New Langone Program
Curriculum & Calendar
May 13, 2002
Executive Summary
The plan outlined in this document is designed to address a numb er of
challenges facing the Langone Program, take greater advantage of opportunities, and place the
School in a strategically strong position with respect to our current and potential competition.
We believe that these revisions will ensure the Langone Program’s continued competitiveness
in the part-time MBA market.
We describe a curriculum and structure for the Langone Program that is
more responsive to the academic and logistical needs of working professionals, makes it
possible to earn a degree in as few as two years, and allows students to remain in cohorts for at
least half of that time. We accomplish this through changes in the structure of the academic
calendar, additions to the core curriculum, and the institution of concentrations in place of
majors. The proposed academic calendar makes use of 50 weeks each year (classes do not
meet for the break weeks in December and March) and divides the year into eight six-week
modules, increasing both course delivery options and students ’ scheduling flexibility. Two
modules are reserved for the delivery of intensive courses. Three-credit courses meet a) once
a week for two consecutive modules or b) twice a week for one module or c) during an
intensive module in a compressed time frame. Both to meet better the needs of working
professionals and to make our use of the faculty and facility mo re efficient, we propose an
increase in the Core from 30 to 36 credits, through the addition of Corporate Finance (3
credits) and 1.5 credits in each in the following new core areas -- Interpersonal Skills Core and
Perspective Core. To enhance the program’s responsiveness to students ’ need to credential
themselves more flexibly, we propose the replacement of 12-credit majors and co-majors with
9-credit concentrations in our full array of majors, co-majors, and program initiatives.
1
New Langone Program
Curriculum & Calendar
(NOTES: Continuation of Executive Summary)
Executive Summary, continued
Stern is challenged on all fronts by intense competition in the full-time and
executive MBA markets, and we are novices in the executive non-degree program market.
The Langone Program is also threatened by an increasing number of educational alternatives
for working professionals. This franchise must be safeguarded, consolidated, and built upon
as vigorously as possible. The proposed program is substantially more attractive and
marketable and will strengthen our competitiveness both here and in new geographic markets.
It will also help establish our reputation as innovators in all programs, by providing a
laboratory for change, and create alumni with stronger ties to the school and, thus, greater
interest in contributing to the academic enterprise and in hiring our students.
In July 2001, the Langone Program Curriculum Committee was formed in
consultation with the Faculty Council to study the issue and work intensively through the fall
to formulate a proposal. The members of the committee were Professors Paul Brown, Bruce
Buchanan, Luis Cabral, Richard Freedman, Ingo Walter, Eitan Zeme l, and Kim Corfman
(chair). This report is the culmination of numerous meetings, analysis of current and
prospective student reactions to various alternative program features, benchmarking of
competitive institutions, and assessment of the potential of new technologies. The proposed
program was presented to the Academic Programs Policy Committee, the Faculty Council, the
Academic Committee of the Part-Time Leadership Forum, the Department Chairs, the Student
Engagement Steering Committee, a Faculty Forum, open meetings of the Langone Program
student body, and two Faculty Meetings. At the Special Faculty Meeting on May 13, the
Faculty voted to adopt the proposal.
A Langone Program Transition Committee, comprising administrators from
across the school and the Part-Time and Full-Time Co-Chairs of the SCORP Academic
Committee, meets monthly to address implementation issues. Academic issues are referred to
the Langone Program Advisory Board.
2
Goals
1. Improve the quality of the part-time student body even
further by expanding the market.
2. Produce even stronger part-time alumni by preparing
students better.
3. Guard against increasing competition from executive
non-degree programs.
Other benefits:
• Enhanced reputation for innovation & leadership
• Improved quality of instruction
• Stronger relationships with students & alumni
• More efficient use of resources
• More flexible teaching schedules
Applications had been declining steadily until this spring.
3
Proposed Schedule
§ 50 weeks (not December or Spring Break)
§ Eight 6-week modules
§ Two modules designated for delivery of intensive
classes
§ 3-credit courses meet:
§ Once a week for 2 consecutive modules (12 wks),
§ Twice a week for 1 module (6 wks), or
§ During intensive module.
