Biz School

Review: Robert Collins, Finance (OMIS), Leavey School of Business

At a glance

  • Workload:  Heavy
  • Teaching Style:  Lecture
  • Interest in students: High
  • Relevance to outside world: Moderate (this is baseline theory)

Overall Professor Rating: 4

Overall Course Rating: 4

Finance 451 is a baseline, theory-oriented course that examines some of the general principles behind finance.  One really learns to apply these concepts in later courses.  While I obviously haven’t taken 451 with professors other than Collins, I really enjoyed the course, and I felt a big part of that positive but challenging experience is due to Collins, specifically.

The Review

This is the latest of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University’s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. That database can be a bit hard to wade through, and the comments are short and often just link to other threads, which are themselves pretty short and superficial. Only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.  I also just write whatever it is that I think is relevant or will be helpful to others.  That is my overall goal.

This review goes way back to Fall 2007, which is a full year ago.  I might stop my reviews of past classes after this one just for fear of having lost too much since I took it.

The facts

I took Finance 451, as I said, a year ago in Fall 2007.  It is the first of the finance courses and is a core requirement of the MBA program.  I have no idea whether I took the class on a Monday/Wednesday or Tuesday/Thursday schedule.  Collins is actually in the OMIS (operations) department, but teaches Finance 451 in the fall (followed by OMIS 355 and 357 in the winter and spring, respectively).  He is obviously there because he offers a compelling and effective introduction to the topics of cost of capital, net present value, etc.

Them’s the facts (slim as they are). Now read on for the review.
(more…)

Getting an MBA – why we do it (not that I have any clue)

As I’ve progressed through my MBA program at the Leavey School of Business at Santa Clara University, I have lately been thinking about why I am doing this.  Why I am pursuing this degree in particular.  And, as I’ve thought about that, I have begun to wonder about the motivations of my classmates and thought more about what they have said they hope to take out of the program or how they hope to make use of the degree down the road.  It has been an interesting and illuminating exercise.

This is really a very generic post and is not about anyone, any group, or any…thing in particular.  I am speaking generally here, with sweeping generalizations about everyone I’ve seen and met at the school.  I say this because I have friends in the program and obviously I want to be clear that I am not thinking of particular people as I write this.  I truly am not.  I am in fact purposely mashing a few people together when I think of certain examples.

I’ll cut it here before I can’t find a better place to do so…

(more…)

Review: Dennis Moberg, Management, Santa Clara University Leavey School of Business

At a glance

  • Workload:  Heavy
  • Teaching Style:  Very interactive
  • Interest in students:Very high
  • Relevance to outside world: Very high

Overall Professor Rating:4.75

Overall Course Rating:5

If there is one elective to be taken during one’s time at the Leavey School of Business, it is Management 516, with Professor Dennis Moberg.  The course is on Organizational Politics and is not only about that, but is based on years of research, both practical and academic, that make it a truly powerful addition to one’s arsenal of skills and understanding.  I’ve taken other courses on leadership and management that all involve politics in one way or another.  Nothing like this.

The Review

This is the latest of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University’s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. That database can be a bit hard to wade through, and the comments are short and often just link to other threads, which are themselves pretty short and superficial. Only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.  I also just write whatever it is that I think is relevant or will be helpful to others.  That is my overall goal.

This is the second review I’ve done of a course I’ve just completed.  So at least its fresh :-).

The facts

I took 516 during the summer of 2008, when the quarter is very short and the classes are quite long.  There are two interesting things about 516, though, and how Moberg has designed the class.  First, while he generally only teaches it during the summer, someone who apparently took it during the regular year indicated that he actually modified the syllabus for the shortened term.  That is saying a lot.  And while I had trouble staying awake in my earlier class each night, I was wide awake, engaged, and energized for this one.  So the issues that usually plague summer term courses did not have an impact.

Tuesdays & Thursdays, 7:45 to 9:45, with a break in the middle.

Them’s the facts. Now read on for the review.
(more…)

The Road Thus Far

I will be revising and/or revisiting this post from time to time.  The goal is to go over what classes I’ve taken at the Leavey School of Business and why I’ve taken them when I did.  Perhaps a useful roadmap for others.  Perhaps not.

