Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Grande école

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IEPs

[edit]

Nota bene:

  • "Grande Ecole" is not a synonymous of "elite schools". There are some Grandes écoles which are elite schools, and other Grandes écoles are not. And there are other elite schools which do not belong to the category of Grandes écoles. Grande école is not a synonymous of "Great School". This is complex, unfortunately.
  • French "Grandes écoles" is a controversial matter, since schools communication policies induces real bias. Good sources are required!
  • IEP are NOT recognized as "Grandes Ecoles"!It is a recurrent mistake here. See La Conférence des Grandes Ecoles, which is the official institution which is allowed to qualify an institution as such.

Floressas 15:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand this point of view. However, the matter is more complicated than that. The definition of a grande école by the conférence des grandes écoles itself is given on their website: [1]. It clearly applies to the IEP of Paris (though not to the other IEPs). The list given by the conférence is clearely labeled Liste des Ecoles adhérentes de la Conférence des Grandes Ecoles Françaises (list of the members of the conférence). Sciences Po is most often considered a Grande école in France, even if it is not a membre of the conférence. There is no indication that the conférence is more than just an association, with no offical role. Peco — Preceding undated comment added 17:06, 10 March 2006

I agree with Peco, Sciences Po is highly selective, independant in its teaching, small compared to universities, and enjoys unique recognition by large companies and State administration. What else is a grande ecole? Moreover, the Conference is only an association, where members can reject your membership application!Tlanson 19:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

[edit]

This is not serious: an association is an institution, and it is the only one with such a network of high level experts to decide. Its status is not a serious argument: there are many associations in the US which are the only one allowed to give a precise title ( AACSB for instance). It has enough credibility, no other institution has. And do you really think that French State is not officially involved in the selection? The association is the only one which is mentionned by the governement about the topic: http://www.education.gouv.fr/sup/bces2001/f232.htm . As most Grandes Ecoles are semi-private, such a kind of institution (peer-control regulation) is easily understandable and efficient, and it is an official one. But enough about it.

Sc-po is related to CPU ( Conférence des présidents des universités.), so it is impossible that it belongs to the other category.

Many non-rigourous journalists assert that the IEP is a Grande Ecole("Sciences Po is most often considered a Grande école in France" as you said ). But opinion and public manipulation is not truth, and has much less value than a serious peer review selection in the before-mentioned official association; and there is no reason to think that their work is not good. For Sc-po, since it has a really objectionable communication policy, one should be very careful. An opinion is admitted in Wikipedia if grounded on expert, reliable and unbiaised sources, and the ONLY institution which has enough expertise and reputation to decide is the Conference.

Then, "elite school", why not, since it is wide and vague, but "grandes ecole", which is a precise concept and label, is too affirmative. Sc-Po looks like a grande école, but it is not labelled as such. Usual wikipedians are not educational experts (no more than public opinion), and do not have to decide if an institution fits a definition or not (Strange quality process!!), as you tried to do. If Sc-po is, why not Dauphine or Paris 1 at bac+5 level, or Celsa, or EHESS ? For Dauphine(which has the same status than Sc-Po and the same kind of characteristics) people always say that it is a Grande Ecole; could I accept that on Wikipedia? Many universities or others (UTC Compiègne) have some features that looks like Grandes écoles' (Usual imitation process)

The main problem with such a categorization is that it will clearly induce foreigners into mistake ( it occured before, and it is very boring and difficult to suppress recurrent mistakes: hence my remarks at the top of the page.) . Precision and expertise is always prefered to speculative opinion on Wikipedia.

As a teacher and researcher, I cannot allow opinion to guide Wikipedia's editorial patterns.

Floressas 13:49, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


PS: Sc-po is less selective than most grandes ecoles; there is no comparision between Polytechnique (or business or engineers schools in Paris) and Sc-Po for instance. Some of my friends studied only one month to enter at the 4th year level; quite easy according to them.

