Trending Content
Career Resources
WSO Free Modeling Series - Now Open Through
April 30, 2024
9 Free Financial Modeling Lessons
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
tha shi cray
That is egregious. No need for an average GMAT that high.
Just falsify your information like that ex-MIT "admission" dean and you should be fine
Isn't 750 like the 99th percentile?
Indeed it is
No way that is true. If you go to beat the GMAT you will see of the 19 self reporting admits only 1 got a 750 or higher. Last year the school's average was 720 so that would be a 30 point increase.
If I had to guess bschool GMAT averages will start trending to the mid 720s but not higher. Bschool admissions isn't a numbers game to the same degree that law or med school are.
There are way too many people in the 680-720 range that have rock star professional and extracurricular experience to won't be passed over and will keep the average around 720. Those are my two cents.
Their average was historically around 710-720. It'll be interesting to see how many people of that group actually decide to attend Sloan. It'll be tough to retain a lot of these candidates when it is likely these applicants will also get into a top 5.
Wow.
god, i am glad i retook the gmat and got a 750. suddenly a 750 seems so average. but frankly, if in the first attempt i had got a 700 i wouldnt have retaken it.
ok, no way that is true, check the beatthegmat stats, almost no one of the admits got over a 750. the average over there is 714. ironically, the average of applicants is 718, so basically a gmat doesnt help you at all at MIT.
Yes but not EVERYONE goes to beat the gmat. this is coming from one of the admissions directors (rod garcia?) from what i heard. insanity. just reporting what i heard from a friend who was at admit weekend. i know booth's average gmat seemed to spike this year as well so i wouldnt be amazed
this seems really odd, the test is curved each time its given; which is why good quant scores have gotten so much harder with so many foreign applicants.
so either the number of applicants must have shot through the roof (reports are the number of applications is actually down this year) or top students are applying to more schools than normal. this seems highly unlikely either way, with the 80% range for most of these schools, it would mean the scores shifted by at least a standard deviation.
Here's to hoping MIT carves out a niche for itself as an elite MBA program for highly intelligent people who haven't had the professional success that you'd find in students at HBS and GSB. Or better yet, maybe one that focuses on professional and academic success, but isn't particularly interested in how many orphans you rescue or inner city children you turn into Rhodes Scholars. So many of the criteria used to differentiate applicants in the top MBA programs are such irrelevant bullshit. It's perfectly legit to argue that GPA and GMAT past a certain point aren't necessary for b-school success. But I'll never understand how spending every second of your spare time doing volunteer work is any better.
Full disclosure: I have a 760 GMAT. My primary hobbies are playing video games, drinking, and not giving a fuck about orphans or inner city children.
Elite bschools want to create the worlds best future leaders, both in the workplace and community. In theory, the adcoms are able to decipher who is doing community service for an application vs. doing it because of true passion.
Someone with a 760 and good job is much more of a commodity (thousand of people a year get 760+ scores) than someone with a 700, a good job, and has a proven track record of passionate leadership within their community - founding organizations, creating sustainable results and striving to promote change. Last thing top schools need are apathetic and entitled students that can get high marks but will more likely than not do anything special in their careers.
yes, but dont you think that for some schools such as stanford, it is just too much. People have different priorities in life, Bill Gates didnt volunteer when he was our age. Buffet didnt either. I am not saying schools should pick students solely on their scores, but they should focus less on extracurricular and more on career advancement, etc. I think successful people in the work place have higher chances of becoming the next CEO, CFO of big corporations than tree huggers.
where are you attending / applying?
I hope I end up with a bunch of classmates just like yourself, seriously. All this "lets safe the world" crap is total bullshit, we are not applying for an MPP, but an MBA. Frankly, if MIT becomes the new "really smart no bull shit crowd" bschool,then it will become my number 1 choice, no questions asked.
I have a 770 and my primary hobby is drinking and being totally self absorbed. I wasn't that excited about MIT but if this is true, I'm kind of hoping things work out for me in R2 (interviewed last week).
Sour grapes after rejection from Harvard? Think of it as going after girls. You have your preferences (good looking/high ranking), and they have theirs. Just thinking a girl wants someone with a lot of money (e.g. good basics) is not the recipe for a perfect match. If you don't like what they want, find someone who does (looks like not the ones you want to be with anyway).
And it's not like Harvard/Stanford are full of tree huggers with 500 in GMAT.
exactly, people are acting like community service and good gpa/test scores are mutually exclusive. lifeofpurpose you can say community service is bullshit and unnecessary and Harvard should focus on careers but the fact of the matter is the ppl who get into HBS have outstanding test scores (for the most part), have good advancement in their careers, and on top of all that exhibit leadership and community betterment. You can talk about how MIT is going to become the no-nonsense biz school but I doubt their avg GPA/GMAT is ever going to get much higher than HBS/GBS... it's just that at HBS/GBS there will be outstanding individuals who have made a real difference outside of an A in some class and getting promoted once or twice.
p.s. don't start with the curriculum nonsense, if you want a technical degree get an MSF/MFin or do something STEM related.
well, i still think HBS is great, would go there in a heart beat, but I was talking mainly about stanford.
Extracurricular may also show that you can do more than just your job. E.g. be able to balance a demanding schedule on top of a demanding schedule (your job). This applies for those with good academic/work, but also topping it off with good EC.
Once you are at the program, they also want you to do more than just go to class (good GMAT/GPA) and do projects (work experience). They want you to be involved in clubs and stuff, where EC experience comes in handy.
