – Morehead, Kentucky
Founded – 1968
Size – 202
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $15,192
Average GMAT – 400
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.2
NINETEENTH: Florida Gulf Coast (6,194.38)
Location – Fort Myers, Florida
Founded – 1991
Size – 230
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business
Out/State MBA Tuition – $51,198
Average GMAT – 505
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.2
TWENTIETH: North Texas (6,157.94)
Location – Denton, Texas
Founded – 1961
Size – 665
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $28,948
Average GMAT – 493.3
# of Concentrations – Two
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.4
TWENTY-FIRST: Washington State (6,153.22)
Location – Pullman, Washington
Founded – 1890
Size – 52
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $23,656
Average GMAT – 554
# of Concentrations – One
Student/Faculty Ratio – 10.5
TWENTY-SECOND: Arizona State (6,150.06)
Location – Phoenix, Arizona
Founded – 1958
Size – 1,726
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $60,186
Average GMAT – 587.5
# of Concentrations – Two
Student/Faculty Ratio – 7.1
TWENTY-THIRD: Texas – San Antonio (6,120.89)
Location – San Antonio, Texas
Founded – 1969
Size – 626
Degree Levels – Four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $30,906
Average GMAT – 561.7
# of Concentrations – One
Student/Faculty Ratio – 4.4
TWENTY-FOURTH: Suffolk (6,112.81)
Location – Boston, Massachusetts
Founded – 1937
Size – 1,028
Degree Levels – Three
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $57,900
Average GMAT – 468.3
# of Concentrations – Five
Student/Faculty Ratio – 6.8
TWENTY-FIFTH: Oklahoma State (6,031.20)
Location – Stillwater, Oklahoma
Founded – 1890
Size – 690
Degree Levels – four
AACSB Accreditation – Business and Accounting
Out/State MBA Tuition – $37,326
Average GMAT – 562.5
# of Concentrations – one
Student/Faculty Ratio – 5.1
METHODOLOGY
The idea in setting up a ranking system was to record the relevant, consistent and publicly available elements of a school. The first part was to examine the information that could be found by simply looking up the school’s website and AACSB survey. From that, I selected fifteen categories of data which I believe is relevant for an MBA candidate to consider.
I then broke the fifteen categories down into three broad sub-groups, of Major, Useful, and Minor value, then ranked the categories within each. I then assigned relative proportions of the total to the categories, so that the end result would be 100%. This resulted in percentage values ranging from 0.36% to 24.00% for a single category.
I then ranked the schools according to their performance in each category. There were two ways to do this. Schools trying to reach a maximum number (like concentrations, where more is better) were assigned a value equal to the score in a category divided by the maximum (6 concentrations out of 8 maximum possible, for example) times 100 times the percentage value. Schools trying to reach a minimal value (such as tuition, where less is better) were assigned a value equal to the formula as follows: (1-(score-smallest possible)/largest possible) times 100 times the percentage value. As a result, maximum values for each category ranged from 36 points (for the lowest in-state undergraduate tuition) to 2,400 points (for the highest number of available concentrations). The rest was simple addition of scores to reach an aggregate. Anyone interested in their own scoring system can simply add or remove other categories they find relevant, adjust the weighting to suit their focus, and work the numbers the same way. I would just remind everyone that it’s important to use consistent data gathered the same way, which is available for all contending universities. Inconsistent data creates invalid results.
Finally, I’d like to thank everyone for reading my work and for your thoughts and comments, if you feel so inclined. This ranking is not meant to be advice on which school you should choose, but rather a tool to help you see which schools offer strengths that match your preferences. So far as I know, no one else is doing this, so amateur that I am, I like to think this may be of use.
Friday, June 25, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Seventeen: Number of FTE Faculty and Score Totals and Final Ranking
This is the last of our fifteen categories. It’s easy to overlook, but it can be important. The number of FTE (full-time employees) is the weighted full-time number of professors and instructors available, and just as the student body size influences your ability to find quality peers, the faculty size influences your access to top instructors. After all, the more instructors the more choice you have. This category counts for 8% of the total score.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 3 to 117 FTE faculty, schools can earn up to 800 points.
Here are the top ten schools by FTE faculty counts for our group of schools:
1. Hong Kong Polytechnic
2. Texas - Dallas
3. Kennesaw State
4. Arizona State
5. Texas – Arlington
6. Towson
7. Massachusetts - Amherst
8. Wisconsin - Whitewater
9. East Carolina
10. Colorado – Denver
With that done, let’s look again at last year’s top programs:
2009 Top Online MBA Programs
1. Auburn
2. Drexel
3. East Carolina
4. Colorado – Denver
5t. Tennessee Tech
5t. Houston – Victoria
7t. Morehead State
7t. Wayne State
9. Colorado – Colorado Springs
10. North Dakota
11t. Georgia Southern
11t. Texas – Dallas
13t. Wisconsin – Oshkosh
13t. Wisconsin – Whitewater
15. Texas A&M – Commerce
16. Michigan – Dearborn
17. Nicholls State
18. Suffolk
19. Georgia College & State U
20. Colorado State
21. Florida
22t. Florida State
22t. Nebraska – Lincoln
24. Wyoming
25t. Durham
25t. Texas – Arlington
25t. Massachusetts – Lowell
25t. North Texas
And now, the Top 25 Online MBA Schools for 2010:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,830.15)
2nd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (7,416.19)
3rd: Gonzaga (7,372.01)
4th: Michigan – Flint (7,164.92)
5th: Nebraska – Lincoln (7,016.55)
6th: Northeastern (6,950.81)
7th: Worcester Poly (6,948.84)
8th: Alabama (6,855.84)
9th: Florida State (6,821.99)
10th: Auburn (6,792.18)
11th: Quinnipiac (6,634.93)
12th: Penn State (6,620.94)
13th: Fayetteville State (6,591.61)
14th: Houston – Victoria (6,512.91)
15th: Georgia Southern (6,495.10)
16th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,443.18)
17th: Massachusetts – Amherst (6,426.50)
18th: Morehead State (6,355.22)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (6,194.38)
20th: North Texas (6,157.94)
21st: Washington State (6,153.22)
22nd: Arizona State (6,150.06)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (6,120.89)
24th: Suffolk (6,112.81)
25th: Oklahoma State (6,031.20)
As I said before I repeat now, this ranking is not an absolute ranking. It takes the available information on fifteen salient categories for AACSB-accredited schools of business which offer a true online MBA program, and assigns values based on the weighting of those categories as I understand them to proportionately apply to the value of the MBA. I present the top schools for each category, and have shown how the total score unfolded through the addition of the new points from each category. The school which is best for you, depends on the qualities which matter most to you. This presentation is to show how each category plays into the whole, and to present schools which excel in those areas. Some of these schools are well-known and some are not. I thought about presenting links to the schools’ websites and detailing the specific results for their performance in each category, but I presume you have access to a search engine, and the intent I brought here was to encourage you to chase down the relevant details yourself for schools which interest you. Because in the end, you must choose the school you attend, what concentrations and what cost and what length of curriculum and electives you select, and so you owe it to yourself to chase down the support for the school you choose. All I have done here is to point out how certain qualities are represented in schools, and to give you thoughts on some schools to consider. I will revisit the most prominent schools, and my methodology, in the next and final post.