AFAIK to enter at the 4th year level at Sciences Po, you have to study for at least 3 years before, or to have several years of work experience. Apokrif 16:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's totally stupid comparison. Any school is less selective than Polytechnique. Nearly all Science Po alumni are hight profile civil servant or politician. Science Po is highly selective but even politechnique have reserved sit for foreign students, Science Po is prestigious, Science Po alumni like ENA are omnipresent in french's political life. Science Po is a "Grand école". fr:utilisateur:Beretta_Vexee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.212.51.89 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 5 July 2007

My intention is not to troll here. I will only restate that nobody is entitled to decide officially whether this or that is a grande école or not. It's like the grands corps : no official definition.

But I will point some errors in your statement.

As most Grandes Ecoles are semi-private

You cannot ignore that sciences po enjoys a semi-public status, being managed by the FNSP, a private foundation. Furthermore, many grande école are completely public.

Sc-po is related to CPU ( Conférence des présidents des universités.), so it is impossible that it belongs to the other category.

This is false. A school can belong to more than one organisation.

and has much less value than a serious peer review selection in the before-mentioned official association

I agree with you if what you say is that only the conférence decides whether a school can be a membre of the conférence.

Sc-po is less selective than most grandes ecoles; there is no comparision between Polytechnique

I understand that you are studying at polytechnique. So I can reassure you: almost no school in France is as selective as polytechnique, except for Normale and the ENA. I do not challenge that. But many members of the conférence are very much less selective than scpo. So this is not a criterion.

Peco 20:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


It is a fact Sc-Po is not a member of the Conference, and therefore it is not right to say that Sc-Po is a Conference member. However it is absolutely not true that "only the Conference decides whether a school is a Grande Ecole or not". Schools with low reputation can claim they are Grandes Ecoles because of membership. But at the same time, you would have to admit "Grande Ecole" is as much a common understanding of prestige and elite as it is about membership: EGIM is a member, but most people won't know it and won't name it a Grande Ecole. For Science Po, it is the opposite. Basically, Grande Ecole is not a protected name, which means no organization has authority on who is and who is not a Grande Ecole.Tlanson 01:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hello people, this is to inform you that the article dedicated to SUPAERO has been placed into the peer review thread. I invite you to take a peek at it and say what you think of it. Thanks! Flambe 04:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 2

[edit]

To be really acute, it should be said that the Ecole Polytechnique is a public establishment under the authority of the ministry of Defence, with its students serving under military status. This military status goes on for four years, which is the duration of the studies at the Ecole Polytechnique. Afterwards students can integrate the "réserve", the french body of reservists, or embrace a military career. On the contrary, French military academies' students automatically serve as officers after their school years, hence the distinction. (a student of the Ecole Polytechnique) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.90.242.5 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 1 April 2007

Polytechnique

[edit]

"While École Polytechnique is run by the Ministry of Defence and its French students are reserve officers in training, it is no longer a military academy and few of its students embrace a military career afterwards." This means that some students do embrace a military career, so I don't see why it is not a military academy (the article does not define "military academy", and military academy only says "Their exact definition depends on the country"). Apokrif 16:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Administratives schools

[edit]

Added top schools (very selective, almumni ending up leading positions) by fields: ENSSIB, ENI (Tax school), ENM (juges and prosecutors), ENSP and EOGN (for police forces). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.123.170.226 (talk) 06:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Centrale Lyon

[edit]

Can we stop referring to this school as a first tier one (in top 10 of engineering school), its graduates are not centraliens either (only Paris provides this status). It is one of the best second tier but not a first tier school, same applies to Arts et Metiers. Thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.208.224.161 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 31 January 2007

Is one of the top 10 - Actually it's ranked 7th in 2009 by the most reliable poll L'etudiant/L'Express - and that consistantly since 2003- There is no doubt that it's not in the same league as X, Mines, and ECP. But it's the best Generalist schools after ECP. Supelec, Supoptic and other schools that may be arguably be more selective are not Generalist and therefore do not appeal to the same category of students - I am not sure why some people think they can be bigger by pushing down others? And yes, it is true, only ECP graduates can be called Centraliens. My advice to the graduates from other Centrale schools: don't even try, that's dishonnest. With respect to Arts et Metiers: that school is much closer to what an engineering school is in the US or Germany. That's not a coincidence that their top students are offered a chance to transfer to Ecole Polytechnique. They may not know as much math as their counterparts coming from prepa, but Gadzarts are very ingenious and intuitive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remi11d (talk • contribs) 23:53, 25 July 2009

