ARINGO: GMAT Below 720? Get Accepted!

Aringo has helped hundreds of people with GMAT scores below 720 get accepted to the top MBA programs by bringing out the real person behind the application. Founded by a former Wharton Admissions Committee Member, we know what the top business schools are looking for, and we will help make sure that your strengths will emerge in your application.

Aringo and a-myjourney.blogspot.com are Admission Consulting Partners now. What does that mean? While signing-up with Aringo, make sure to tell them that a-myjourney.blogspot.com sent you and you would avail discounts.

Aringo Consulting Group Provides you with:

> Aringo helps candidates with GMAT scores below 720 get into the top-10 MBA programs.
> Free initial assessment
> Admission rate higher by 50% on average than normal admission rates for the top programs
> Round Table Strategy

Aringo’s clients have been accepted at Harvard (MBA) with GMAT scores of 580, 660 and 670; at Wharton with GMAT scores of 640, 660 and 670; at Duke with GMAT scores of 600 and 640; at INSEAD with GMAT scores of 630, 640 and 650; at MIT with GMAT scores of 660 and 680; at LBS with GMAT scores of 630, 650 and 660; at Kellogg with GMAT scores of 640 and 680, and many more…

Aringo Video: A top MBA with a GMAT Score < 720.

Ready to get started? Sign up with Aringo, make sure and tell them a-myjourney.blogspot.com sent you to avail discounts, and get started with your admissions process today!

  

An upcoming webinar from The Art of Applying

By now you must have heard about the The Art of Applying. For those who haven't,  it is a brand new career coaching service by Harvard grad, Kaneisha Graysson. Visit http://theartofapplying.com/ to explore.

There is a webinar event coming up on August 26, 2010. The topic this time is: “School Choice, Quick-Start Essays, and Killer Recommendations.” Link to Register: http://theartofapplying.com/bdo/join

Please feel free to visit http://bschoolodds.com/free-webinar for past seminar from The Art of Applying.

A

My experience with Princeton Review MBA admission service

Supposedly, this entry be published 2 weeks earlier when Princeton Review screwed up my senses, but then I went home for vacation and was chilled down. But still I feel to blog my experience with Princeton Review so my fellow MBA aspirants could make the right decision.

I took the Princeton Review MBA admission counseling last year. As I took my GMAT in Nov 2009 and was in rush to meet round 2 deadlines, I needed a correct and quick guidance. You must have sensed by now, Princeton Review terribly failed to provide me that, and to get me through any of the shortlisted schools.

My counselor always pretended to be very smart and knowledgeable, but for every question his first two answers were "I'll get back to you," and "Don't worry, you are in safe hands." He never bothered to know about my stories, forget his guiding on them. He read my essays only once just before applications submission, that too just for spell check or a formality. He always claimed that he is an interview expert but when he prepared me for it, I realised it was all waste. We planned a mock interview one day before my real interview, but he forgot that and didn't even bother to pick my call. Can you beat this? All in all I still don't know what was his role.

My essay editor was quite impressive lady. But she has her own limitations. Her role was majorly language correction and styling.

Finally, I didn't get through any of 5 schools. My counselor assured me that Princeton Review would provide me free service again for new 5 schools and later Princeton Review operations folks denied it and gave some excuses. I was not interested in their free services anyways as I decided to write my essays myself this time, but it made me realise that they don't care about career, they are just worried about their business.

The major role of these people should be to understand our stories, evaluate them, help us pick best ones out, and help them weave together to give a complete picture, without missing out any dimension and at the same time avoid writing redundant stuffs. Let us know about the great blogs and career related sites, pro-actively guide us through additional actions such as informational interviews, sessions etc. And then to prepare us for interviews by suggesting what to say, what not to say, how to say, et al.

The purpose of this post is only and only to share my not-so-good experience, so other interested guys could make the right decision.

Hope you guys will make the right choice,

A

Back in action...after a sweet vacation at home!

A lot is happening in my life from last few days. Last week was at home after a long time and enjoyed tremendously with my lil sister and cousin, playing cricket on terrace, flying kites and ample eating, sleeping, and talking. It did drift me from my MBA course, but was a much needed break. 

That said, am back in action. The first task after sweet vacation was to draft the answers for SLP application but its deadline is 15th August, not 31th July as I was thinking till 15 min earlier. Now I have some breathing space for the same.

The work in office is killing, making me work from morning 10 to evening 8. From now onwards, my friend and I have decided to stay back in office to discuss and draft essays from 8 pm till 11. We are following it from last 2 days. It's working out quite well as of now and my career goal essay shaping up.

Before starting this blog post, had a conversation with Ross recent alum from India working about my career goals and how they are fit with Ross, and what I can do extra as a reapplicant. Scheduled a meeting with another Ross senior alum next week and 2 current students from Kellogg.

Started my research for 1 years programs now as well.

So, gaadi is on right track, it seems ;)

A

Response of Accepted.com on my schools shortlisting criterion

Linda Abraham of Accepted.com has responded to my last post shortlisting schools - criterion. She largely agrees with the my criterion except the first point (intake % of Indian engineers). 

My point is that, as an Indian engineer belongs to an overrepresented group, he/she should apply to a school where the intake of Indian engineers is relatively higher, considering he/she is a career enhancer or wants to be the same indutry post MBA. This might increase his/her chances of getting in as the seats would be more in that school.