Thanks.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 3 to 117 FTE faculty, schools can earn up to 800 points.
Here are the top ten schools by FTE faculty counts for our group of schools:
1. Hong Kong Polytechnic
2. Texas - Dallas
3. Kennesaw State
4. Arizona State
5. Texas – Arlington
6. Towson
7. Massachusetts - Amherst
8. Wisconsin - Whitewater
9. East Carolina
10. Colorado – Denver
With that done, let’s look again at last year’s top programs:
2009 Top Online MBA Programs
1. Auburn
2. Drexel
3. East Carolina
4. Colorado – Denver
5t. Tennessee Tech
5t. Houston – Victoria
7t. Morehead State
7t. Wayne State
9. Colorado – Colorado Springs
10. North Dakota
11t. Georgia Southern
11t. Texas – Dallas
13t. Wisconsin – Oshkosh
13t. Wisconsin – Whitewater
15. Texas A&M – Commerce
16. Michigan – Dearborn
17. Nicholls State
18. Suffolk
19. Georgia College & State U
20. Colorado State
21. Florida
22t. Florida State
22t. Nebraska – Lincoln
24. Wyoming
25t. Durham
25t. Texas – Arlington
25t. Massachusetts – Lowell
25t. North Texas
And now, the Top 25 Online MBA Schools for 2010:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,830.15)
2nd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (7,416.19)
3rd: Gonzaga (7,372.01)
4th: Michigan – Flint (7,164.92)
5th: Nebraska – Lincoln (7,016.55)
6th: Northeastern (6,950.81)
7th: Worcester Poly (6,948.84)
8th: Alabama (6,855.84)
9th: Florida State (6,821.99)
10th: Auburn (6,792.18)
11th: Quinnipiac (6,634.93)
12th: Penn State (6,620.94)
13th: Fayetteville State (6,591.61)
14th: Houston – Victoria (6,512.91)
15th: Georgia Southern (6,495.10)
16th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,443.18)
17th: Massachusetts – Amherst (6,426.50)
18th: Morehead State (6,355.22)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (6,194.38)
20th: North Texas (6,157.94)
21st: Washington State (6,153.22)
22nd: Arizona State (6,150.06)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (6,120.89)
24th: Suffolk (6,112.81)
25th: Oklahoma State (6,031.20)
As I said before I repeat now, this ranking is not an absolute ranking. It takes the available information on fifteen salient categories for AACSB-accredited schools of business which offer a true online MBA program, and assigns values based on the weighting of those categories as I understand them to proportionately apply to the value of the MBA. I present the top schools for each category, and have shown how the total score unfolded through the addition of the new points from each category. The school which is best for you, depends on the qualities which matter most to you. This presentation is to show how each category plays into the whole, and to present schools which excel in those areas. Some of these schools are well-known and some are not. I thought about presenting links to the schools’ websites and detailing the specific results for their performance in each category, but I presume you have access to a search engine, and the intent I brought here was to encourage you to chase down the relevant details yourself for schools which interest you. Because in the end, you must choose the school you attend, what concentrations and what cost and what length of curriculum and electives you select, and so you owe it to yourself to chase down the support for the school you choose. All I have done here is to point out how certain qualities are represented in schools, and to give you thoughts on some schools to consider. I will revisit the most prominent schools, and my methodology, in the next and final post.
Thanks.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The Best MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Sixteen: Minimum Program Duration
This category is important to a minority of students, but for some people it will matter. This category counts for 4% of the total score.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 12 to 36 months to finish the program, schools can earn up to 400 points.
Here are the shortest minimum-duration programs in our group of schools:
1t. Western New England
1t. Florida
3t. Michigan – Flint
3t. Institute de Empresa
5t. Colorado – Colorado Springs
5t. Colorado - Denver
7t. Suffolk
7t. Georgia Southern
7t. Florida State
7t. Florida Gulf Coast
7t. Georgia College & State U
7t. Gonzaga
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,475)
2nd: Gonzaga (7,215)
3rd: Michigan – Flint (7,110)
4th: Wisconsin – Whitewater (7,040)
5th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,866)
6th: Worcester Poly (6,853)
7th: Auburn (6,676)
8th: Alabama (6,658)
9th: Northeastern (6,609)
10th: Florida State (6,548)
11th: Fayetteville State (6,516)
12th(tie): Quinnipiac (6,498)
12th(tie): Penn State (6,498)
14th: Houston – Victoria (6,328)
15th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,300)
16th: Morehead State (6,239)
17th: Georgia Southern (6,235)
18th: Washington State (6,119)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (6,064)
20th: Massachusetts – Amherst (6,030)
21st: Wyoming (5,909)
22nd: Western New England (5,893)
23rd: Suffolk (5,839)
24th: North Texas (5,816)
25th: Texas – San Antonio (5,806)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 12 to 36 months to finish the program, schools can earn up to 400 points.
Here are the shortest minimum-duration programs in our group of schools:
1t. Western New England
1t. Florida
3t. Michigan – Flint
3t. Institute de Empresa
5t. Colorado – Colorado Springs
5t. Colorado - Denver
7t. Suffolk
7t. Georgia Southern
7t. Florida State
7t. Florida Gulf Coast
7t. Georgia College & State U
7t. Gonzaga
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,475)
2nd: Gonzaga (7,215)
3rd: Michigan – Flint (7,110)
4th: Wisconsin – Whitewater (7,040)
5th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,866)
6th: Worcester Poly (6,853)
7th: Auburn (6,676)
8th: Alabama (6,658)
9th: Northeastern (6,609)
10th: Florida State (6,548)
11th: Fayetteville State (6,516)
12th(tie): Quinnipiac (6,498)
12th(tie): Penn State (6,498)
14th: Houston – Victoria (6,328)
15th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,300)
16th: Morehead State (6,239)
17th: Georgia Southern (6,235)
18th: Washington State (6,119)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (6,064)
20th: Massachusetts – Amherst (6,030)
21st: Wyoming (5,909)
22nd: Western New England (5,893)
23rd: Suffolk (5,839)
24th: North Texas (5,816)
25th: Texas – San Antonio (5,806)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Fifteen: Operating Budget per Student
This category is another relatively small one, but given the need for facilities and resources for online students, it still counts, especially since a large budget is less effective if it’s cut up into too many pieces. This part counts for 3% of the total score.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $2,060 to $404,481, schools can earn up to 300 points.