I completely agree with you. Last week I had to undo lots of modifications done by somebody using IP 84.5.63.100 not only in this article, but, worse, in articles of other schools (Centrale Paris and Mines Paris). He degradated their contents just to show that Centrale Lyon was at their same level of excellence.
Agustin.PalaciosLaloy — Preceding undated comment added 19:51, 31 January 2007
Absolutely, the same guy keeps undoing others' valid contribution, for example by removing Ecole Normale Superieure from the top list, etc. (He also doesn't know how to type, introducing typos and spurious spaces around commas and brackets.) This is bordering on vandalism. How can we flag him? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.15.69 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 4 February 2007

To come back to the main topic, I must say that I can't agree with the first comment. Centrale Lyon does belong to the top ten of the engineering Grandes Ecoles, and this for at least three reasons :

1/That's what it scores in every global (non-specialized) survey. See for instance those of "Le Point" : http://www.lepoint.fr/html/grandes_ecoles/ecoles_ingenieurs/post_prepa/classement_general.jsp In 2003, it even reached place #3 in the same magazine (since then, criteria have changed).
2/It also corresponds to its level of recruitment. (see the statistics of the "Centrale-Supelec" competitive exam on the SCEI-concours web-site) And, yes, of course, it recruits almost exclusively after the "prépas".
3/The institution itself dates back from the 19th century, has got a good network of graduates, enjoys a nice campus including large labs, which evey school can't pride itself of...

Last, let me mention that "centralien" is just a casual nickname - not a trademark - also used from graduates from other Centrale schools than Paris to refer to themselves, which I find totally ok since they also belong to the family. And soon, we'll be glad to welcome some "centraliens de Marseille"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evarist (talk • contribs) 07:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selectivity of top French Grandes Ecoles

[edit]

There are about 600,000 French students taking the baccalaureat each year, here is an estimate of the number of students entering the top French Grandes Ecoles after a Classe Preparatoire:

X: 350 ENS (all options): 500 ECP: 300 ENSMP: 200 HEC: 350 ENPC: 150 ESSEC: 350 ESCP-EAP: 350 SUP AERO: 150 SUPELEC: 440 ENST: 150 ENSTA: 150 ESPCI: 200 ENSAE: 150 ESE: 250 INA PG: 300


TOTAL: 4,000

This is about 0.5% of High School graduates.

In the UK, Oxford and Cambridge enroll also about 4,000 students a year for a country of similar population (but with more foreign students from the ex-colonnies). In the US, the Ivy League schools (Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Brown, Penn) enroll about 22,000 students a year for a country almost 5 times larger in population. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.208.224.161 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 2 February 2007

Paristech

[edit]

Hi,

A paragraph/link dealing with Paristech (http://www.paristech.org/) might be a good idea.

Alexander142 00:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Criteria for incorporation into the Grandes Ecoles category

[edit]

To stop these endless discussions, I propose to agree on criteria for incorporating schools into the discussed category or not:

  • Selectivity: A "grande école" is highly selective. There is no question about that. So HEC, X, Sc. Po or Normale Sup have very low acceptance rates. They differ in selection modes, but all are very difficult to get in. The problem is that half of the schools listed here will disappear from the article. Namely, all the second tier Engineering and Business schools, which offer more places than they have candidates.
  • WOW effect: A "grande école" is like Oxbridge or Ivy; when an individual mentions where he/she studied, people are impressed.

I propose that these criteria are cumulative.

Otherwise, the army used to put people into categories before entering the National service. And there were two categories: The "grandes écoles" and the "écoles", which could be "écoles de commerce", or "écoles d'ingénieur".