§ Standard class hours
§ Mon – Thurs eve: 6:00-9:00 pm
§ Sat – Sun: 9:00am-noon, 12:30-3:30pm
Calendar
The most significant change is in the calendar. Students will continue to
need 60 credits to earn a degree and take a combination of 1.5 and 3 credit courses. The
proposed academic calendar makes use of 50 weeks each year. (Exceptions are the December
holiday break and Spring Break.) The year is divided into eight 6-week modules, anchored on
NYU Commencement. Standard 3-credit courses meet either once a week for two consecutive
modules (i.e., 12 weeks in total) or more intensively, twice a week for one module. Standard
1.5-credit courses meet once a week for a single module.
Two of the eight modules, S1 and U3 (which include the weeks that
currently make up the two mini-semesters), are reserved for intensively delivered courses.
During the intensive modules, class formats follow the mini-semester model. Classes meet
more frequently, but students will take only one at a time and can take as many as 6 credits in
each intensive module. The advantage of dedicating two of eight equal-length modules to the
delivery of intensive classes (rather than using time periods shorter than those used for
conventionally delivered classes, as we do now) is it gives us greater flexibility if we wish to
make changes in the future. For example, if we decide to change the time of year we offer
intensive classes or add a third intensive module, the calendar need not be redesigned.
4
New/Old Calendar Comparison
CURRENT CALENDAR NEW CALENDAR
Semester Start End Module Type Start End
F1 Regular 9/25/2003 11/5/2003
Fall 9/2/2003 12/20/2003
F2 Regular 11/6/2003 12/20/2003
Winter Recess
January Mini-Semester 1/5/2004 1/19/2004 S1 Intensive 1/5/2004 2/8/2004
S2 Regular 2/9/2004 3/29/2004
Spring 1/20/2004 5/11/2004
S3 Regular 3/30/2004 5/11/2004
Commencement
U1 Regular 5/15/2004 6/28/2004
Summer 5/15/2004 8/6/2004
U2 Regular 6/29/2004 8/16/2004
August Mini-Semester 8/7/2004 9/2/2004
U3 Intensive 8/17/2004 9/29/2004
The correspondence between the semester calendar and the
module structure is what makes it possible for part-time and full- time students
to continue to take electives together. The two fall modules and the two non-
intensive spring modules fit perfectly with the fall and spring semesters.
5
Course Scheduling Alternatives
1.5-Credit Formats 3-Credit Formats Sample Student Options
Evenings & Weekends Evenings & Weekends 4.5
Weekends only Weekends only 3 Credits 6 Credits 6 Credits Credits
S1a 1/2/02 W Mtg 1 Mtg 1 1.5-credit 3-credit 3-credit
1/3/02 R Mtg 2 Mtg 2 course course course
1/4/02 F Mtgs 1-2 Mtgs 1-2 1.5-credit
1/5/02 S Mtgs 3-4 Mtgs 3-4 Mtgs 3-4 Mtgs 3-4 course
1/6/02 U (S alternate) Mtgs 5-6 (S alternate) Mtgs 5-6
1/7/02 M Mtg 5 Mtg 5
1/8/02 T
1/9/02 W Mtg 6 Mtg 6
Intensive 1/10/02
1/11/02
1/12/02
R
F
S
Mtgs 1-2
Mtgs 3-4
Mtg 7
Mtgs 8-9
Mtgs 7-8
Mtgs 9-10
1.5-credit
course
Modules: 1/13/02
1/14/02
1/15/02
U
M
T
Mtgs 5-6 (S alternate)
Mtg 10
Mtg 11
Mtgs 11-12
Examples of 1/16/02 W
1/17/02
1/18/02
R
F
Mtg 12
S1 1/19/02
1/20/02
1/21/02
S
U
M
Scheduling S1b
1/22/02
1/23/02 W
1/24/02
T
R
Mtg 1
Mtg 2
Mtg 1
Mtg 2
1.5-credit
course
3-credit
course
Alternatives 1/25/02
1/26/02
1/27/02
F
S
U
Mtgs 3-4
(S alternate)
Mtgs 1-2
Mtgs 3-4
Mtgs 5-6
Mtgs 3-4
(S alternate)
Mtgs 1-2
Mtgs 3-4
Mtgs 5-6
3-credit
course
2002 1/28/02
1/29/02
1/30/02 W
M
T
Mtg 5
Mtg 6
Mtg 5
Mtg 6
1/31/02 R Mtg 7
2/1/02 F Mtgs 1-2 Mtgs 7-8 1.5-credit
2/2/02 S Mtgs 3-4 Mtgs 8-9 Mtgs 9-10 course
2/3/02 U Mtgs 5-6 (S alternate) Mtgs 11-12
2/4/02 M Mtg 10
2/5/02 T Mtg 11
2/6/02 W
2/7/02 R Mtg 12