Sloan's round 1 accepted cohort having a 750+ GMAT averaged is unbelievable (and I mean literally unbelievable as in "there is no way this can be true"). I have the USNews Premum edition and here are the facts from the published data. For the 2012 rankings, Sloan had 797 total students and an average GMAT of 718 (which is behind Harvard, Stanford and Yale, and tied with Wharton and Haas). According to the GMAT website, 750 is 98% percentile and 718 is about 93% percentile. So instead of accepting applicants from a 7% elite pool, MIT Sloan is apparently now only fishing in a 2% pond...
797 total students means that there are roughly 400 students per year. Since these are accepted students, we can ignore yield and assume that perhaps there are 190 first round accepted students (assuming 190 for R1, 190 for R2 and maybe 20 for R3). For 190 students to deviate from a 718 average to 750+ territory would be an extremely unexpected event that would occur several standard deviations from the norm.
No school in MBA history has had an average GMAT of 750. I recall hearing somewhere that Stanford's 728 average GMAT is one of the highest ever. Unless MIT Sloan is throwing all their other standards out the window and severely jeopardizing the GPA, work experience and leadership requirements of its 2014 class, moving the average from 718 to 750+ for 190 students is virtually mathematically impossible.
I agree, it's just too much. I know that beatthegmat doesn't necessarily represent the entire class, but only one of the admits over there had a GMAT of 750.
ok guys, over at beatthegmat, they did a chat and they did confirm that Rod Garcia said that the mean gmat was indeed 750. However, he said it wasn't on purpose.
well, dont forget that may with high GMATs might decide to attend somewhere else, so the overall average for the "attending class" will decrease.
Harvard Business School's mission is: "We educate leaders who make a difference in the world." (http://www.hbs.edu/about/)
HBS has the flexibility to admit the applicants that individually, or collectively, best enable HBS to carry out this mission. The concept that only the most intelligent or successful individuals should be admitted is created by the applicants. Creating an army of HBS grads that go on to become Partners at Megafund PE shops or CEOs/Founders of multi-billion dollar companies is NOT the stated goal of HBS. Is this fair? Obviously the high scoring, really intelligent people aren't going to think so. But no one DESERVES to go to HBS (or any other b-school for that matter).
beast mooode
damn, speechless....
5 years ago top b s chools were.. 700ish average? welcome to 750+ land :0
it's insane. If the top score was a 1000, this jump wouldnt mean much. But we are talking about a top score of 800.
A 750 average means that for each 720, there are three 760s, for each 700 there are 5 students with 760, it is hard to find many people with 780+, so most people above the average scored 760 or 770, while the range for people scoring below the average could be much larger.
I know they said that it doesnt mean anything, but maybe MIT is trying to improve its rankings. Just as Yale, a top15 school has the third highest GMAT average, MIT might try to outrank Wharton in the US Ranking merely by increasing its GMAT. Or maybe they heard the rumors about Booth's increase in GMAT scores, so they wanted to stay on top.
I mean, isnt the GMAt the easiest way to improve rankings in the short term? Almost all the other variables are fixed in the short term.
I just came across this thread. Is this really true? I was thinking of doing mit sloan round 2 if i improve my gmat score. This is pretty freaking scary.
All this hearsay! OK -- this is from MIT's 2013 profile
http://mitsloan.mit.edu/mba/student-experience/class-profile/?experience/profile.php
I know, that's not the class of 2014, which is starting in a month, but you'll see a bar chart of gmat scores from the upcoming second-year class. It shows a mean GMAT of 711 and an 80% range from 660 to 750. The little bar chart shows a decent distribution across that 80% as well. So, I just don't know what to say about the 750 number -- it feels like an outlier, or, as a previous poster said, there's something going on we don't know about.
Quaerat corporis autem maxime cupiditate sint optio rem aut. Est nam cupiditate nam rerum temporibus.
Voluptatem ut voluptates dolores suscipit id voluptas debitis aspernatur. Et ipsam ut consequuntur ad et officia aut. Consequatur qui omnis quisquam inventore aspernatur. Sint illum itaque fuga eligendi unde. Id dignissimos iste voluptatem est quia consequatur.
Non exercitationem nihil unde sed culpa perspiciatis. Vel est ducimus aliquam ab et. Labore distinctio hic rerum omnis amet.
Dignissimos doloribus numquam iure alias esse. Est illum alias veritatis tempore. Autem fuga facilis nostrum ut itaque porro magnam inventore. Exercitationem iure ducimus molestiae illum dolores.
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...
Maiores quisquam possimus voluptas sit necessitatibus repellat omnis natus. Dicta id voluptatem in itaque vel sint vitae. Reiciendis ducimus voluptas et fuga et ducimus. Atque eveniet voluptas odit harum voluptates. Sapiente et placeat ut quos repellat. Animi rerum distinctio maxime.
Ut aliquid dolores perferendis error praesentium ipsa voluptatem. Rerum officia voluptas recusandae vel dolorum. Vero qui nihil magni voluptatum est unde occaecati tempora. Consequatur voluptas et nam magnam et ut. Recusandae in et doloribus eos nihil et blanditiis et.
Sit dolorem magnam dolorum quis omnis. Tempore iste necessitatibus sit quisquam quibusdam debitis. Aperiam odio quis ipsum adipisci assumenda delectus voluptatem numquam. Qui minima voluptatum iusto. Voluptatem nihil consequuntur ullam commodi id. Fuga animi rerum nisi et laborum voluptas illum et.
Expedita est cupiditate animi odit ut. Delectus qui assumenda velit repellendus consequatur quasi ut. Fugiat pariatur sapiente impedit dignissimos nobis voluptatem itaque. Esse qui sunt est et quibusdam dolor aliquam totam.