Whether a "grande écol"e is part of the Conférence des grandes écoles or not is utterly irrelevant. The École des Chartes and École Normale Supérieure - Ulm administratively belong to Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne (sorry but Ecole Normale Supérieure does not belong to Paris I University and to any other University. The Ecole Normale are administratively outside the universities although they have strong links with them. It is the same for Ecole des Charrtes. A French normalien — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.230.85.18 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 15 October 2013). However, there is no discussion as to their status. It should be the same for all.

The "elite schools" idiom is purely foreign to French culture and perception. It is a translation of the idiom "grande école". There cannot be a differenciation between the two concepts.

Please read Bourdieu, please! before any change or discussion is made to this article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanuatu92 (talk • contribs) 09:58, 5 March 2007


Hi Vanuatu92,
I agree with you on the fact that we need a definition of the term...however whatever definition we might end up with, there will always be some people thinking that such or such school belongs to the category of "Grandes Ecoles". I'd rather just give a list of schools without mentioning prestige or anything.
The wow effect isn't a relevant criterion...objectivity must prevail.
Alexander142 00:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The problem is that these schools are not legally anything special. It's really hard to find objective criteria for a purely sociological fact. Perhaps, there should just be a mention, at the beginning of the article, that the following list is debated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanuatu92 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 6 March 2007


Hey guys,

I'm french and I am at the Mines Paris at the moment. I completely agree with Alexander142 on the fact that those schools are not legally special. However, I can't really agree on the criterion you use for your selection of those schools. Being a founding member of the CGE implies that the school is very good but few ones are missing: ENGREF, INSA Lyon and ENSIMAG for the engineering schools. Those three schools are really important in that category:

- 'ENGREF' because it trains engineers from the "Corps de l'Etat" (including Poytechniciens)

- 'INSA Lyon' because it is far before all the 5-year schools and represents that model; they're usually considered to have a developped human dimension in addition to their scientific skills; it is a traditional school belonging to the top 10. (however they would be at the end of the 10 first)

- 'ENSIMAG' because it is the best school for Computer engineering, and is one of the hardest school to get after the taupe. It is also really reputed for finance engineering and they are often considered in the 10 top.

Furthermore I have to add something:

X is the best of the best engineering schools, it should really be placed before all of the others, even before les Mines et Centrale Pa X is very very special and those people are very smart

Cheers Hendrix elec

PS: I tried to find a descent ranking on google, and it took a lot of time...... I found this one on a school website. It is not quite perfect but it is the most representative of the ten first that I found.... Sorry (it's just to give you an idea) http://www.utc.fr/evenements/classement/nouvel_econom/index.html#ne2003 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hendrix elec (talk • contribs) 21:05, 6 March 2007

Hi Hendrix Elec. The One thing we are trying to avoid is exactly that: you are in one school, and therefore are fighting for place n°2, or 3 or x against another editor, who will come from another... This is endless.
Look. I'm a graduate of a few institutions, some grandes ecoles, some Oxbridge, some plain universities. But I do not write about my schools/unis, or fight for their place. We are trying to be as objective, or accurate, as can be. And being too personal is biased. Moreover, it's not about a ranking in this article; it's about explaining a concept to people who do not know about it. What you are doing is typical of the grandes écoles frame of mind, but is not relevant to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanuatu92 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 6 March 2007


Hi Hendriw elec,
I was trying to find a common point to all the listed schools and the fact that most of them were founding members of the CGE appeared to me, I wouldn't make it a criterion either ^^
Anyway all those rankings are pointless and just end up with students and alumni arguing about it...I'm quite satisfied with the article as it is (with a mention of the controversial content of the part discussed here).
Alexander142 03:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ps: for the ranking-addicts: http://site.voila.fr/classements.ecoles/ingenieurs2007.html


Hi Vanuatu92,

I understand your viewpoint. I agree that this article is quite "controversial". You know that french system is one of the most elitist (it is not a quality, I agree with you...;-) in the world. We have to explain it in this article.