Here are the ten lowest undergraduate in-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Washington State
2. Southern Arkansas
3. Penn State
4. Missisippi
5. Wisconsin – Lacrosse
6. Western Kentucky
7. Wyoming
8. Tennessee - Martin
9. Indiana – Bloomington
10. Clarion U of Pennsylvania
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,119)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,881)
3rd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (6,773)
4th: Michigan – Flint (6,744)
5th: Worcester Poly (6,720)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,599)
7th: Alabama (6,524)
8th: Auburn (6,476)
9th: Northeastern (6,342)
10th: Fayetteville State (6,250)
11th: Quinnipiac (6,232)
12th: Penn State (6,231)
13th: Florida State (6,215)
14th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,166)
15th: Houston – Victoria (6,028)
16th: Morehead State (5,972)
17th: Georgia Southern (5,902)
18th: Washington State (5,852)
19th: Massachusetts – Amherst (5,763)
20th: Florida Gulf Coast (5,731)
21st: Wyoming (5,643)
22nd: North Texas (5,549)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (5,540)
24th: Suffolk (5,506)
25th: Western New England (5,493)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $2,060 to $404,481, schools can earn up to 300 points.
Here are the ten lowest undergraduate in-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Washington State
2. Southern Arkansas
3. Penn State
4. Missisippi
5. Wisconsin – Lacrosse
6. Western Kentucky
7. Wyoming
8. Tennessee - Martin
9. Indiana – Bloomington
10. Clarion U of Pennsylvania
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,119)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,881)
3rd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (6,773)
4th: Michigan – Flint (6,744)
5th: Worcester Poly (6,720)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,599)
7th: Alabama (6,524)
8th: Auburn (6,476)
9th: Northeastern (6,342)
10th: Fayetteville State (6,250)
11th: Quinnipiac (6,232)
12th: Penn State (6,231)
13th: Florida State (6,215)
14th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,166)
15th: Houston – Victoria (6,028)
16th: Morehead State (5,972)
17th: Georgia Southern (5,902)
18th: Washington State (5,852)
19th: Massachusetts – Amherst (5,763)
20th: Florida Gulf Coast (5,731)
21st: Wyoming (5,643)
22nd: North Texas (5,549)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (5,540)
24th: Suffolk (5,506)
25th: Western New England (5,493)
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Fourteen: Student Body Size
Things are closing towards the final results now, with only 16.43% (or 1,643 possible points remaining) of the total to be assigned. This category is the smallest of the four remaining areas to consider. The number of students attending a university influences the opportunity to find high-value partners for projects and challenging competition for to honors. This category counts for 1.43% of the total score.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 14 to 5,599 students, schools can earn up to 143 points.
Here are the ten highest size of MBA student class in our group of schools:
1. Texas – Dallas
2. Hong Kong Polytechnic
3. Arizona State
4. Florida
5. Texas – Arlington
6. Kennesaw State
7. Thunderbird
8. Durham
9. Colorado – Denver
10. Massachusetts – Amherst
(Note that these rankings are for ONLINE MBA student class size only)
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,106)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,858)
3rd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (6,759)
4th: Worcester Poly (6,759)
5th: Michigan – Flint (6,701)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,542)
7th: Alabama (6,459)
8th: Auburn (6,451)
9th: Northeastern (6,295)
10th: Quinnipiac (6,182)
11th(tie): Florida State (6,170)
11th(tie): Fayetteville State (6,170)
13th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,117)
14th: Penn State (6,108)
15th: Houston – Victoria (6,022)
16th: Morehead State (5,938)
17th: Georgia Southern (5,855)
18th: Massachusetts – Amherst (5,738)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (5,703)
20th: Washington State (5,552)
21st: Wyoming (5,547)
22nd: North Texas (5,518)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (5,495)
24th: Suffolk (5,439)
25th: Western New England (5,437)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 14 to 5,599 students, schools can earn up to 143 points.
Here are the ten highest size of MBA student class in our group of schools:
1. Texas – Dallas
2. Hong Kong Polytechnic
3. Arizona State
4. Florida
5. Texas – Arlington
6. Kennesaw State
7. Thunderbird
8. Durham
9. Colorado – Denver
10. Massachusetts – Amherst
(Note that these rankings are for ONLINE MBA student class size only)
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,106)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,858)
3rd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (6,759)
4th: Worcester Poly (6,759)
5th: Michigan – Flint (6,701)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,542)
7th: Alabama (6,459)
8th: Auburn (6,451)
9th: Northeastern (6,295)
10th: Quinnipiac (6,182)
11th(tie): Florida State (6,170)
11th(tie): Fayetteville State (6,170)
13th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,117)
14th: Penn State (6,108)
15th: Houston – Victoria (6,022)
16th: Morehead State (5,938)
17th: Georgia Southern (5,855)
18th: Massachusetts – Amherst (5,738)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (5,703)
20th: Washington State (5,552)
21st: Wyoming (5,547)
22nd: North Texas (5,518)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (5,495)
24th: Suffolk (5,439)
25th: Western New England (5,437)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Thirteen: Student/Faculty Ratio
This category is trickier than it may first appear. In face-to-face classes, the ratio of students per teacher is critical in the quality level of instruction a candidate may expect. It is less so in online classes, because the online student has greater access to the teacher when offering answers or asking questions. Also, since online classes use virtual office hours for professors or organized Q&A sessions for the class, there is no risk that a student may miss time with the instructor because someone else has already arrived first or the available time is a problem with other commitments, like work.
However, the student/faculty ratio does factor into how much attention an instructor may give an individual student’s work. Just imagine the difference between evaluating, say 75 students’ projects or just 25 in the same available amount of time, regardless of how the work is submitted. This category counts for 9% of the total score for a school.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 5.4 to 85.9 for schools, schools can earn up to 900 points.
