I voted for Cal State - but then I live in California and would get in state rates. Scholastically I would rate them comparative. The big difference would be the cost. Depending on your location and other background, it would make a difference. Members of the US military can not beat the offer through Touro (almost free). For California residents the cost of any Cal State program is low, same for Northern Alabama for residents in the southeast. Next question, do you have a business/management field you are interested in and which program best matches that? If none, go for the lowest cost to you.
CSUDH seems pretty tough to beat =except= for those who (a) don't have an undergrad degree in business (or related field) or (b) have an undergrad degree in business (or related field) but that degree is more than 10 years old. If either (a) or (b) applies, then the student must complete prereq coursework at another institution or the bridge courses offered through CSUDH. Touro, on the other hand, doesn't appear to have the 10-year limitation. Further, even if a student does not have an undergrad business (or related) degree, only two "leveling" courses are required. In both instances, 8 credits are required but for Touro's program that means =2= courses (4 credits each) while at CSUDH it's =4= (2 credits each). Personally, I've found 2 credit hour courses to involve substantially the same amount of work as 3 (or more) credit hour courses. Then, of course, there's the matter of the (apparently non-waivable) GMAT requirement imposed by CSUDH.
Found none selected Baker.. The only open remaining is Touro or UNA. I like UNA for the fact that they have a B&M MBA program and was told that they are working towards AACSB. The program also provides DVD's of all the actual classroom lectures in addition to the online discussion and tests. They do need GMAT if GPA is less than 3.5 ! DOes that show the quality of enrolling students? I do like Touro for the fact that a lot of members on the board have praised.
Cool.....=anything= but some rigid policy whereby every applicant, =without= exception, MUST take the GMAT....no ifs ands or but(t)s.
A guy with GPA >3.5 is not an average person. I think it makes sense not having him to write GMAT for Online MBA. I am sure many of us here would hate to write GMAT for admission.
Maybe, maybe not. As you know, not all undergraduate experiences are created equal. Standardized testing is one approach to help negate the differences. I guess I am having difficulty understanding your point. There may be a good reason for individuals not wanting to take a standardized test, but it seems you are generalizing dislike for tests in this statement. I don't believe that is a valid reason not to take a standardized test; Nobody likes tests. Tony
May not be a VALID reason but it sure is a reason. I hate taking tests. I get nervous, overlook/misread questions, can't concentrate, worry about time, etc. BR, Bill
So do I Bill. I believe most people do to some degree. They are standardized, in other words they are not measuring anything in absolute terms other than relative performance. Nobody likes to take tests, but that reason itself is not a valid one. If a person could prove they got abnormally nervous, that would be valid. However, the amount of "nervousness" would be hard if not impossible to quantify. Furthermore, isn't the ability to function under pressure a skill that should be learned and can to some extent be measured? I am not disagreeing that some people test well and others not so well. I am just not convinced schools should throw out an important tool in assessment because some of their customers would rather not take a test. Tony
I don't have a problem with standardized testing. I do, however, have a problem with the GMAT. I mean, I know something's out of whack when either (a) the acceptable score for admission is idiotically low or (b) the applicant already =has= a graduate degree.
Do you mean that you have a problem with various school's application of their admittance procedure in regards to the GMAT? If so I agree with you. Some policies are totally asinine. This was certainly not my point however. I was stating the value of 'the GMAT' or any standardized test in regards to evaluating potential students. I realize that there are arguments, but I do not see any better solutions. Tony
I think we're on the same page, more or less. I don't have a problem with standardized tests, per se. It's just the screwball policy of some schools that require submission of GMAT scores, without exception, for no apparent reason (other than, perhaps, complying with some whacko AACSB standard).
I remember that not matter where you live, CSUDH's DL MBA charges same rate higher than the in-state residential MBA rate.