I'm not quite personnal here as I'm from Mines Pa, and there is no debate on it. I'm just trying to help you bulding this article, because the french system is nowhere clearly explained and written (even the newspaper completely disagree on this topic...). Even many french people don't understand it.

But two things are non controversial (as a french I can tell you): X do have a special status. the ENGREF, INSA Lyon, Ensimag do belong to the best grandes ecoles. I do assure you that they are very famous and recognized. (I don't understand why you deleted those three schools (???????)


Otherwise, if youdon't want to rank, you have another choice: don't rank grandes ecoles on this article if you don't want to talk about ranking.

Anyway, I and all the french do apologize for having a so ununderstandable system...

Hendrix elec — Preceding undated comment added 23:28, 7 March 2007

I'm French as well. And have graduated from two non-controversial grandes écoles, and lectured in others. Didn't delete the schools, just put them in the second list. Insa, for example, recruits after high school. If too many institutions are listed, I believe it will be confusing (even more than at present). X has a special status, as ENS, Chartes, HEC and ENA. I'm not sure Sc. Po doesn't have a special status as well. But other schools are virtually unknown from the wider public. They may be selective, but are not impressive in every day life. I don't think anyone graduated from Ensimag, or ESC Rouen, gets an uneasiness at mentionning his/her school.
My second point is that, as elitism goes, it is clearly not related to selectivity. The ratio grandes écoles (in its too wide acception) over country population is much higher than the ratio Ivy or Oxbridge over country population. The system is perceived as more selective than elsewhere; but this is not necessarily the case (just leave France, as is my case, and it becomes silly, if not even ridiculous). To render/translate that feeling of elitism, not too many schools should be put down otherwise readers will be confused between the "elitist" character and the amount of students who go to grandes écoles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanuatu92 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 8 March 2007


Hi guys,

I am an other French who is studying in an ingineering school (INP Grenoble). This discussion is an endless discussion, and it is so French. Well an easy way to end this discussion is to rank only the three schools which widely recognised as the mains ones: Polytechnique, Centrale Paris et Mine Paris. They are known because of their famous alumnis and because of the quality of their formation and researches. To content every body it could be made an allusion to the other by the way of mentioning the different entrance exams ("concours") or "prépa intégrée" like this :

There is a broad spectrum of engineering schools, many recruiting after taupes. Things may be a bit confusing since many schools have a lengthy official name (often beginning with École Nationale Supérieure), a shortened name, an acronym and, for the most famous, a nickname (and often a nickname for their students).

Amidst all the engineering schools, only a few of them are very prestigious and famous for the quality of their formation and recruitment and the fame of their research department, among which three are major:

  • the École Polytechnique, nicknamed X, which trains engineers and prepares its students (the polytechniciens) for high-level graduate studies or high-level administrative careers. It is highly considered to be the best engineering grande école in France;
  • the École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris (ENSMP or the Mines de Paris);
  • the École Centrale Paris (ECP), whose graduates are centraliens;

There are a total of 227 Ecoles d'ingénieurs in France which are mainly divided by the their mode of recruitement. The student can be selected by an entrance examination after the "classe préparatoire" (by order of importance) :

  • Concours Polytechnique (entrance examination for the Ecole Polytechnique)
  • Concours Centrale-Supélec (in which student of École Centrale Paris and Supelec are recruited)
  • Concours commun Mines-Ponts (in which student of the École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris are recruited)
  • Concours Commun Polytechnique (in which
  • Concours E3A/E4A (while the ENSAM is recruiting in this "concours" it is considerated as a major engineering school of France)
  • Concours des écoles d'agronomie (this "concours" cannot be ranked because of its particularity: it only selects for schols of agronomy, one famous school recruiting by this "concours" is the INA P-G)

or directly after their high school on the review of their high school's grades. Some famous schools select their students directly after the high school, among which there is the INSA Lyon.

Kau Australis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaus.australis (talk • contribs) 18:22, 9 March 2007

I agree quite. That's what I did for the "Ecoles de commerce": I put the three big ones in a group, a few others after. It would feel unfair for others but it would be much better.