Here are the ten lowest student-to-faculty rations of our group of schools:
1. Southern Arkansas
2. Tennessee - Martin
3. Western Kentucky
4. Georgia Southern
5. Wisconsin - LaCrosse
6. North Dakota
7. Louisiana - Monroe
8. Rowan
9. Fayetteville State
10. Mississippi
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,075)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,851)
3rd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (6,742)
4th(tie): Worcester Poly (6,697)
4th (tie): Michigan – Flint (6,697)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,533)
7th: Alabama (6,449)
8th: Auburn (6,446)
9th: Northeastern (6,275)
10th: Quinnipiac (6,176)
11th: Fayetteville State (6,168)
12th: Florida State (6,155)
13th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,108)
14th: Penn State (6,101)
15th: Houston – Victoria (6,000)
16th: Morehead State (5,933)
17th: Georgia Southern (5,848)
18th: Massachusetts – Amherst (5,708)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (5,697)
20th: Washington State (5,551)
21st: Wyoming (5,544)
22nd: North Texas (5,502)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (5,479)
24th: Western New England (5,434)
25th: Oklahoma State (5,414)
However, the student/faculty ratio does factor into how much attention an instructor may give an individual student’s work. Just imagine the difference between evaluating, say 75 students’ projects or just 25 in the same available amount of time, regardless of how the work is submitted. This category counts for 9% of the total score for a school.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 5.4 to 85.9 for schools, schools can earn up to 900 points.
Here are the ten lowest student-to-faculty rations of our group of schools:
1. Southern Arkansas
2. Tennessee - Martin
3. Western Kentucky
4. Georgia Southern
5. Wisconsin - LaCrosse
6. North Dakota
7. Louisiana - Monroe
8. Rowan
9. Fayetteville State
10. Mississippi
The overall lead is now as follows:
1st: Colorado – Denver (7,075)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,851)
3rd: Wisconsin – Whitewater (6,742)
4th(tie): Worcester Poly (6,697)
4th (tie): Michigan – Flint (6,697)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (6,533)
7th: Alabama (6,449)
8th: Auburn (6,446)
9th: Northeastern (6,275)
10th: Quinnipiac (6,176)
11th: Fayetteville State (6,168)
12th: Florida State (6,155)
13th: Alabama – Birmingham (6,108)
14th: Penn State (6,101)
15th: Houston – Victoria (6,000)
16th: Morehead State (5,933)
17th: Georgia Southern (5,848)
18th: Massachusetts – Amherst (5,708)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (5,697)
20th: Washington State (5,551)
21st: Wyoming (5,544)
22nd: North Texas (5,502)
23rd: Texas – San Antonio (5,479)
24th: Western New England (5,434)
25th: Oklahoma State (5,414)
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Twelve: Number of Concentrations
This category is the big one. This is because the initial criteria gave us a set of good schools, schools accredited by the AACSB, which offered a true online MBA. The difference between these 72 schools is weighed by what the school can offer a top candidate, and the top category of the 15 available to measure is the number of concentrations. Businesses like to know what the MBA means to them, and the concentration sets the applicant apart, even from other MBA holders.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 1 to 8 concentrations, schools can earn up to 2,400 points.
Here are top schools by available MBA concentration:
1t. Colorado- Denver
1t. Michigan – Flint
1t. Northeastern
1t. Worcester Poly
5t. Gonzaga
5t. Wisconsin - Whitewater
7t. Fayetteville State
7t. Houston – Victoria
9t. Auburn
9t. Florida Gulf Coast
9t. Morehead State
9t. Quinnipiac
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Colorado – Denver (6,363)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,023)
3rd: Michigan – Flint (5,979)
4th: Worcester Poly (5,956)
5th: Wisconsin – Whitewater (5,910)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (5,754)
7th: Alabama (5,639)
8th: Auburn (5,613)
9th: Northeastern (5,481)
10th: Houston – Victoria (5,378)
11th: Florida State (5,361)
12th: Alabama – Birmingham (5,326)
13th: Quinnipiac (5,323)
14th: Fayetteville State (5,301)
15th: Penn State (5,297)
16th: Morehead State (5,104)
17th: Georgia Southern (4,970)
18th: Massachusetts – Amherst (4,964)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (4,869)
20th: Suffolk (4,725)
21st: Washington State (4,708)
22nd: Wyoming (4,702)
23rd: North Texas (4,684)
24th: Florida (4,670)
25th: Texas – San Antonio (4,665)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 1 to 8 concentrations, schools can earn up to 2,400 points.
Here are top schools by available MBA concentration:
1t. Colorado- Denver
1t. Michigan – Flint
1t. Northeastern
1t. Worcester Poly
5t. Gonzaga
5t. Wisconsin - Whitewater
7t. Fayetteville State
7t. Houston – Victoria
9t. Auburn
9t. Florida Gulf Coast
9t. Morehead State
9t. Quinnipiac
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Colorado – Denver (6,363)
2nd: Gonzaga (6,023)
3rd: Michigan – Flint (5,979)
4th: Worcester Poly (5,956)
5th: Wisconsin – Whitewater (5,910)
6th: Nebraska – Lincoln (5,754)
7th: Alabama (5,639)
8th: Auburn (5,613)
9th: Northeastern (5,481)
10th: Houston – Victoria (5,378)
11th: Florida State (5,361)
12th: Alabama – Birmingham (5,326)
13th: Quinnipiac (5,323)
14th: Fayetteville State (5,301)
15th: Penn State (5,297)
16th: Morehead State (5,104)
17th: Georgia Southern (4,970)
18th: Massachusetts – Amherst (4,964)
19th: Florida Gulf Coast (4,869)
20th: Suffolk (4,725)
21st: Washington State (4,708)
22nd: Wyoming (4,702)
23rd: North Texas (4,684)
24th: Florida (4,670)
25th: Texas – San Antonio (4,665)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Eleven: Minimum GMAT
This category is useful but less significant than the average GMAT score, because it defines a floor which all students meet or exceed, but does not define the actual caliber of the students as a group. This category is worth 1.79% of the total.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 200 (if the GMAT is required or a score floor is established) to 600, schools can earn up to 179 points.
