When Part Time Is the Right Time

(page 2 of 3)

Do you think that full-time is usually a better option for career-changers?

I think that you can do it either way. Because, really think about it, industry change is not just job change. For some people, that's no small thing, all the learning that you have to do to get up to speed. Some people can operate on less sleep and can operate pretty efficiently without structure. But I think if you need that structure and you think you'll do better in that environment, then I think full-time is probably the right place for you.

Are there any other groups of people who would probably be better served by taking that risk and doing the full-time program?

There are a couple of groups. First of all, again, if you're in a job, even though the paycheck feels great but you don't see how this is ever going to take you anywhere, or for whatever reason you find yourself in an environment that's unhealthy, you find yourself in an industry that's like topsy-turvy, going somewhere not positive -- for a lot of those people to get off is the right way to do it.

I also think it's right for people who want to go into some traditional Wall Street firms, where the way that they bring people into the fold is via the formal, structured, internship recruiting process. And then from that internship, they pick off the people they want to give full-time offers. It's still relatively common in certain sectors of I-banking.

In full-time programs you hear a lot about the importance of networking. Do part-time students miss out on a lot of that?

In the full-time program, it's a little bit more culturally ingrained—you'd be abnormal to not participate in that. And I think, in the part-time program, and we've studied our own students, it's kind of 30-30-30. Thirty percent are not participating in all that bonding stuff at all, and those people are just trying to survive.

They've got kids, they've got a hard job, they're commuting out to the far suburbs. Those people are struggling. So that 30% doesn't participate, by and large, at all. Then there's the 30% on the other end of the spectrum that are really participating in a way that's almost exactly the same as if they would have gone to a full-time program. And then there's the 30% in the middle who are kind of hybrid, and they're sort of cafeteria picking what they're going to participate in or not, and they're getting some of that bonding.

I do think it's more common and it's more expected in a full-time program, so if I'm really, really a shy person and I need that structure and I need that push and I think that's valuable, then maybe I'd be better off in a full-time program.

Are there any curricular components at Chicago that are included in full-time but not in part time?

Actually, full-time has to take 21 courses, not 20. The one course they take that's different, which also adds to the polish factor, is a course called Lead. It's a leadership development course, and it's a real immersion in the soft-skill world. For full-time students, it's mandatory. Everybody has to take it first year. It's optional in the part-time program.

One big complaint that a lot of part-time students have is that they don't have the same access to job placement and career services.

Yeah. We just changed that, about a year and a half ago, and now they do. Our students now have full access to full-time recruiting. Number one, on the employer side, they wanted access to all of our students, and they didn't want to have to go to two separate programs to recruit. So recruiters and companies really drove it for us in a big way. Secondarily, the students were requiring it, because part-time students aren't all one flavor any more.

There's entrepreneurs, there's career switchers. It's a huge range of folks. We've gone through two cycles of this, and out of 1,500 evening and weekend students, we have approximately 150—about 10%—who participate in on-campus recruiting.