Vanuatu92 — Preceding undated comment added 08:03, 10 March 2007

Considering the ranking made by magazines you have two types of rankings:

- The ones that separate schools after prepa and schools after prepa integree

http://img458.imageshack.us/img458/8047/classementdh7.jpg

- The ones that rank both. In those ones UTC is part of the 20 first and INSA is part of the 10 first.

http://www.utc.fr/evenements/classement/nouvel_econom/palmares2006.pdf (a summary I found on UTC website because this school conserves lots of ranking on its page)

This is not all about INSA or UTC. I don't care about it. It is just the fact that some taupins sometimes forget that some (at least 2) schools whith prepa intégrée are part of the top 15... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.70.159.214 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 23 March 2007

Ok Ok it's better to put another ranking. I put this average ranking because it's the most objective I found: it makes an average of ALL the ranking published during 5 years, it couldn't be more objective ! Nobody cares about the fact it was made by students, provided it was made thanks to a synthesis of all the ranking made during these latest years. You'll always find a ranking where your school has a good place, but it's harder to prove the fame of a school with only a ranking. That's why I think that a ranking that makes an average of 22 ranking is interesting. Your ranking is OK, it was extracted from a serious magazine (not Le Point ;) and the ranking you put has been taken into account in the ranking I put :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.228.152.6 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 23 March 2007

The thing about this ranking you found is that it makes a ranking of "only post prepa schools", that's why I said it was not very objective. Apart from the fact that INSA and UTC are not in this ranking, it is true that it is a good one, but if you wan't an accurate one, it should include INSA and UTC.

The thing about the students I told you about, is that I know them, and some of them are very against 5 year schools, because of the old rivality between INSA and UTC and the taupins (apart from the ones that are sure to go to Ulm who don't care about this rivality). Anyway we're both reasonable persons I think, and I'm happy that we didn't have a "pugilat" :-) (that's a french word) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.70.159.214 (talk • contribs) 13:09, 23 March 2007

INSA Lyon

[edit]

Can we be serious and take this school out of the top tier list, it just does not make the list consistent. INSA Lyon is a second tier school at best - not a Groupe A school, I am not even sure it is a Groupe B. I believe Groupa A schools are X, Ecoles d'appli de l'X (Mines Paris, Ponts, SupAero, ENSTA, ENSAE, TElecoms Paris, ENSPM), Centrale Paris, Supelec and may be INA PG (Top Agro school), ESPCI (special status - at least 4 or 5 Nobel Prizes, second to ENS here) and ENSAM (if we push it, but ENSAM is likely to be a top Groupe B). INSA Lyon just does not fit at all in this list, and the top ENSIs should (COMMENT: it's certain that they're not as good, you can't objectively compare an ENSI to INSA or ENSAM!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.220.174 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 22 April 2007) be ahead of this school. Thanks to correct this to keep this article accurate! (Comment: I suggest to keep it the way it is now, because it is the most objective we can do — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.220.174 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 22 April 2007) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.208.224.161 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 29 March 2007

INSA Lyon is really well recognized in the industry. This discussion just bring us back to the old debate between "prepa vs. INSA"... INSA Lyon clearly belongs to the top of group B. I agree with you that it doesn't belong to the so called group A, but it's the same for ENSAM (and surely for ESPCI). But the list here is not the list of the group A. We decided to include ENSAM, INSA Lyon and ESPCI, because they have something special.

- ENSAM has a very powerful network.

- INSA has a powerful network as well, and it's the only school to be prestigious and in 5 years at the same time. It' one of the first school outside Paris (after Supaéro).

- ESPCI because of the nobel prizes.