But this is just one side of coin. The other side is that in those schools more engineers might apply, thereby intensifying the competition. Also, this criterion doesn't stand good for career changers who want to move out of technology/IT industry post MBA.

Linda explains more on this.  Jump on to her post to know more.

A

Shortlisting schools - Criterion

In my last post I dicussed my take on 1 year program v/s 2 years program. Today, I want to discuss on the criterion I feel must be considered while shortlisting schools.

Shortlisting schools is the toughest and most crucial step of MBA application process. The other day I had a long discussion with one of my friend about the criterion which hold priority for us (Indian IT guys - an overrepresented group). We decided on something and your comments to clarify our thoughts are most welcome.

1. Intake % of Indian engineers: I believe this is very important as a few schools such as MIT, Tepper give a little more preference to engineers than others schools do. If a school's intake of an IT is low as compared to other functions, then even if qualified, it might become very competitive for an Indian IT guy. And, qualified and competitive are two different things, as you know. If you don't please let me know.

2. Teaching methodology: This is one of the important criterion for me. I might not apply to a school which follows a strict case study method (I'm not used to it) such as Harvard or Darden, or I might not apply to a school where I have to sit 50% of time inside a class listening to a lecture (I'm overused of it). I seek a balance of all with an emphasis on projects and hands on learning as at Ross.

3. Recruitment: Howsoever good is the college, International applicants always face stiff competition is getting great jobs, and more if there is a career transition. So, it becomes necessary to know how many international students got placed relatively.

4. Culture (competitive or collaborative): After researching through many schools, even they are framed as competitive, at the end I found them collaborative. For example Harvard which is known for its competitive environment, but ask a Harvard alumni to know Harvard also is collaborative. So what I feel is, and please shed more light on this, the schools which has more of case study, where each student is individual in a class of 90 and is arguing for his/her points with other 89, will automatically become competitive. But outside the class, they might be collaborative. One other hand, team based projects and assignments will make students more collaborative all the time.

5. Clubs/extra-curricular: How active are the your career clubs and your interests clubs?

6. Curriculum and Specialization: Some has rigid curriculum and some has flexible. Some are type casted for a particular specialization such as Chicago for Finance and some are famous for general management such as Ross. But somehow I feel, this criteria has lower priority for me than the above five. Every top school could give what I want in terms of subjects/courses I want to study.

There are many other criterion such as location, climate et all. No doubt these are important criterion as well, but I want to keep them tertiary.

Disclaimer: These are my personal views gained after my research and discussions with alums, students, and friends. Please feel free to correct me anywhere. It would help us both :-)

A

Schools shortlisting: 1 year program v/s 2 years program

Today, I have formally started short listing the schools and the very first question that stands is 1 year program v/s 2 years program. But before pondering over the factors to answer this question, I want to stop for a second and ask: “How important is this question for me?”

I’ve already completed 6 years of my IT experience and when I’ll enter any school, next year hopefully, I’d complete 7. So, as far as my research goes, 7 years of total experience is not so high to lower my chances into US 2 years programs and is not so low to lower my chances into European 1 year programs. In that sense, my chances are equally favourable in both of these programs. For a person who has just 2-3 years of experience or who has more than 10 years of experience, this question might not be as important, because the former knows he/she has relatively brighter chances in 2 years program and relatively lower in 1 year, and vice-versa for the latter. For instance, my friend who has 3 years of experience is not even thinking about 1 year program.

Thus, this question is very important for me. And just to mention, it is also very important for my mom, who is quite worried about my marriage ;-).

There are a few factors (not comprehensive) which I can’t ignore to consider.

Favouring 2 years programs:

1. Without any background in consulting, I need a solid base to make a transition from IT to consulting. Apart from experiential learning through team projects, this solid base would come from internship project in a consulting firm, which I could avail only in 2 years programs with a very few exceptions in 1 year programs such as INSEAD.

2. In 1 year program, I should have razor sharp future goals, as it doesn’t give me any space to rethink or reframe my career plans after getting into the school. In 2 years program, I could have that option, if I realise any change for better.

3. 2 years would give me a little breathing space. 1 year would be no doubt academically rigor.

4. I could make a strong network base with students and alumni in 2 years; 1 year would just pass in a splash.

5. After discussing with current students, friends, and experts, I have this feeling that the transformational education I could avail better in US than anywhere else.

Favouring 1 year programs:

6. If I’m very sure of making a transition specifically to IT consulting, my solid IT background would favour me, and in that case a 1 year programs could also provide the needed solid base.

7. I'll miss on just 1 year income, and will be back to work earning in just a year after 1 year program.

8. 1 year programs are relatively lower fee structures than 2 years with a few exceptions.

9. I’ll be 31 when I’ll come out of 2 years of program; a big concern for my mom.

Given these factors both suits me in their ways. Just going by my heart, I’m more tilted for 2 years program in US, but would target only the top tier ones. So, I’m planning to apply to both 2 years and 1 year programs which clearly fit my goals, and where I strongly fit. I hope this would maximise my chances.

One female just got dinged from Ross and got selected in INSEAD. Means, many people shortlist both programs, not only I. Do you think differently?

The next question is “how many schools in Round 1?”

Keep researching. This is the time to maximise it.

A