Here are the top minimum GMAT score requirements of our group of schools:
1t. Florida
1t. Nebraska - Lincoln
3t Mississippi
3t. Oklahoma State
3t. Massachusetts - Amherst
3t. Massachusetts - Lowell
3t. Wyoming
8t. Indiana - Bloomington
8t. North Dakota
8t. Quinnipiac
8t. Western Kentucky
8t. Worcester Poly
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Massachusetts – Amherst (4,664)
2nd: Nebraska – Lincoln (4,554)
3rd: Alabama (4,439)
4th: Washington State (4,408)
5th: Wyoming (4,402)
6th: Florida (4,370)
7th: Texas – San Antonio (4,365)
8th: Oklahoma State (4,331)
9th: Mississippi (4,204)
10th: Texas – Pan American (4,193)
11th: Florida International (4,173)
12th: Florida State (4,161)
13th: Texas – Dallas (4,128)
14th: Alabama – Birmingham (4,126)
15th: Auburn (4,113)
16th: Penn State (4,097)
17th: North Texas (4,084)
18th: Indiana – Bloomington (4,075)
19th: Georgia Southern (4,070)
20th: South Dakota (4,035)
21st: Arizona State (3,992)
22nd: Massachusetts – Lowell (3,983)
23rd: Colorado – Denver (3,963)
24th: Temple (3,930)
25th: Gonzaga (3,923)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 200 (if the GMAT is required or a score floor is established) to 600, schools can earn up to 179 points.
Here are the top minimum GMAT score requirements of our group of schools:
1t. Florida
1t. Nebraska - Lincoln
3t Mississippi
3t. Oklahoma State
3t. Massachusetts - Amherst
3t. Massachusetts - Lowell
3t. Wyoming
8t. Indiana - Bloomington
8t. North Dakota
8t. Quinnipiac
8t. Western Kentucky
8t. Worcester Poly
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Massachusetts – Amherst (4,664)
2nd: Nebraska – Lincoln (4,554)
3rd: Alabama (4,439)
4th: Washington State (4,408)
5th: Wyoming (4,402)
6th: Florida (4,370)
7th: Texas – San Antonio (4,365)
8th: Oklahoma State (4,331)
9th: Mississippi (4,204)
10th: Texas – Pan American (4,193)
11th: Florida International (4,173)
12th: Florida State (4,161)
13th: Texas – Dallas (4,128)
14th: Alabama – Birmingham (4,126)
15th: Auburn (4,113)
16th: Penn State (4,097)
17th: North Texas (4,084)
18th: Indiana – Bloomington (4,075)
19th: Georgia Southern (4,070)
20th: South Dakota (4,035)
21st: Arizona State (3,992)
22nd: Massachusetts – Lowell (3,983)
23rd: Colorado – Denver (3,963)
24th: Temple (3,930)
25th: Gonzaga (3,923)
Monday, June 21, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Ten: Average GMAT
This category is tremendously important, second only to the number of concentrations available in a program. The reason this counts as 18% of the total score, is because the average GMAT score of full-time students indicates the caliber of your colleagues at school, not least because full-time students help establish course expectations, and higher GMAT scores raise expectations. A good school should challenge the candidate.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 400 to 653 (where scores are reported), schools can earn up to 1,800 points. If average GMAT scores are not reported or the GMAT is not required by the school, a default 551.3 points are awarded.
Here are the ten highest average GMAT score averages in our group of schools:
1. Indiana – Bloomington
2. Penn State
3. Temple
4. Nebraska - Lincoln
5. Massachusetts - Amherst
6. Alabama
7. Florida
8. Drexel
9. Thunderbird
10. Worcester Poly
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Massachusetts – Amherst (4,500)
2nd: Nebraska – Lincoln (4,375)
3rd: Washington State (4,303)
4th: Alabama (4,296)
5th: Texas – San Antonio (4,246)
6th: Wyoming (4,238)
7th: Florida (4,191)
8th: Oklahoma State (4,167)
9th: Florida International (4,143)
10th: Florida State (4,132)
11th: Auburn (4,083)
12th: Texas – Pan American (4,074)
13th: Penn State (4,067)
14th: North Texas (4,054)
15th: Mississippi (4,040)
16th: Texas – Dallas (4,009)
17th: Alabama – Birmingham (3,983)
18th: Arizona State (3,962)
19th: Georgia Southern (3,935)
20th: Colorado – Denver (3,933)
21st: Indiana – Bloomington (3,925)
22nd: South Dakota (3,916)
23rd: Temple (3,900)
24th: Gonzaga (3,894)
25th: Drexel (3,863)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from 400 to 653 (where scores are reported), schools can earn up to 1,800 points. If average GMAT scores are not reported or the GMAT is not required by the school, a default 551.3 points are awarded.
Here are the ten highest average GMAT score averages in our group of schools:
1. Indiana – Bloomington
2. Penn State
3. Temple
4. Nebraska - Lincoln
5. Massachusetts - Amherst
6. Alabama
7. Florida
8. Drexel
9. Thunderbird
10. Worcester Poly
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Massachusetts – Amherst (4,500)
2nd: Nebraska – Lincoln (4,375)
3rd: Washington State (4,303)
4th: Alabama (4,296)
5th: Texas – San Antonio (4,246)
6th: Wyoming (4,238)
7th: Florida (4,191)
8th: Oklahoma State (4,167)
9th: Florida International (4,143)
10th: Florida State (4,132)
11th: Auburn (4,083)
12th: Texas – Pan American (4,074)
13th: Penn State (4,067)
14th: North Texas (4,054)
15th: Mississippi (4,040)
16th: Texas – Dallas (4,009)
17th: Alabama – Birmingham (3,983)
18th: Arizona State (3,962)
19th: Georgia Southern (3,935)
20th: Colorado – Denver (3,933)
21st: Indiana – Bloomington (3,925)
22nd: South Dakota (3,916)
23rd: Temple (3,900)
24th: Gonzaga (3,894)
25th: Drexel (3,863)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Nine: Operating Budget
This category is one which matters more for an online school than for many traditional programs. The online student is dependent on technology, not only in his own hardware and software but in the school’s resources. Access to research and course data is critical for students, especially when performing real-time discussions and projects, so the school’s operating budget reflects its ability to meet that demand.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $1,768,743 to $90,020,515 for these budgets, schools can earn up to 107 points.
Here are the ten highest Operating Budgets for our group of schools:
1. Indiana - Bloomington
2. Arizona State
3. Thunderbird
4. Suffolk
5. Florida
6. Hong Kong Poly
7. Penn State
8. Florida International
9. Texas – Dallas
10. Temple
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Laval (2,888)
2nd: Texas – Pan American (2,839)
3rd: Texas – El Paso (2,821)
4th: Massachusetts – Amherst (2,798)
5th: Washington State (2,776)
6th: Texas – Arlington (2,759)
7th: Wyoming (2,709)
8th: Auburn (2,705)
9th: Texas – San Antonio (2,698)
10th: North Texas (2,695)
11th: Nebraska – Lincoln (2,651)
12th: Florida International (2,622)
13th: Oklahoma State (2,616)
14th: Alabama (2,612)
15th: Florida State (2,589)
16th: Mississippi (2,551)
17th: Georgia Southern (2,546)
18th: Texas – Dallas (2,542)
19th: Florida (2,509)
20th: West Georgia (2,486)
21st: Kennesaw State (2,448)
22nd: Alabama – Birmingham (2,447)
23rd: Durham (2,420)
24th: SUNY – Utica (2,400)
25th: Colorado – Denver (2,389)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $1,768,743 to $90,020,515 for these budgets, schools can earn up to 107 points.
