MIT Sloan | Mr. Low GPA Over Achiever
GMAT 700, GPA 2.5
Stanford GSB | Mr. Corp Finance
GMAT 740, GPA 3.75
Harvard | Mr. Improve Healthcare
GMAT 730, GPA 2.8
Berkeley Haas | Mr. Wake Up & Grind
GMAT 700, GPA 3.5
Darden | Mr. Fintech Nerd
GMAT 740, GPA 7.7/10
Stanford GSB | Mr. Minority Champ
GMAT 740, GPA 3.7
Darden | Mr. Senior Energy Engineer
GMAT 710, GPA 2.5
Harvard | Mr. Merchant Of Debt
GMAT 760, GPA 3.5 / 4.0 in Master 1 / 4.0 in Master 2
Stanford GSB | Mr. Indian Telecom ENG
GRE 340, GPA 3.56
Stanford GSB | Ms. East Africa Specialist
GMAT 690, GPA 3.34
Berkeley Haas | Mr. Hanging By A Thread
GMAT 710, GPA 3.8
Harvard | Mr. Nonprofit Social Entrepreneur
GMAT 740, GPA 3.7
Chicago Booth | Ms. Start-Up Entrepreneur
GRE 318 current; 324 intended, GPA 3.4
Duke Fuqua | Ms. Health Care Executive
GMAT 690, GPA 3.3
Harvard | Mr. Professional Boy Scout
GMAT 660, GPA 3.83
IU Kelley | Mr. Construction Manager
GRE 680, GPA 3.02
IU Kelley | Mr. Clinical Trial Ops
GMAT Waived, GPA 3.33
IU Kelley | Ms. Biracial Single Mommy
, GPA 2.5/3.67 Grad
Rice Jones | Mr. Simple Manufacturer
GRE 320, GPA 3.95
NYU Stern | Mr. Low Gmat
GMAT 690, GPA 73.45 % (No GPA in undergrad)
Chicago Booth | Mr. Finance Musician
GRE 330, GPA 3.6
N U Singapore | Ms. Biomanager
GMAT 520, GPA 2.8
Harvard | Mr. 1st Gen Brazilian LGBT
GMAT 720, GPA 3.2
USC Marshall | Mr. Ambitious
GRE 323, GPA 3.01
Tuck | Ms. Nigerian Footwear
GRE None, GPA 4.5
Stanford GSB | Mr. Low GPA To Stanford
GMAT 770, GPA 2.7
Berkeley Haas | Mr. 360 Consultant
GMAT 720, GPA 3.4

GMAT vs. GRE: Which Should You Choose?

MOOC_poster_mathplourde

B-School Stats You Can’t Miss

 

You’ve heard the prediction. MOOCs will cannibalize higher education. Professors will teach from a studio instead of a lectern. And students will pick-and-choose courses from various institutions as degrees carry less weight.

Well, you might want to revisit those assumptions, as the MOOC revolution may be more hype than harbinger. That’s the lesson from data from the Babson Survey Research Group’s annual survey on online education, which was published in The Chronicle of Higher Education this week. Surveying 2,800 academic leaders, the study found that MOOCs may be less of a menacing disruptive force than previously expected.

Let’s step back to 2012, where 28% of the same survey’s respondents felt MOOCs were sustainable. That number has dropped to 16% in three years…at a time when MOOCs are seemingly on the upswing. And there was an even bigger divide between respondents who felt MOOCs weren’t sustainable. That number jumped from 26% to 51% in just three years.

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education, Babson Survey Research Group

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education, Babson Survey Research Group

In economic terms, just 6% of the sample viewed MOOCs as a way to “generate income” or “explore cost reductions.” “What this means,” Steve Kolowich reports in The Chronicle, is that academic leaders seem to understand that “any returns on their investment in free online courses will be indirect and possibly hard to quantify. They seem to be at peace with the fact that MOOCs will curb college costs.”

Similarly, the study found that MOOCs (aka “self-directed learning”) ranked dead last at 9% when the sample was asked to list the two most important factors on the future of higher education. It trailed behind stalwarts like student debt, workforce debt, assessment, competency-based education, and student retention.

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education, Babson Survey Research Group

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education, Babson Survey Research Group

Finally, another gap emerged over the importance of MOOCs in understanding online pedagogy. Three years ago, 50% of respondents believed MOOCs would help schools in that area. Now, just 28% believe that to be true – and 37% disagree with that premise entirely.

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education, Babson Survey Research Group

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education, Babson Survey Research Group

So are academics living in denial – or do they have a better understanding of the scope and limitations of MOOCs? That’s up for debate. But don’t expect MOOCs to go the way of VCRs and eight track players. “The conventional wisdom now,” Kolowich writes, “is that free online courses offer a promising recruiting tool and an interesting (but not essential) research tool for colleges that can afford the upkeep, while also nudging more-conservative institutions to finally start integrating online coursework into the curriculum.”