Online MBA Ranking | How Graduates Rate Their Programs For Learning Experience by: Kristy Bleizeffer on December 16, 2024 | 2,249 Views December 16, 2024 Copy Link Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email Share on LinkedIn Share on WhatsApp Share on Reddit QUALITY OF PROFESSORS The quality of professors can make or break the student experience for any graduate program, particularly online. We asked alumni to rate their professors in overall quality as well as in accessibility and responsiveness. As with other questions, respondents rated professors on a 10-point scale. Alumni at University of Utah (Eccles) rated their faculty the highest for quality with an average 9.9. Indiana Kelley and University of Michigan (Ross) faculty followed close behind with 9.8. In all, alumni from 34 programs rated professor quality 9 or higher. When rated on their accessibility and responsiveness, Hofstra University (Zarb) professors earned a perfect 10. Professors from four other programs were rated 9.9 by their alumni for professor responsiveness: Indiana University (Kelley), Jack Welch Management Institute, University of Utah (Eccles), and Villanova University. An impressive 43 of 57 schools earned a score of 9 or higher in the metric from alumni. How would you appraise the overall quality of your professors? Question Rank School Prof Quality 1 University of Utah (Eccles) 9.9 2 Indiana University (Kelley) 9.8 2 University of Michigan (Ross) 9.8 4 Auburn University (Harbert) 9.7 4 Jack Welch Management Institute 9.7 4 Syracuse University (Whitman) 9.7 4 University of Washington (Foster) 9.7 8 Hofstra University (Zarb) 9.6 8 North Carolina State University (Poole) 9.6 10 Rogers State University 9.5 10 University of North Carolina (Kenan-Flagler) 9.5 12 Carnegie Mellon University (Tepper) 9.4 12 Florida International University 9.4 12 Rice University (Jones) 9.4 12 University of Florida (Warrington) 9.4 16 Southern Methodist University (Cox) 9.3 16 University of Denver (Daniels) 9.3 16 University of Massachusetts at Amherst (Isenberg) 9.3 16 University of North Texas (Ryan) 9.3 16 Villanova University 9.3 16 Wake Forest University 9.3 16 William & Mary (Mason) 9.3 23 Pepperdine University (Graziadio) 9.2 23 University of South Florida (Muma) 9.2 25 Creighton University (Heider) 9.1 25 Santa Clara University (Leavey) 9.1 25 University of Delaware (Lerner) 9.1 25 University of Iowa (Tippie) 9.1 25 University of Southern California (Marshall) 9.1 30 Baylor University (Hankamer) 9.0 30 Lehigh University 9.0 30 Louisiana State University (Ourso) 9.0 30 University of Texas at Dallas (Jindal) 9.0 30 Worcester Polytechnic Institute 9.0 35 University of California, Davis 8.9 35 University of Maryland (Smith) 8.9 37 American University (Kogod) 8.8 37 Bryant University 8.8 37 University of Connecticut School of Business 8.8 40 Bowling Green State University (Schmidthorst) 8.7 40 Drexel University (LeBow) 8.7 40 Ohio University 8.7 40 Texas Tech (Rawls) 8.7 40 University of Tennessee at Chattanooga 8.7 45 University of Nebraska-Lincoln 8.6 45 University of Wisconsin MBA Consortium 8.6 47 Fairfield University (Dolan) 8.5 47 San Jose State University (Lucas) 8.5 47 University of Michigan-Dearborn 8.5 50 Clemson University 8.4 50 University of Cincinnati (Lindner) 8.4 50 University of Massachusetts-Lowell 8.4 53 Kennesaw State University (Coles) 8.3 53 SUNY Oswego 8.3 55 George Mason University (Costello) 8.0 56 Seattle University (Albers) 7.8 57 University of Missouri (Trulaske) 7.5 How accessible and responsive were your professors? Question Rank School Responsiveness 1 Hofstra University (Zarb) 10.0 2 Indiana University (Kelley) 9.9 2 Jack Welch Management Institute 9.9 2 University of Utah (Eccles) 9.9 2 Villanova University 9.9 6 Clemson University 9.8 6 North Carolina State University (Poole) 9.8 6 Rice University (Jones) 9.8 6 University of Washington (Foster) 9.8 6 Wake Forest University 9.8 6 William & Mary (Mason) 9.8 12 Auburn University (Harbert) 9.7 12 Baylor University (Hankamer) 9.7 12 Syracuse University (Whitman) 9.7 12 University of Maryland (Smith) 9.7 16 Carnegie Mellon University (Tepper) 9.6 16 University of Delaware (Lerner) 9.6 16 University of Florida (Warrington) 9.6 16 University of Iowa (Tippie) 9.6 16 University of Massachusetts at Amherst (Isenberg) 9.6 16 University of Michigan (Ross) 9.6 16 University of North Carolina (Kenan-Flagler) 9.6 23 Creighton University (Heider) 9.5 23 Florida International University 9.5 25 American University (Kogod) 9.4 25 Southern Methodist University (Cox) 9.4 27 Fairfield University (Dolan) 9.3 27 Lehigh University 9.3 27 Louisiana State University (Ourso) 9.3 27 University of Connecticut School of Business 9.3 27 University of Denver (Daniels) 9.3 27 University of Wisconsin MBA Consortium 9.3 33 Pepperdine University (Graziadio) 9.2 33 Santa Clara University (Leavey) 9.2 33 University of Nebraska-Lincoln 9.2 36 San Jose State University (Lucas) 9.1 36 University of California, Davis 9.1 36 University of Southern California (Marshall) 9.1 39 Bowling Green State University (Schmidthorst) 9.0 39 Bryant University 9.0 39 Rogers State University 9.0 39 University of Cincinnati (Lindner) 9.0 39 University of North Texas (Ryan) 9.0 44 Ohio University 8.9 45 Seattle University (Albers) 8.8 45 University of South Florida (Muma) 8.8 45 University of Texas at Dallas (Jindal) 8.8 45 Worcester Polytechnic Institute 8.8 49 Drexel University (LeBow) 8.7 49 Kennesaw State University (Coles) 8.7 49 University of Massachusetts-Lowell 8.7 52 Texas Tech (Rawls) 8.6 52 University of Missouri (Trulaske) 8.6 54 University of Michigan-Dearborn 8.5 54 University of Tennessee at Chattanooga 8.5 56 George Mason University (Costello) 8.4 56 SUNY Oswego 8.4 More alumni data on the student experience: PAGE 2: WOULD RECOMMEND PAGE 3: FORMAT SATISFACTION PAGE 4: QUALITY OF PROFESSORS PAGE 5: EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING PAGE 6: APPLYING LESSONS AT WORK PAGE 7: MAKING CONNECTIONS Previous Page Continue ReadingPage 4 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © Copyright 2025 Poets & Quants. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Poets & Quants, please submit your request HERE.