If you look at any ranking (the ones that doesn't make the separation between "with prepa" and "5 year"), ENSAM and INSA Lyon are always part of the 10 first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.220.174 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 22 April 2007

I don't think that ESPCI should be put in the same category as INSA Lyon and ENSAM. The specificity of the group A schools is their high selectivity. From this point of view, ESPCI is at least as selective as Telecom Paris, Supaéro, ENSTA and Supélec. ENSAM and INSA Lyon are, as said above, very good schools which have something special. Nevertheless, their selectivity is lower than the selectivity of the group A schools. For this reason, I think that ESPCI should belong to group A as long as Telecom Paris, Supaéro, ENSTA and Supelec belong to group A. I also believe that Centrale Lyon is closer to group A from this point of view than ENSAM and INSA Lyon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.24.170 (talk) 02:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even belong to INSA Lyon (nor ENSAM) but I just think that it's not fair that sometimes jealous taupins (or people that don't really know engineering schools) forget INSA Lyon.

Furthermore, I should had to what you've written that ENSPM is not an engineering school in itself as it's only a second diploma that you get after a first engineering diploma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.220.174 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 22 April 2007


I agree with what you said, INSA Lyon and ENSAM are very good school, and their quality is that they are both prestigious and modest at the same time. I also agree on the fact that INSA and ENSAM have the two biggest networks in France. This is not negligible at all. They're not as good as the top ones (group A), not as good as supaero or even ensta(the last school of the groupe A), but they're still very good, and the network helps a LOT.

Christophe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.54.193.51 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 23 April 2007

How can we have schools such as Mines de Nancy and St Etienne and Centrale Lyon behind INSA Lyon. It is completely biased. No recruiter would buy this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.208.224.161 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 2 May 2007


This is really beginning to turn in a war. 206.208.224.161 is apparently very protective on this article (cf. his last 100 contributions) and seems to want his list of the schools and no other. I thought this was not a ranking of the schools, but just a separation of the most known and the others. So I can't understand his eagerness to undo a list which got the most approvals. Mathieu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.245.197.122 (talk • contribs) 17:00, 2 May 2007


206.208.224.161, you wrote completely wrong things on AgroParisTech, and now you also try to criticize INSA Lyon and ENSAM. As Mathieu worte, we're talking about the 10 most famous schools, that's why ENSAM and INSA Lyon are included.

Every french knows that there is a debate on INSA Lyon. Lots of recruiters consider that it is a very good school, as good as Centrale or Mines Nancy and Sainté (clearly). And there are also other people that criticize INSA because it recruits after Bac. Concerning the magazine rankings, some of them are tricky, as they separate schools after prepa and schools after bac... In any ranking that doesn't separte the 2 type of schools, INSA Lyon is part of the ten first schools.

INSA Lyon is not X, that's for sure. Anyway, it is very famous, and it is a very good school. People here talked about its network, but how about the special international classes (Eurinsa, Amerinsa, etc.)? How about the fact that INSA Lyon is the second Grande Ecole (after Mines Paris) for research in France? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.220.174 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 12 May 2007

Acronyms

[edit]

Can't we put the acronym of the schools first? It's a bit elligbile and someone that doesn't know the topic is likely to understand nothing this way...

Example A: Do we have to put École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris? Can't we just put Mines Paris and the link to the wikipedia page of Mines Paris should be enough to explain more...

Example B: Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Electrotechnique, d'Electronique, d'Informatique, d'Hydraulique et des Télécommunications... Don't you think that it's too long...? We could just put ENSEEIHT (and the real name in brackets, otherwise someone that doesn't speak french will understand and remember... nothing)

--84.97.220.174 15:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Bill[reply]

Agro Paristech

[edit]

Is not this a chapter of the Paristech consortium? If so it should not show here as the Paristech consortium does not show anywhere here. INA PG might just qualify for the top schools though. The Engref (ex Enitef I think, not the application school for X also called Engref) and Ensia should be way below in the list (Groupe C schools at best) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.208.224.161 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 2 May 2007

206.208.224.161, I think that you really try to impose your viewpoint, and that you try to vandalize this page. Furthermore, you clearly demonstrate that you don't know engineering school.

ENGREF is the application school for X. It is a very good school, who trains for high administration careers. Enitef is an ancient school that was absorbed by ENGREF.

ENSIA is the second best agro school after INA PG.