Some facts – I started in Spring 2007, and am pursuing concentrations in Managing People and IT, Leadership, and Entreprenuership.  I am also going to take some classes in the International Business track.  The concentrations don’t really mean anything – it’s unlikely someone will hire you to manage an IT department because you took the first of the concentrations I indicated.  But it helps guide you through your electives, to be sure.

In previous posts, I have talked about how I approached my choice in courses intially, and how that has subsequently changed.  This post takes it a step back and perhaps upward – looking at why I took courses in a particular order.  Some of the reasons are not mind-blowing – right professor, right time, needed a few more units, etc.  The ones that start to show up  more as you get later in my time at Leavey are the opportunistic ones.  Taking a class because I managed to get in.  That’s where the electives really get interesting.

This post is kind of long so I’m breaking it here

(more…)

Review: DR Palmer, Management, Santa Clara University Leavey School of Business

At a glance (please read review, as ‘at a glance’ it’s hard to rate professor Palmer)

  • Workload:  Moderate
  • Teaching Style:  Interactive
  • Interest in students:  Moderate
  • Relevance to outside world:  Low

Overall Professor Rating: 2

Overall Course Rating: 2.5

It is incredibly hard to summarize a review on Professor DR Palmer (who is different than Professor David R. Palmer, by the way).  His style is very off-the-cuff, his lectures meandering, and his attention span rather short.  At the same time, he’s the kind of person with whom I’d love to sit down over a couple cups of coffee.  But that doesn’t make for a good professor, really.  The course, too, is hard to rate.  The subject matter is really quite interesting from a research and practical perspective, but the way it was taught, by DR Palmer, made for a lower rating.

The Review

This is the latest of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University‘s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. That database can be a bit hard to wade through, and the comments are short and often just link to other threads, which are themselves pretty short and superficial. Only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.  I also just write whatever it is that I think is relevant or will be helpful to others.  That is my overall goal.

I’m also reviewing them in reverse order of when I had them for class.  This is mostly so that I am reviewing those whom I remember the best sooner.  This also means that at some point I might skip a few professors I took a year ago or just stop outright out of concern that I will not be able to provide a proper review (the downside of these longer reviews is that I do, after all, have a responsibility to do a good job at them). As of this writing, which is summer quarter 2008, I’m now going back to Fall 2007, so it’s a ways back.

The facts

I took Management 503 – Organizational Theory – back in Fall of 2007.  I have no idea what time I took it or what days of the week :-).  The course is loosely based on how companies are organized, how communications are handled within such structures, etc.  This is one of the required courses in the management track – basically, you need this and 501 and you can take everything else.  Interestingly, I have seen few of my 503 classmates in my other classes.  This is weird because one would think most people would get 503 out of the way relatively early in their coursework (as I did – my third quarter), and I should therefore run into them again later.  So far, I don’t think I have, though.

Them’s the facts. Now read on for the review.
(more…)

Review: Professor Bo Tep, Management Santa Clara University Leavey School of Business

At a glance

  • Workload:  Light
  • Teaching Style:  Highly interactive
  • Interest in students:  Very high
  • Relevance to outside world:  Not sure.

Overall Professor Rating: 4

Overall Course Rating:3.5

Professor Tep is a completely different professor than anyone other you are likely to have at SCU.  He believes not only in experiential learning but also in spirituality and looking at things with a much more holistic perspective.  Can be off-putting to some.  The course is also very loose, though it is also apparently ever-changing.  Bo wants to introduce new ideas each quarter, it seems.

The Review

This is the latest of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University‘s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. That database can be a bit hard to wade through, and the comments are short and often just link to other threads, which are themselves pretty short and superficial. Only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.

I’m also reviewing them in reverse order of when I had them for class.  This is mostly so that I am reviewing those whom I remember the best sooner.  This also means that at some point I might skip a few professors I took a year ago or just stop outright out of concern that I will not be able to provide a proper review (the downside of these longer reviews is that I do, after all, have a responsibility to do a good job at them).  I am now back two quarters from my current term.

