UCLA Part Time MBA VS. UCSD Full Time MBA
Hi all,
I applied to 2 business schools to pursue an MBA degree full time in late Round 3 and was admitted to the Part Time program FEMBA at UCLA (16th) ( was Denied for full time program) and the Full Time MBA program at UCSD (60th) with a fellowship covering first year tuition and subsidized housing (I pay $500/month for a single).
UCLA offered no Grants/Fellowships or Housing.
I am currently in Financial Analyst in the Software industry, but i would like to pursue banking/ financial services realistically at a middle market or boutique firm in California post MBA .
My GMAT was 660 after a month long prep, it was my first and only test.
I understand that it will be an uphill battle at either program, but if I absolutely have to choose one, which program would benefit me more professionally? I would appreciate any insights or advice to make this decision easier.
Please feel free to share your thoughts on this post. if you have a question that needs to be answered I would gladly share my input as well.
Thanks everyone!
If you want to do banking, retake GMAT and apply R1 one next year. UCSD will give you zero shot at banking (have you not looked at the employment reports???). UCLA FT would give you a decent shot, but not the part-time program - PT programs are for career accelerators, not career changers.
I get the vibe you REALLY should've researched MBA programs more before applying (e.g. R3 is a horrible time to apply also), instead of rushing it. From either choice, you're likely to get little to no salary increase.
Re-take the GMAT. Judging by your moniker I'm gonna assume you're an Asian male. There is a better chance of a meteor striking the Earth than an Asian guy with a 660 GMAT getting into a top 15 full-time MBA program.
Do more research on the schools and the application process. Round 3 is for those with extenuating circumstances and/or very non-traditional applicants. Otherwise, you're not getting in.
UCSD MBA is a joke. It's not going to get you into a serious finance job.
what did you study in school and how did you do? how much more effort do you think you could afford to put in the GMAT? are you positive you want to change careers? your job right now sounds sweet.
i echo the sentiments of the posters above- you should consider retaking. it is really tough as an asian male in particular to get into a good MBA program, so you need to try and get every advantage you can
Thank you all for the feedback thus far. I studied Management Science (Quantitative Methods) at UCSD for my undergrad. I graduated with the most outstanding student award in the Econ dpt and a 3.895 GPA. I work with operational models in my current job at a Midsize software company and have about 2 years of experience in this line of work. However, I would like to change career to Financial Services by getting an MBA degree.
I do admit that I did not allow myself enough time to prep for the GMAT and rushed through the application process.
the real question is: does the PT MBA from UCLA (16th in MBA, 4th in PT MBA) trump the FT MBA from UCSD (60th, but climbing up the ranks year over year)? which program would benefit me more if I am only targeting boutique firms on the west coast?
and yes, I am giving serious consideration to retaking the GMAT and aiming for Top 20 schools next year.
Another question is, is there any possible way I can become an entry level analyst with my current background?
UCSD undergrad is a solid school. You majored in a rigorous major and did very well and have respectable work experience. This seems to be a clear case of where you undersold yourself by not taking the GMAT more seriously and doing more research into schools and career options. You are correct that for banking, a PT MBA won't work. Asset Management is a different story, however, since their hiring is more ad hoc and not contingent upon the standard on-campus recruiting schedule.
If you are dead set on banking, you actually have 2 options: a FT MBA or a MFin from a respectable school. You clearly have the quantitative chops and coursework for the latter, and MFin programs such as UCLA, MIT, prefer younger applicants and place reasonably well into banking analyst roles. Go back to the drawing board, study for the GMAT and try to crack 720+, do more research, and apply to a few top 10-15 FT programs and a few MFin programs as well.
Retake GMAT and get 700 reapply to Anderson first round and probably good shot of getting in?
thanks. seems like my best option is retaking the GMAT.
is the general consensus then:
1.UCLA PT MBA still > than UCSD FT MBA, and
2.Employers in banking give no credit to a PT MBA even from a Top school, and will prefer not to hire one (for someone with my background)
If you go to either of these programs, you are wasting all the good work you did in undergrad. I also went to a mid-tier state school and graduated with a similar GPA. When I applied with four years of experience (and a 720+ GMAT), I got into four top-10 programs. Don't sell yourself short, man.
Agree with everyone above, reapply for 2015/2016 enrollment. Retake the GMAT, get a promotion (and preferably a new role). I think people who get into the trenches of their company in an operational/technical role and are able to move into a front-office equivalent (strategy/bd/product management) have good profiles for bschool. Your gpa/school combination is strong, and it sounds like you have the potential to hit 700+ and put together a better app. This also gives you time for meaningful extracurriculars. A lot of younger guys feel pressure from family/peers to do some kind of grad school and sell them self short on mba programs...patience usually pays off (did for me) until you hit 4/5 years of experience prior to enrollment.
To answer your original question, I think Anderson part-time will be better than UCSD for finance recruiting. People do make it to banking/AM every year from FEMBA...not sure how well a position you would be in terms of networking by doing the saturday program as opposed to the LA locals who are more involved.
I appreciate your perspective. I had the urge to finish my MBA asap and that's the reason I was even considering UCSD mba or PT at Anderson (27 months by fast tracking). one of my biggest concerns is becoming too old on paper for investment banking because too much experience can count against you (from what I've heard).
I had the promotion/salary conversation with my current employer last month and I was told that they were working on a senior analyst role for me. Should I accept the role should it comes to fruition? or stay at the current position?
i think the answer to your question as posed is UCSD FT would be better. But that's strictly considering those two options and your career transition goals. I agree with others that I don't think there's much in the way of banking opps, but there should be other decent financial svcs opportunities coming out of Rady. But yeah, 2 yrs experience doesn't make you "old" by any conventional b-school metric, so I would probably wait a year and try to boost my scores/ECs.
also UCSD isn't going to be ranked 60 forever. They have one of the best economics programs in the country, and the bschool is brand new and well funded. It should be on par with a USC in a few years.
where do you think UCSD will peak in ranking?
tough to say exactly, and there's a ton of variables that are probably more relevant for your decision than the overall ranking. that said, I could definitely see them getting into the top 25 over the next 10 years. I fully expect them to become a powerhouse in pharma/biotech placements and we'll likely see lots of top execs with Rady on their resume in 20 years time. consulting could also be strong for them. i think banking placements will be special cases for them for some time -- Haas and UCLA already too entrenched on the west coast.
Eum inventore ipsa tempore dolorem. Nisi est expedita est ullam omnis cum aut. Unde nemo minima quam et. Alias est at molestias debitis qui. Quis quaerat corporis hic.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...