Here are the ten highest Operating Budgets for our group of schools:
1. Indiana - Bloomington
2. Arizona State
3. Thunderbird
4. Suffolk
5. Florida
6. Hong Kong Poly
7. Penn State
8. Florida International
9. Texas – Dallas
10. Temple
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Laval (2,888)
2nd: Texas – Pan American (2,839)
3rd: Texas – El Paso (2,821)
4th: Massachusetts – Amherst (2,798)
5th: Washington State (2,776)
6th: Texas – Arlington (2,759)
7th: Wyoming (2,709)
8th: Auburn (2,705)
9th: Texas – San Antonio (2,698)
10th: North Texas (2,695)
11th: Nebraska – Lincoln (2,651)
12th: Florida International (2,622)
13th: Oklahoma State (2,616)
14th: Alabama (2,612)
15th: Florida State (2,589)
16th: Mississippi (2,551)
17th: Georgia Southern (2,546)
18th: Texas – Dallas (2,542)
19th: Florida (2,509)
20th: West Georgia (2,486)
21st: Kennesaw State (2,448)
22nd: Alabama – Birmingham (2,447)
23rd: Durham (2,420)
24th: SUNY – Utica (2,400)
25th: Colorado – Denver (2,389)
Sunday, June 20, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Eight: MBA Out-of-state Tuition
This category is one of the more important ones. For a lot of MBA candidates, the cost of your tuition is an important factor in where you go to school, so this category counts for a full 10% of the total, surpassed only by the number of concentrations, the average GMAT score of students, and the degree levels offered by the school.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $8,881 to $81,665 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 1,000 points.
Here are the ten lowest MBA out-of-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Michigan - Flint
2. Laval
3. Texas – Pan American
4. Texas – Tyler
5. Southern Arkansas
6. Rowan
7. Fayetteville State
8. Mississippi
9. Western Kentucky
10. SUNY – Utica
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Laval (2,846)
2nd: Texas – Pan American (2,829)
3rd: Texas – El Paso (2,811)
4th: Massachusetts – Amherst (2,770)
5th: Washington State (2,751)
6th: Texas – Arlington (2,732)
7th(tie): Auburn (2,697)
Wyoming (2,697)
9th: North Texas (2,671)
10th: Texas – San Antonio (2,667)
11th: Nebraska – Lincoln (2,628)
12th: Oklahoma State (2,580)
13th: Florida International (2,576)
14th: Alabama (2,569)
15th: Florida State (2,560)
16th: Mississippi (2,541)
17th: Georgia Southern (2,531)
18th: Texas – Dallas (2,497)
19th: West Georgia (2,478)
20th: Florida (2,442)
21st: Alabama – Birmingham (2,434)
22nd: Kennesaw State (2,423)
23rd: Durham (2,406)
24th: SUNY – Utica (2,396)
25th: Morehead State (2,376)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $8,881 to $81,665 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 1,000 points.
Here are the ten lowest MBA out-of-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Michigan - Flint
2. Laval
3. Texas – Pan American
4. Texas – Tyler
5. Southern Arkansas
6. Rowan
7. Fayetteville State
8. Mississippi
9. Western Kentucky
10. SUNY – Utica
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Laval (2,846)
2nd: Texas – Pan American (2,829)
3rd: Texas – El Paso (2,811)
4th: Massachusetts – Amherst (2,770)
5th: Washington State (2,751)
6th: Texas – Arlington (2,732)
7th(tie): Auburn (2,697)
Wyoming (2,697)
9th: North Texas (2,671)
10th: Texas – San Antonio (2,667)
11th: Nebraska – Lincoln (2,628)
12th: Oklahoma State (2,580)
13th: Florida International (2,576)
14th: Alabama (2,569)
15th: Florida State (2,560)
16th: Mississippi (2,541)
17th: Georgia Southern (2,531)
18th: Texas – Dallas (2,497)
19th: West Georgia (2,478)
20th: Florida (2,442)
21st: Alabama – Birmingham (2,434)
22nd: Kennesaw State (2,423)
23rd: Durham (2,406)
24th: SUNY – Utica (2,396)
25th: Morehead State (2,376)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Seven: Undergraduate Out-of-state Tuition
This category is another pretty minor selection, which is why it counts for only 0.71% of the total, but it does matter a bit because, like the other tuition data, the undergraduate tuition rate often serves as a barometer for the graduate rate.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $4,738 to $70,000 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 71 points.
Here are the ten lowest undergraduate out-of-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Laval
2. Durham
3. Kennesaw State
4. Southern Arkansas
5. Louisiana - Monroe
6. Houston - Victoria
7. Texas – Permian Basin
8. Wyoming
9. Texas – Tyler
10. Alabama - Birmingham
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Texas – El Paso (1,939)
2nd: Texas – San Antonio (1,936)
3rd: Washington State (1,932)
4th: Florida State (1,931)
5th: Massachusetts – Amherst (1,930)
6th(tie): Oklahoma State (1,927)
Nebraska – Lincoln (1,927)
8th: Texas – Arlington (1,926)
9th: Alabama (1,923)
10th: North Texas (1,917)
11th: Florida (1,913)
12th: Colorado – Denver (1,907)
13th: Texas – Dallas (1,902)
14th: Florida International (1,889)
15th: Arizona State (1,872)
16th: Penn State (1,856)
17th(tie): Laval (1,846)
Indiana – Bloomington (1,846)
19th: Texas – Pan American (1,833)
20th: Wyoming (1,827)
21st: Auburn (1,823)
22nd: Durham (1,799)
23rd: Temple (1,721)
24th: Drexel (1,671)
25th: Hong Kong Poly (1,645)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $4,738 to $70,000 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 71 points.