The facts

I had Professor Tep for Management 538 – Managing Groups and Teams – the Winter 2007.  Professor Tep is very up front about the class, which is rather important considering his rather unconventional style of teaching.  He sends out an e-mail a couple of weeks before the class stating that it’s an experiential course, rather than one about how to do project management.  He reiterated this at the start of class, that we would be talking about our experiences in managing teams.  Still, we lost about 40% of the class after the first few weeks.

I took 538 on Monday and Wednesday nights, at 5:30PM.  I had this class immediately prior to another class with a losse structure, but not in a spiratual sense (see my review of Chacko’s Finance course ).  I also took it in the same quarter as 512, taught by Cheryl Shavers, and the contrast was almost frightening.

A couple of things to note – Bo has changed the class a bit, giving it a bit more structure.  I’m glad to say that some of this is from feedback that I and others provided to him.  I really enjoyed the class but I think it needed a bit of tweaking so hopefully other students have enjoyed it.  Also, Bo and I occasionally have coffee so we still stay in touch.  That doesn’t make this any more of a subjective review, in reality, but just fyi.

Them’s the facts. Now read on for the review.
(more…)

Review: Professor George Chacko, Finance, Santa Clara University Leavey School of Business

This is the latest of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University‘s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. But only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.

I’m also reviewing them in reverse order of when I had them for class.  This is mostly so that I am reviewing those whom I remember the best sooner.  This also means that at some point I might skip a few professors I took a year ago or just stop outright out of concern that I will not be able to provide a proper review (the downside of these longer reviews is that I do, after all, have a responsibility to do a good job at them).  I am now back two quarters from my current term.

The facts

I had Professor Chacko for Finance 455 in Winter Quarter, 2008.  It was the 7:05 section (he also taught a 5:30 section the same days) on, I think, Mondays and Wednesdays.  The course is technically titled ‘Investments’ but Professor Chacko outright stated that regardless of what the school decided to call the course he would have taught the same material in the same manner (more on the ‘material’ in a bit, as it is indeed flexible enough to be used in several different style classes).  In fact, he taught a course in the spring that was a ‘696 experimental’ course that was basically just more of the same.

FNCE 455 is the second of two required courses in the discipline.  The first, 451, which I took the previous quarter, is about evaluating cost of capital, net present value analysis, etc.  455 is much more practical in many ways, examining specific cases on topics such as portfolio construction, payoff diagrams, and other financial analysis from the perspectives of a fund manager or a personal investor.

455 is an entirely case-based course.  We covered about 7 or 8 cases through the quarter, from books written by Chacko (and others) while he was at Harvard Business School.  We would do a write-up before each case, really as motivation to read it (I don’t think he actually read or graded them), and then discuss the case during class.  Work was generally done individually.  The final exam was also a case write-up, but much more in-depth and obviously done without a class discussion.

I took 455 when I did both because I needed it as a requirement and because I had heard good things about Chacko.  So my goals were relatively even (as compared to ‘taking it just because it was available’ or something like that).

Them’s the facts. Now read on for the review.

(more…)

Taking the middle road

In a previous post (since lost in a botched wordpress update) about my ‘strategic’ plan through my MBA program, deciding what classes to take, etc, I was debating my overall approach.  The question was whether to take the more challenging professors so that I’d ostensibly (important word) learn more and get more out of those classes, or to try and take some easier ones to keep my load more level.  The opinion among my fellow classmates is pretty split, for what it’s worth.

At the time, my inclination was to take the harder classes, so that I’d get the most out of things.  Since then, however, I have learned a few things.

First, just because a professor is ‘interesting’ and ‘challenging’ doesn’t mean he or she is good.  One professor I had supposed really made you think more, but he also didn’t cover any of the course material.  He also challenged students to think critically and voice their opinions.  However, that just devolved into actual arguments with him over semantics and meaning.  It was ridiculous.  All of this would have been fine, except that we were still quizzed on the course material, I seemed to be the only person taking the reading seriously, and I wanted to go over the course material.  So a professor that is merely “interesting” isn’t good enough.

Second, some professors that are tenured – and this goes for any school/discipline/etc – are just riding out the wave.  They lose track of why they are teaching.  And sometimes they lose sight of how to structure a course.  There is one professor, in economics, who, depending on whom you ask, is either really challenging and makes you learn a lot at a fast pace or is just mean and difficult for the heck of it.  While I would love to take the class twice – once with someone else and once with him – to find out which of those two is his actual approach, I have no interest (nor much respect) in taking a class where the professor is difficult just for the heck of it.  So, again, need to read between the lines.