2/8/02 F
2/9/02 S
2/10/02 U
2/11/02 M
2/12/02 T
6
Content
Motivation for Changes
in the
Core Curriculum
Motivation for Changes in the Core Curriculum
It is useful to recall that the Stern MBA program was exclusively a part-time
program for well over half a century and working professionals were the population for whom
the first curriculum was designed. The first full-time MBA students were admitted in the early
1960s. The launch of the full-time MBA program immediately raised the issue of
comparability between full-time and part-time study. Initially, virtually all electives were
offered in the evening and full-time students took most of their courses in the evening. Then
more daytime offerings were added, the full-time MBA cohort became more cohesive and
demanding, and the quality of full-time applicants improved. Throughout the changes that
have taken place in these programs and the introduction of the Westchester part-time MBA
program in the 1970s and the Executive MBA program in the 1980s, the faculty has insisted
that comparable standards for program content, pedagogy, and student performance be
applied.
In recent years, changes in the MBA program curriculum, both large
and small, have been driven by the full-time student at Stern. In many ways, the
similarities among our MBA programs are appropriate, as we want to ensure
comparable preparation of all our graduates, regardless of their employment status
and pace through the program. However, we should take into account the
differences between full-time and part-time students in their academic needs due to
the contexts in which they study and their career goals. This is precisely what we
have done successfully in the Executive MBA Program.
7
Content, continued
§ Core Curriculum (36 credits)
§ Current core (30)
§ Corporate Finance (3)
§ Interpersonal Skills Core (1.5)
(e.g., conflict & negotiations)
§ Perspective Core (1.5)
(e.g., business history)
Core Curriculum
We are raising the Langone Program core from 50% (30 credits) to
60% (36 credits), by adding Corporate Finance (3 credits) and 3 credits of Program
Core. The Program Core is designed to address two important areas of part-time
student development – Interpersonal Skills and Perspective.
Stern’s core curriculum has the breadth to ensure the development of well-
rounded managers and enough depth to serve as a foundation for more focused and advanced
study. What it may lack is content important to students whose primary goal is advancement
along an established career path, which is more common among part-time students. Students
who are doing significant on-the-job learning and aspire to more responsible positions with
their employers or in their fields, are likely to benefit from educational experiences that give
them perspective on the forest (vs. the trees in which they work each day) and emphasize skills
that are of greater importance at higher managerial levels and are harder to learn through
experience alone, but are thought by many to be more effectively taught to practicing
managers than to full-time students .
The purpose of the Interpersonal Skills Core is to help students
develop their ability to work with and lead others in uncertain environments. It
consists of a 1.5-point course that focuses on such topics as teamwork, leadership,
negotiation, conflict resolution, and other skills important to effective management.
We have the option of designing a course for this purpose or selecting from courses
currently offered or in development that have the appropriate emphasis (e.g., Conflict
& Negotiation or Leadership & Teams).