Here are the ten lowest undergraduate out-of-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Laval
2. Durham
3. Kennesaw State
4. Southern Arkansas
5. Louisiana - Monroe
6. Houston - Victoria
7. Texas – Permian Basin
8. Wyoming
9. Texas – Tyler
10. Alabama - Birmingham
The overall lead is now as follows (points):
1st: Texas – El Paso (1,939)
2nd: Texas – San Antonio (1,936)
3rd: Washington State (1,932)
4th: Florida State (1,931)
5th: Massachusetts – Amherst (1,930)
6th(tie): Oklahoma State (1,927)
Nebraska – Lincoln (1,927)
8th: Texas – Arlington (1,926)
9th: Alabama (1,923)
10th: North Texas (1,917)
11th: Florida (1,913)
12th: Colorado – Denver (1,907)
13th: Texas – Dallas (1,902)
14th: Florida International (1,889)
15th: Arizona State (1,872)
16th: Penn State (1,856)
17th(tie): Laval (1,846)
Indiana – Bloomington (1,846)
19th: Texas – Pan American (1,833)
20th: Wyoming (1,827)
21st: Auburn (1,823)
22nd: Durham (1,799)
23rd: Temple (1,721)
24th: Drexel (1,671)
25th: Hong Kong Poly (1,645)
Saturday, June 19, 2010
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Six: MBA In-state Tuition
This category is more important than undergraduate tuition, since we’re talking about MBA tuition, but it’s still relative minor, since a true online school will want to attract candidates from outside their state. So this category counts for 2.14% of the whole set.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $3,617 to $81,665 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 214 points. Here are the ten lowest MBA in-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Fayetteville State
2. Laval
3. Texas – Pan American
4. Texas - Tyler
5. Georgia Southern
6. Texas A&M - Commerce
7. Southern Arkansas
8. Louisiana - Monroe
9. Mississippi
10. West Georgia
The overall lead is now as follows (until the last category, amounts under a point are rounded):
1st: Texas – El Paso (1,880 points)
2nd: Massachusetts – Amherst (1,875 points)
3rd(tie): Florida State (1,874 points)
Washington State (1,874 points)
5th: Texas – San Antonio (1,873 points)
6th(tie): Nebraska – Lincoln (1,869 points)
Oklahoma State (1,869 points)
8th: Texas – Arlington (1,866 points)
9th: Alabama (1,864 points)
10th(tie): Florida (1,862 points)
North Texas (1,862 points)
12th: Texas – Dallas (1,847 points)
13th: Colorado – Denver (1,846 points)
14th: Florida International (1,830 points)
15th: Arizona State (1,815 points)
16th: Penn State (1,806 points)
17th: Indiana – Bloomington (1,796 points)
18th: Laval (1,775 points)
19th: Texas – Pan American (1,771 points)
20th: Auburn (1,764 points)
21st: Wyoming (1,762 points)
22nd: Durham (1,730 points)
23rd: Temple (1,668 points)
24th: Hong Kong Poly (1,640 points)
25th: Drexel (1,624 points)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $3,617 to $81,665 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 214 points. Here are the ten lowest MBA in-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Fayetteville State
2. Laval
3. Texas – Pan American
4. Texas - Tyler
5. Georgia Southern
6. Texas A&M - Commerce
7. Southern Arkansas
8. Louisiana - Monroe
9. Mississippi
10. West Georgia
The overall lead is now as follows (until the last category, amounts under a point are rounded):
1st: Texas – El Paso (1,880 points)
2nd: Massachusetts – Amherst (1,875 points)
3rd(tie): Florida State (1,874 points)
Washington State (1,874 points)
5th: Texas – San Antonio (1,873 points)
6th(tie): Nebraska – Lincoln (1,869 points)
Oklahoma State (1,869 points)
8th: Texas – Arlington (1,866 points)
9th: Alabama (1,864 points)
10th(tie): Florida (1,862 points)
North Texas (1,862 points)
12th: Texas – Dallas (1,847 points)
13th: Colorado – Denver (1,846 points)
14th: Florida International (1,830 points)
15th: Arizona State (1,815 points)
16th: Penn State (1,806 points)
17th: Indiana – Bloomington (1,796 points)
18th: Laval (1,775 points)
19th: Texas – Pan American (1,771 points)
20th: Auburn (1,764 points)
21st: Wyoming (1,762 points)
22nd: Durham (1,730 points)
23rd: Temple (1,668 points)
24th: Hong Kong Poly (1,640 points)
25th: Drexel (1,624 points)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Five: Undergraduate In-state Tuition
This category is admittedly pretty minor, which is why it counts for only 0.36% of the total, but it does have meaning. If nothing else, the undergraduate tuition rate often serves as a barometer for the graduate rate, so you need to watch it. This is the weakest category of the fifteen I use, but it still counts.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $1,930 to $42,100 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 36 points. This is the first category which begins to set schools apart from each other.
Here are the ten lowest undergraduate in-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Laval
2. Kennesaw State
3. Durham
4. Wyoming
5. Fayetteville State
6. Louisiana – Monroe
7. Georgia Southern
8. Florida Gulf Coast
9. Florida International
10. East Carolina
The overall lead is now as follows:
Tied for 1st at 1,684 points:
Florida
Florida International
Florida State
4th: Alabama (1,683 points)
Tied for 5th at 1,682 points:
Arizona State
Colorado – Denver
Nebraska – Lincoln
Oklahoma State
Texas – San Antonio
Washington State
Tied for 11th at 1,681 points:
Texas – Arlington
Texas – El Paso
Tied for 13th at 1,680 points:
Indiana – Bloomington
Massachusetts – Amherst
Tied for 15th at 1,679 points:
North Texas
Texas – Dallas
17th: Penn State (1,675 points)
18th: Laval (1,561 points)
Tied for 19th at 1,560 points:
Durham
Wyoming
Tied for 21st at 1,558 points:
Auburn
Texas – Pan American
23rd: Temple (1,552 points)
24th: Drexel (1,538 points)
25th: Hong Kong Polytechnic (1,527 points)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there is a range from $1,930 to $42,100 for a year of tuition and fees, schools can earn up to 36 points. This is the first category which begins to set schools apart from each other.
