Bloomberg Undergraduate Rankings

I'm in undergrad and don't really have enough knowledge to form an opinion, would like to see what others have to say.

Lol at Wharton and Haas ranked 16 and 36.

Before we have to read 100 posts destroying the rankings, understand these rankings are NOT in order of Best Undergrad Business School to be Guaranteed an Investment Banking job. This is a 4 factor weighted ranking based on things that aren't very important such as polls and salary right out of school (not looking at the salary long game).

I realize for an IB ranking your top would include HYPWS before all you mongoloids start going apeshit about Ivy rankings etc. These types of rankings are essentially click/controversy bait.

Go frogs!!

Rankings are a joke. This reminds me of the USC vs ND post and how people used rankings as a factor. I think we can all agree how shit they are once and for all.

Well now the school I transferred from is ranked higher than the school I transferred to, so that's fun. But really this rankings are very off from reality and shouldn't be relied on by practically anyone.

Yea but it still sucks to see your Bschool degree ranking (Goizueta) drop 3 spots every year. Makes my degree feel more and more useless.

Finally an accurate ranking. No more usnews BS. How do I know that? Notre Dame is ranked second. WSO approved.

Ranking sucks. Wharton is ranked 66th on the employer survey rank?

Wow. My alma mater took a nose dive from like top 25 to barely top 50.

Good thing these kinds of lists are almost entirely arbitrary.

So does this mean that Targets are going to start transferring to non-targets?

I'm going to use this forum as the proverbial dumpster into which I trash this survey. This is why you don't take survey data or rankings at face value. I like the idea of coming up with an objective way of comparing schools but this does not work. Having attended one of the ACC/Big Ten schools (would be considered "non-target" on WSO) in the top 15 of this list, my alma mater should not be ranked where it is. Maybe the employer survey data says students were better prepared, but I am 100% confident the average Wharton student would blow 95% of my classmates out of the water.

This is what happens when you create a ranking methodology based on some stupid ideological concepts and then just puke out the results. E.g. the top ranked school for employer feedback (40% of the weighting) is John Carroll. So you're telling me that some tiny liberal arts college in Ohio is better preparing students than schools that have been acclaimed for providing top UG business education for decades? I looked through at least 10 pages of Linkedin search results for John Carroll's b-school and saw maybe 3 recognizable companies so I don't even know who they would've polled for this.

I have no problem with giving some of these other schools some credit where it is due, but I just hate that rankings can play a part in so many arguments when they are this flawed.

I applied to college this year. A couple of these schools jumped 20+ spots from the previous year (Syracuse, uMiami, Bentley.) I got into/ visited Bentley and yes it seemed like a great school but not a top 10 school and it's not better than Wharton or UCB. I think these rankings are more at an overall background of schools not just IB. Nova is a semi target/ non target but has heavy placement in big 4 accounting etc. Also they put 35% of their ranking in what students said about their school. If my school won the ncaa tournament my thoughts about my school would definitely be higher than it was before (Villanova)

Which rankings are we supposed to consider legit? According to me, many people base their views on the US News & World Report rankings, but I have heard many complaints about how it is biased towards public universities.

Rankings are basically meaningless, markets are generally parochial and alumni tend to disproportionately stay close to where they graduated from, odds are if you want to work in South Florida you're better of coming out of "The U" (University of Miami) than Wake Forest, regardless of what the ranking says. Most schools have local, at best regional reach, only a handful are truly national.

Another thing to consider about employer feedback is what kinds of employers are the students from each college going to.

Student X from Wharton is likely going to an elite firm in whatever industry, where his colleagues also come from elite backgrounds and expectations are high. I don't doubt that student X is exceptionaly prepared, but in his firm (McKinsey, GS, a top marketing firm, whatever) it is probably harder for him to consistently outperform. This probably contrasts with the average kid from XYZ State University, who is a.) the one kid from his school to get into a decent shop because he was the top performer in the entire school and kills it each day at work or b.) works at a place where it's "easier" to get a job, expectations are lower, and perceived performance is stronger. They probably control for this, but just my two cents.

A separate point: some of the perceived better schools in my area are secretly disliked nowadays by some senior guys because they think the kids come in entitled and aren't as willing to grin and bear it as in the past. This is probably them being jaded by the "these millennials these days" phenomenon, but it's worth mentioning.

The ratings are a sham, and this is coming from a McIntire grad (UVA consistently gets love from these rankings). There's no way Wharton is #16 behind schools like WF, OSU, and W&M. Everyone's already pointed out the numerous flaws in the employer survey, but volatile rankings are what sell magazines.

One interesting school was the US Coast Guard Academy - if I'm correct, these kids owe 4 years of service to the Coast Guard. I wonder why the Coast Guard ranks their students so poorly against the non-Academy kids (you would infer that ever single non-Academy kid is superior from the rankings).

The people ripping on the rankings- those who are butthurt (i.e. ohhh my alma! What BS!) The people talking them up to more than what they are, a ranking- Probably has their school in top 25 and are overly excited.

However, Bloomberg is very respected. If you go to a school in the top 25 or top 10 for that matter, you will have good opportunities. I can promise you that doing well at IU (for instance) studying business will set you up for success, IF you seize the opportunities. BUT if you go to IU, get into the bschool, party too much, mow lawns during the summer and barely 3.0 - good fuckin luck mate!

Coming from someone who's school placed well: It doesn't mean shit what it is ranked if you don't do the right things (network, work hard once admitted, gain meaningful xp, etc.)

It is only what you make of it. Therefore, yes I would think the rankings are a good thing to go off, but there is NO shortcut, only more enjoyable routes.