The Perspective Core is 1.5-credits designed to broaden students’
view of business beyond their own industries and functional areas by giving them a
larger context in which to place their other learning and experience. Courses that we
might create or select for the Perspective Core include those in the areas of business
or economic history or business and government.
8
Content, continued
§ 9-Credit Concentrations in:
§ Current majors & co-majors
§ Program Initiatives
§ General Management
Concentrations and Electives
To allow students to continue to concentrate in more than one area
despite the larger core, the proposed number of credits required for a concentration is
nine (vs. the current 12 for a major). Further, concentrations are available not only in
the eight existing major subjects (Accounting, Economics, Finance, Information
Systems, Management, Marketing, Operations Management, and Statistics & OR),
but also in our co-majors and program initiatives (Entrepreneurship, International
Business, Digital Economy, Entertainment, Media & Technology, and Law &
Business), and General Management. Allowing students to concentrate in a broader
variety of subjects, gives them the flexibility to credential themselves as they deem appropriate
given their educational and career goals.
9
Sample Two-Year Curriculum
Cum Current Mod Cum
Years Module Semester Type Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Credits
Aug/
0.00 U3 Int Pre-Term 0 0.0
Fall
0.13 F1 Fall Reg Cohort 1: Managing Orgs Cohort 1: Statistics
3 3 6.0
0.25 F2 Fall Reg Cohort 2: Firms & Markets Cohort 2: Fincl Accounting
Jan/
0.38 S1 Int Cohorts 1 & 2: Strategy Sequence & Management Communication 4.5 10.5
Spring
0.50 S2 Spring Reg Cohort 1: Firms & Markets Cohort 1: Fincl Accounting
3 3 16.5
0.63 S3 Spring Reg Cohort 2: Managing Orgs Cohort 2: Statistics
0.75 U1 Summer Reg Cohort 1: Core H Cohort 2: Core I 3 Elective 1.5 21.0
0.88 U2 Summer Reg Cohort 1: Core I Cohort 2: Core H 3 24.0
Aug/
1.00 U3 Int Cohorts 1 & 2: Interpersnl Core 1.5 Cohorts 1 & 2: Core J 3 28.5
Fall
1.13 F1 Fall Reg
Core K 3 Core L 3 Elective(s) 3 37.5
1.25 F2 Fall Reg
Jan/ Cohort 1: Prof Resp Cohort 1: Perspective Core
1.38 S1 Int 1.5 1.5 Elective 1.5 42.0
Spring Cohort 2: Perspective Core Cohort 2: Prof Resp
1.50 S2 Spring Reg
Elective(s) 3 Elective(s) 3 48.0
1.63 S3 Spring Reg
1.75 U1 Summer Reg
Elective(s) 3 Elective(s) 3 Elective(s) 3 57.0
1.88 U2 Summer Reg
Aug/
2.00 U3 Int Elective 1.5 Elective 1.5 Elective 1.5 60.0
Fall
Core Courses
Electives
Program Sequence and Cohorts
This figure illustrates the kind of sequence we will design
for the core and how a student might distribute electives, to earn an
MBA in two years (16 modules). As flexibility is a key benefit of the
Langone Program, students are not required to adhere to this entire
sequence. However, we will not guarantee their ability to finish in only
two years if they do not. Following a similar sequence, students who
choose to attend only on weekends can finish in 2.5 years. The design
of the two-year program is guided by the following considerations:
1. The building of knowledge in a logical sequence.
2. The ability to keep Core Groups together as long as possible.
3. Coordination with staffing requirements of full-time block program.
4. The careful matching of course content with the delivery format.
10
Continuing Student
Transition Issues
§ New calendar affects all Langone Program
students and F-T students who take evening &
weekend electives.
§ Part-time student options for new core and
concentrations :
§ Adopt both
§ Ignore
§ Choose the parts you like
11
Responses to Some Student Concerns
1. Will the changes results in a lower quality experience or
diminish the value of my degree?
2. Will students have to complete the program in 2 years?
3. Will there be changes in the faculty and will P-T
students still take classes with F-T students?
