<p>I got accepted into the Business Honors and Plan II at the University of Texas, U Chicago and AEM at Cornell. Cornell is ranked 2nd as a MBA feeder school while UT is ranked 18th. Though Cornell graduates may attend top 5 MBA programs more often than UT students, that's likely both because (a) Cornell prepares kids slightly better and (b) Cornell kids are also smarter in general (a smartness that made them get into a good MBA program without necessarily being effected by Cornell). How much of a difference will going to UT make on MBA admissions? Does anybody know of any data related to this?</p>
<p>where are you getting these feeder rankings from?</p>
<p>i would also like to know the answer to this. i’m assuming that the more prestigious the undergrad school, the better off you are to the mba schools.</p>
<p>unlike the other professional graduate programs (law and med), i believe u-grad “prestige” DOES play a factor. business is all about perception, and elite business employers are super prestige-whores. so all else equal, i do think it comes into play directly when comparing applicants.</p>
<p>it also comes into play INDIRECTLY in a major way. the most surefire way to get into a top MBA program is to get the “right” kind of work experience after undergrad, at the level of mckinsey consulting. those types of employers recruit at elite undergraduate institutions and erect harsh barriers to those going to non-elite schools. thus you are at a disadvantage at a lower-ranked school because you will not have access to the type of employment that will help you in your mba application, even if you are extremely smart and accomplished at your school. </p>
<p>so in summary, i don’t think it has much to do with your two points at all. mba programs are not looking for the smartest students, or they would rely more heavily on the gmat. </p>
<p>they are instead looking for those with “real world accomplishments”, which roughly translates into prestige, salary, job function, and recognition of your post-undergraduate work experience. with that in mind, you see the TRUE advantage of cornell over UT, which is access to the right kind of employers, which leads to admission to the best business schools.</p>
<p>BostonEng’s second paragraph sums up the most important point. That said, Cornell >= Chicago > UT</p>
<p>I agree with the two posts above me. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t say that UG school directly makes a huge impact, but it’s much much easier to get a good job out of a good UG, and WE is everything in MBA admissions. </p>
<p>If I were you I wouldn’t even consider UT compared to the other two schools on your list.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>such a statement can’t be said in a bubble, as it depends on OP’s financial situation. keep in mind that even at an elite school, banking or consulting is not guaranteed (i believe in the boom years, harvard was up to 50% placement in those two industries though).</p>
<p>that said, if your undergraduate debt will be under or around 50k, and you are business minded, i would go cornell or u-chicago. if you are looking at 100k or more, you should just go to UT even if your chances will be diminished. </p>
<p>there are other ways to “break in”, particularly if you enter an industry that is well known to be at the top like google is for software engineering. given UT’s location, it might be worth it to look at the oil and gas industry for example. there are many paths to the MBA, it is just that banking/consulting is the more standard way.</p>
<p>I guess when I said if I were you I failed to consider the varying economic conditions of various students. Good call, BostonEng.</p>