Here are the ten lowest undergraduate in-state tuition rates of our group of schools:
1. Laval
2. Kennesaw State
3. Durham
4. Wyoming
5. Fayetteville State
6. Louisiana – Monroe
7. Georgia Southern
8. Florida Gulf Coast
9. Florida International
10. East Carolina
The overall lead is now as follows:
Tied for 1st at 1,684 points:
Florida
Florida International
Florida State
4th: Alabama (1,683 points)
Tied for 5th at 1,682 points:
Arizona State
Colorado – Denver
Nebraska – Lincoln
Oklahoma State
Texas – San Antonio
Washington State
Tied for 11th at 1,681 points:
Texas – Arlington
Texas – El Paso
Tied for 13th at 1,680 points:
Indiana – Bloomington
Massachusetts – Amherst
Tied for 15th at 1,679 points:
North Texas
Texas – Dallas
17th: Penn State (1,675 points)
18th: Laval (1,561 points)
Tied for 19th at 1,560 points:
Durham
Wyoming
Tied for 21st at 1,558 points:
Auburn
Texas – Pan American
23rd: Temple (1,552 points)
24th: Drexel (1,538 points)
25th: Hong Kong Polytechnic (1,527 points)
The Best Online MBA Schools (AACSB) for 2010 Part Four: Degree Levels
This one may not appear important, but a university which offers you an MBA may later be attractive for a doctorate, or additional certification. A school which offers more degree levels is more serious in its mission.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there are four levels to consider, schools can earn 25%, 50%, 75% or 100% of 100 times the 14.00 value of the category, or 350, 700, 1050, or 1400 more points.
Twenty-five AACSB schools with online MBA programs offer the full four degree levels. They are, alphabetically (2009 ranking in parentheses):
Alabama
Arizona State
Auburn (1)
Colorado – Denver (4)
Drexel (2)
Durham (25t)
Florida (21)
Florida International
Florida State (22t)
Hong Kong Polytechnic
Indiana – Bloomington
Laval
Nebraska – Lincoln (22t)
North Texas (25t)
Oklahoma State
Penn State
Temple
Massachusetts - Amherst
Texas – Arlington (25t)
Texas – Dallas (11t)
Texas – El Paso
Texas – Pan American
Texas – San Antonio
Washington State
Wyoming (24)
The lead is now a 17-way tie for first, with another 8 teams tied for 18th place:
Tied for 1st at 1,650 points:
Alabama
Arizona State
Colorado – Denver (4)
Florida (21)
Florida International
Florida State (22t)
Indiana – Bloomington
Massachusetts - Amherst
Nebraska – Lincoln (22t)
North Texas (25t)
Oklahoma State
Penn State
Texas – Arlington (25t)
Texas – Dallas (11t)
Texas – El Paso
Texas – San Antonio
Washington State
Tied for 18th place at 1,525 points:
Auburn (1)
Drexel (2)
Durham (25t)
Hong Kong Polytechnic
Laval
Temple
Texas – Pan American
Wyoming (24)
(The reference to 2009 rankings will not be continued again until the final rankings)
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there are four levels to consider, schools can earn 25%, 50%, 75% or 100% of 100 times the 14.00 value of the category, or 350, 700, 1050, or 1400 more points.
Twenty-five AACSB schools with online MBA programs offer the full four degree levels. They are, alphabetically (2009 ranking in parentheses):
Alabama
Arizona State
Auburn (1)
Colorado – Denver (4)
Drexel (2)
Durham (25t)
Florida (21)
Florida International
Florida State (22t)
Hong Kong Polytechnic
Indiana – Bloomington
Laval
Nebraska – Lincoln (22t)
North Texas (25t)
Oklahoma State
Penn State
Temple
Massachusetts - Amherst
Texas – Arlington (25t)
Texas – Dallas (11t)
Texas – El Paso
Texas – Pan American
Texas – San Antonio
Washington State
Wyoming (24)
The lead is now a 17-way tie for first, with another 8 teams tied for 18th place:
Tied for 1st at 1,650 points:
Alabama
Arizona State
Colorado – Denver (4)
Florida (21)
Florida International
Florida State (22t)
Indiana – Bloomington
Massachusetts - Amherst
Nebraska – Lincoln (22t)
North Texas (25t)
Oklahoma State
Penn State
Texas – Arlington (25t)
Texas – Dallas (11t)
Texas – El Paso
Texas – San Antonio
Washington State
Tied for 18th place at 1,525 points:
Auburn (1)
Drexel (2)
Durham (25t)
Hong Kong Polytechnic
Laval
Temple
Texas – Pan American
Wyoming (24)
(The reference to 2009 rankings will not be continued again until the final rankings)
Friday, June 18, 2010
The Best Online MBA (AACSB) Schools for 2010 Part Three: AACSB Accreditation Levels
We’ll start simple. The AACSB accredits schools as either Business schools, or as both Business and Accounting schools. The reason it matters, is not only for people who want to focus on Accounting as a concentration or career, but the additional effort by the school reflects, in my opinion, a superior academic standard which should be reflected in the overall MBA curriculum.
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there are two levels to consider, accreditation in both Business and Accounting earns 100% of (100 x 2.5) or 250 points. Accreditation in Business only earns half that, or 50% of (100 x 2.5) or 125 points.
Twenty-nine AACSB schools with online MBA programs are accredited in both Business and Accounting, so we start with a 29-school tie for the early lead. They are, alphabetically (2009 ranking in parentheses):
Alabama
Alabama - Birmingham
Arizona State
Colorado – Denver (4)
Florida (21)
Florida International
Florida State (22t)
Georgia Southern
Gonzaga
Indiana – Bloomington
Kennesaw State
Louisiana – Monroe
Massachusetts - Amherst
Mississippi
Nebraska – Lincoln (22t)
North Texas (25t)
Oklahoma State
Penn State
Portland State
Suffolk (18)
Tennessee Tech (5t)
Texas – Arlington (25t)
Texas – Dallas (11t)
Texas – El Paso
Texas – San Antonio
Towson
Washington State
West Georgia
Western Kentucky
In terms of scoring, each school earns up to 100 times the percentage value of the category, so that in total a maximum score of 10,000 is possible. For this category, since there are two levels to consider, accreditation in both Business and Accounting earns 100% of (100 x 2.5) or 250 points. Accreditation in Business only earns half that, or 50% of (100 x 2.5) or 125 points.
Twenty-nine AACSB schools with online MBA programs are accredited in both Business and Accounting, so we start with a 29-school tie for the early lead. They are, alphabetically (2009 ranking in parentheses):
Alabama
Alabama - Birmingham
Arizona State
Colorado – Denver (4)
Florida (21)
Florida International
Florida State (22t)
Georgia Southern
Gonzaga
Indiana – Bloomington
Kennesaw State
Louisiana – Monroe
Massachusetts - Amherst
Mississippi
Nebraska – Lincoln (22t)
North Texas (25t)
Oklahoma State
Penn State
Portland State
Suffolk (18)
Tennessee Tech (5t)
Texas – Arlington (25t)
Texas – Dallas (11t)
Texas – El Paso
Texas – San Antonio
Towson
Washington State
West Georgia
Western Kentucky
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