4. Why concentrations instead of majors?
5. Are you doing this to save money or increase revenues
at our expense?
6. How will employers evaluate the change?
7. Why isn’t the full-time program moving to this
calendar?
See slides that follow for responses.
12
Responses to Some Student Concerns
1. Will the changes results in a lower quality
experience or diminish the value of my
degree?
Will the proposed changes result in a lower quality experience or diminish the value of
my degree?
Students who have raised concerns about the program quality and degree
value implications of this proposal are on exactly the same page as we are. We want to assure
you that Stern’s reputation is at least as important to us as it is to you, that we have considered
the impact of the proposed changes carefully, and that we will not consider making any that
we believe have a chance of compromising the quality of the program and the value of your
degree. As many of you know, I personally have spent the last two years doing everything I
can to improve both the quality of the Langone Program and the quality of life in it. This is a
continuation of that effort.
I believe one of Stern's problems has been our assumption that part-time and
full-time students need the same things. We know that Executive MBA students do not want
or need the same things as full-time MBA students and we have always offered them a
program that looks very different from the other MBA programs at Stern. In many ways
Langone Program students have more in common with our EMBA students than our full-time
students. Note that among the differences between the EMBA program and our other MBA
programs are a) that they have significantly fewer in-class hours and b) they have a much
larger core, yet no one questions whether the MBA our executives receive is any less valuable
than yours. Two years ago we started by making logistical and course format changes in the
Langone Program. Building on what we have learned from our experiences, research on other
programs, and surveys of current and prospective students, we are thinking about more
fundamental structural changes along with some less dramatic curricular changes.
13
In-Class Contact Hours Comparison: Stern
Mtgs/ # # Elapsed Break Min/ Hrs/ Exam Hrs/ Hrs/
Credits wk Wks Mtgs Start End min min mtg mtg hrs course credit
Regular semester, Fall 2001 - Spring 2002
Class meetings 3 1 13 13 6:00 8:50 170 10 160 2.7 0 34.7 11.6
Class meetings + final exam 3 1 13 13 6:00 8:50 170 10 160 2.7 2 36.7 12.2
Summer, 2001 - 2002
Class meetings 3 1 10 10 6:00 9:30 210 10 200 3.3 0 33.3 11.1
Class meetings + final exam 3 1 10 10 6:00 9:30 210 10 200 3.3 2 35.3 11.8
Mini-semesters, 2001 - 2002
12 eve (or 8 eve, 2 days) 3 NA NA 12 6:00 9:15 195 10 185 3.1 0 37.0 12.3
6 eve (or 4 eve, 1 day) 1.5 NA NA 6 6:00 9:15 195 10 185 3.1 0 18.5 12.3
Ancient History, Pre-1993 (72-credit degree)
Class meetings 3 1 14 14 5:30 7:10 100 0 100 1.7 0 23.3 7.8
Class meetings + final exam 3 1 14 14 5:30 7:10 100 0 100 1.7 2 25.3 8.4
Proposed structure
Two 6-wk modules 3 1 12 12 6:00 9:00 180 10 170 2.8 0 34.0 11.3
One 6-wk module 1.5 1 6 6 6:00 9:00 180 10 170 2.8 0 17.0 11.3
Change in In-Class Contact Hours
Compared to this fall and spring, the time for an entire course is reduced by
only 40 minutes (2%). Even if you take two hours out for an in-class final (which will only be
necessary if a professor feels strongly an exam cannot be administered via a new testing
program we will soon begin to use), total class time is reduced by only 2.67 hours (7%). Note
that compared to our summer semester, the proposal represents an increase in contact hours.