Finally, there are some disciplines in which I am simply weak.  I am not good at Finance.  The complexities of portfolio construction, cost of capital – that’s just hard for me.  I get the basic tools but the harder ones just fly by me and I have to work really hard.  Does that mean I take the easy professors’  Actually, no.  But I do take the ones where it’s a bit more open and loosely-structured of a course, where I can absorb information without being overloaded with assignments.

Fortunately, for Econ, I found a professor that was a good middle ground between one who is known for being relatively easy and the one who is extremely difficult.  And in general, I still do seek professors who will challenge me.  But I am now a lot more careful about what ‘challenge’ means and think about how I learn, how I want to interact with teachers, etc.

My reviews, over time, will illustrate the lessons I’ve learned in choosing professors.

Review: Professor Cheryl Shavers, Management, Leavey School of Business

This is the fourth of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University‘s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. But only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.

The facts

I took Professor Shaver’s class in Winter Quarter, 2008.  It was the 5:30 section, Tuesday and Thursdays, I think.  Already Winter seems like a long ways away.  The course, Management 512, is titled the ‘Social Psychology of Leadership’ but is best described generically as a leadership course.  Professor Shavers does go over the material out there, but it’s not research-based.  The book introduces some of the research concepts out there, but essentially Shavers challenges each student on how to handle certain situations.  She poses problems and asks us what to do.  The course is pretty loose, mechanically.  A bit of reading, some questionnaires, and each group has to do a presentation on a particular case.  There is also a final individual paper.  But the course is otherwise discussion-based.

My motivation for taking the course was two-fold – one practical, the other programmatic.  First, it was an requirement for the leadership concentration at the school.  So I intended to take it at some point.  Second, it was available that quarter, plain and simple.  So I took it.  However, many of the students in the class are taking it just as they are finishing up their time at Leavey, and you’ll often have students taking Capstone (the final class in the program) sitting next to you.  It’s actually a nice mix of students, though, and really breaks one free from the first year or so of requirements and core courses.

Them’s the facts. Now read on for the review.
(more…)

Review: Steve Corio, Marketing, Santa Clara University Leavey School of Business

At a glance

  • Workload:  Light
  • Teaching Style:  Interactive (kind of)
  • Interest in students: High
  • Relevance to outside world:  Low

Overall Professor Rating: 2.5

Overall Course Rating: 2

Marketing 551 is a hard class for the SCU program.  Many have described it as an undergraduate-level course and I would agree, even as someone without any background in the marketing side of things.  So it’s not easy to review a course that is so basic in the concepts it covers.  In addition, the other professors that teach 551, during the year, have less than stellar reviews.

The Review

This is the latest of my reviews on the professors I’ve had while an MBA student at Santa Clara University‘s Leavey School of Business. There are lots of sites out there that provide feedback and rates – ratemyprofessor is the most notable. The SantaClaraMBA Yahoo group also has a big database of comments and lots of additional information in its message archive. That database can be a bit hard to wade through, and the comments are short and often just link to other threads, which are themselves pretty short and superficial. Only here can I write as much as I want  🙂

I review professors from a variety of perspectives.  First, I explain the context(s) under which I took the class.  Time of year, time of day, etc.  Then I talk about the quality of the class and the professor, and finally about the professor as a person.  After all, we are trying to learn about our interactions with people, so knowing that side of a teacher is critical, too.  So these would be interactions outside the classroom, etc.  I also just write whatever it is that I think is relevant or will be helpful to others.  That is my overall goal.

This is the first review I’ve done of a course I’ve just completed.  So at least its fresh :-).

The facts

I took 551 this summer 2008, Tuesday and Thursday, from 5:30-7:30.  It was the first of two classes on those evenings – 4 straight hours of class.  And it was also the first class after a day at work.  Summer classes are always hard to take, and hard to review, I think.  The classes are longer, with a break, and some faculty modify their course material for the short, 7 week term, others don’t.  But that’s when I took the course, so that’s that.

Them’s the facts. Now read on for the review.

(more…)