There are numerous ways faculty can make more effective use of in-class
time, by moving activities that may even be better accomplished outside of class. Here are
some examples of methods already in use by some of our faculty in both the part-time and full-
time programs, none of which have to be a major feature of a course when so little time is
being replaced. These include relegating organizational tasks to the course management
system (CMS) (e.g., team formation, sign-ups, collecting & returning assignments, mid -
semester evaluations), giving quizzes and exams online, conducting threaded discussions of
assignments, answering questions online in preparation for more focused in-class discussions,
assigning group projects to be completed using the CMS, posting & discussing group
presentations online, using selected CD or Web-based lecture alternatives (e.g., Cenquest
materials, voice-over PowerPoint lectures, videotapes), and conducting live chats with small
groups. We have a dedicated Educational Technology Team working with our faculty to
improve the effectiveness of educational technology use and many classes that do make use of
the approaches above are among our highest rated by the students .
14
Top Ten PT & FT MBA Programs
SORTED BY:
HOURS/DEGREE MINUTES/CLASS HRS/COURSE WEEKS OF CLASSES
Total Total
Hrs/ Mtgs/ Min/ mtgs/ hours/ Credits/ Weeks of
School Rank degree School week mtg School course course School course classes
Virginia 9 892.5 Berkeley 1 165 Berkeley 16 44.0 Berkeley 3 16
Michigan 6 810.0 DePaul 1 180 Berkeley 28 42.9 Virginia 3 15
Michigan 7 793.3 Michigan 1 170 Virginia 30 42.5 Georgia St 3 15
Berkeley 18 785.7 Stern 1 170 Michigan 28 40.5 Michigan 3 14
Kellogg 2 766.7 UCLA 1 165 Michigan 14 39.7 Michigan 3 14
Duke 5 765.0 Stern 1 160 MIT 26 39.0 Berkeley 3 14
USC 9 759.5 Chicago 1 160 USC 14 36.2 USC 3 14
Columbia 7 720.0 USC 1 155 Columbia 24 36.0 Cornell 3 14
Georgia St 5 700.0 Babson 1 150 Georgia St 15 35.0 Stern 3 13
Cornell 8 700.0 Kellogg 1 150 Cornell 28 35.0 Stern 3 13
Stern 1 693.3 Georgia St 1 140 Stern 13 34.7 Babson 3 13
Stern 13 693.3 Duke 2 135 Stern 26 34.7 MIT 12 13
Wharton 1 684.0 Kellogg 2 100 Stern 12 34.0 Columbia 3 12
Stern prop 680.0 Berkeley 2 90 Kellogg 20 33.3 Stern 3 12
UCLA 12 680.0 Michigan 2 90 Babson 13 32.5 Harvard 3 Varies
Babson 10 650.0 MIT 2 90 Harvard 23.5 31.3 Kellogg 1 10
Harvard 3 626.7 Columbia 2 90 DePaul 10 30.0 UCLA 4 10
MIT 4 624.0 Wharton 2 90 UCLA 10 27.5 DePaul 4 10
Berkeley 8 616.0 Virginia 2 85 Duke 12 27.0 UCLA 4 10
DePaul 4 600.0 Stern 2 80 UCLA 20 26.7 Chicago 3 10
UCLA 6 577.5 Harvard 2 80 Chicago 10 26.7 Chicago 3 10
Chicago 2 533.3 UCLA 2 80 Chicago 20 26.7 Kellogg 1 10
Chicago 10 533.3 Chicago 2 80 Kellogg 10 25.0 Duke 3 6
Kellogg 3 500.0 Cornell 2 75 Wharton 12 18.0 Wharton 0.5 6
FT 2001-02
PT proposed
Comparison to Other Schools
While contact hours are only one part of the quality
picture, it is worth exploring where Stern’s requirements lie, relative to
other MBA programs. The other top 10 part-time MBA programs
require a median of 616 face-to-face contact hours to earn the degree,
while it takes 693 hours to earn an MBA at Stern in 13-week semesters
(60 11.6-hour credits). In the summer of 2001, classes met 11 hours
per credit, which would result in a total of 667 hours for the degree. The
slide above show that both the current and proposed Langone Program
fall in the middle of the range of the top 10 part-time and top 10 full-time
MBA programs.
Note: Prior to 2001, most semesters had 14 weeks Fall 2001, Spring
2002, and all spring semesters for the foreseeable future will have 13
weeks. In semesters when classes meet 14 times, in-class contact
hours total 37.3 per course.
15
Responses to Some Student Concerns
2. Will students have to complete the
program in 2 years?
Will students have to complete the program in 2 years?
No! No student will be required to follow the two-year schedule. At
any point, a student can decide to take fewer courses, take a module or two off, etc.
The new design makes it possible to finish in two years, but students continue to have the
option to slow down or take some time off at any point, as long as they finish within six years.
Currently it is possible to complete the degree in two years attending only in the
evening and on weekends, and some students do it . However, as the program is
currently set up, this is extremely difficult to do. If the proposal is adopted, we expect
that many students will follow the two-year schedule through much of the first year and
at that point decide to slow down. We expect to see a slight decrease in the average
time part-time students spend in the program.
(Note that the two years we are talking about are longer than the two
years it takes a full-time student to earn an MBA. A Langone Program student who
follows the two-year schedule attends classes for 24 months (minus two weeks), while
a full-time student is in class for at most 15 months, as they do not attend classes
during the summer or intersessions.)
16
Responses to Some Student Concerns
3. Will there be changes in the faculty and
will part-time students still take classes
with full-time students?
4. Why concentrations instead of majors?
Will there be changes in the faculty and will part-time students still take classes with full-
time students?
No change expected on either count. Part-time and full-time students will
continue to share both electives and faculty. Part -time and full time students will continue to
take electives together in the evening and on weekends, just as they do now. The two fall
modules and the two non-intensive spring modules fit perfectly with the fall and spring
semesters.
Why concentrations instead of majors?
The reason for 9-credit concentrations is to compensate for the larger core,
which would make it possible to have only one 12-credit major. Concentrations will replace
majors and students will be able to concentrate in up to three areas or opt for a General
Management concentration (an assortment of courses tailored to the student’s specific needs).
The label “concentration” is designed to indicate the different requirement. (Note that
Columbia has offered only concentrations for as long as anyone can remember.)
17
Responses to Some Student Concerns
5. Are you doing this to save money or
increase revenues at our expense?
Are you doing this to save money or increase revenues at our expense?
No. As we do not intend to increase the number of students we admit,
the changes will not increase the school’s revenues. Further, there are no cost
savings implied. In a number of ways the proposed program is more costly than the
current design. As many of you know, we have spent substantially more money and
expended more resources of other kinds on the Langone Program every year since
Summer 2000. The significant investments Stern has made in the Langone Progra m in the
past couple of years and those associated with implementing this proposal have been designed
with the interests of the students and reputation of the program and school in mind. This is
simply because we believe that what is good for any group of students is good for the school
as a whole.
18
Responses to Some Student Concerns
6. How will employers evaluate the
change?
7. Why isn’t the full-time program moving
to this calendar?
How will employers evaluate the change?
One of the reasons we are confident that the changes will be favorably
received by employers is our Executive MBA Program experience. Companies such as
American Express, Lehman Brothers, JPMorgan Chase, Pfizer, IBM, Verizon, Ernst & Young,
Morgan Stanley, and PWC have been sponsoring their employees in our Executive MBA
Program for years and are convinced that the quality of the education is at least as high as that
in our other MBA programs. This, despite the fact that there are only 30 in-class hours per
course (vs. the 34 in the proposal and the 34.7 we have now) and each class session is 3.5
hours (vs. 3 hours).
The Office of Career Development is in regular communication about
curricular issues with representatives of a number of companies that recruit on campus and
their response has been favorable.
Why isn’t the full-time program moving to this calendar?
While there are advantages to the proposed calendar for full-time students
too, the benefits are much more apparent for our working professionals. It is unlikely that we
would have decided the need was great enough in the full-time program to make the change.
Once it is instituted in the Langone Program, we may decide it makes sense to consider it for
the full-time program as well. However, that issue has not yet been brought to the table.
19
20