These three schools decided to merge and that's it. They will become a new school. It is like that, they merge. We don't want to know what you think about it, 206.208.224.161 because it is going to be done. '206.208.224.161, please go to their website, and read it


206.208.224.161 should stop to vandalize wikipedia, because he does changes on the article, whereas he is not informed at all. Furthermore, his viewpoint looks biased and he doesn't bring proofs.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.220.174 (talk • contribs) 10:08, 12 May 2007

INSA Lyon and ENSAM

[edit]

Alright, let's end the discussion about those two schools. There are 4 points on which everybody agrees. If someone has something to say, please put it here, but stop to change the web page every 5 minutes, thanks.

- INSA and ENSAM has big network, and are very very famous.

- INSA and ENSAM are not "groupe A" schools but a good "groupe B" ones. HOWEVER, those 2 schools have the biggest networks (with Centrale), which is NOT negligible.

- INSA is a very good school even if it is a 5 year one. In that sense, INSA (and UTs) are the exceptions.

- ENSAM stays a very good school, even if people say that E3A concours is easier.

I'm not from INSA nor ENSAM, I'm from Mines Paris. So I don't care about it. I think that what I worte is very objective. I think everybody agrees with what I wrote, but the discussion is just on the force of the words I wrote (conclusion: it's an endless discussion....). However, judging from these 4 arguments, I think that INSA Lyon and ENSAM should be put in the top tier list.

However, there is just a very special discussion on INSA, and I know exactly what it is as I saw people having this discussion a million times... I know four types of people that are willing to take off INSA of the list:

- jealous engineers that didn't have a Mines/ponts or a Centrale, and that are jealous of INSA because they finally got a worse school when they choose (or were forced) to go to prepa instead of going to INSA.

- jealous taupins that were refused at INSA, and now want to decrease INSA's reputation because they fear the "concours" results.

- old prepa teachers that think the same things since 1960, and that don't want to hear about a concurrent system.

- Parisians... that are so proud, that they just need to hear that a school is not in Paris to say that it's not good (I know some parisians that told me that Supaéro was bad because it is in Toulouse!!!!!)

It's finally easy for everybody to say b***shits, as INSA can't be ranked because the selection is not made at the same time as the other schools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hendrix elec (talk • contribs) 20:27, 19 May 2007

All this is very interesting, but it's just your opinion. Another could say that we should put ENST Bretagne, Telecom INT or even Supinfo here because of other reasons that could be very honest. Give us enough rankings that could prove that INSA Lyon deserves being put with other group A schools, you may have a brother, a sister or a girlfriend in INSA Lyon t defend it so blindly. That's not because people think that INSA Lyon hasn't the same prestige than Supaéro, Telecom Paris or other great schools that they are jealous not being there. You can't tell me than INSA Lyon is seen as Supaéro or Ponts et Chaussées, I'm a french student too and I know that there are taupins that criticize unfairly INSA and ENSAM and that would tell you it's a group 3 school. I don't think so, in the business world INSA Lyon, Telecom Bretagne, Centrale Lille, Centrale Lyon, ... are similar. But don't tell me INSA is more prestigious than these schools, you know it's false ! :) I saw you changed the order between Mines Paris and Centrale Paris because you said generally people (I would say taupins) consider than Mines Paris is just after X, you may be right (although Centrale is more known and more considered in Strategy Consulting) but "Mines Paris > Centrale Paris" is not a well known fact in people mind (you did it because you're in Mines Paris) so you can't pretend an order that exists between schools only for Mines Paris and not for INSA Lyon. That's very subjective, ENSAM deserves eing put with group A schools because it's the only school that is "on the limit", INSA Lyon has never been "on the limit", nobody has never thought it was a group A school. I won't change it, do what you want, but you shouldn't take advantage of the fact that is a foreign page to make people believe false things, that's not very good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.228.154.4 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 19 May 2007


Hi 160.228.154.4, I understand your viewpoint, and I see that you're talking sense, which is good. However, there is one thing I've never said: "ENSAM and INSA are as prestigious as supaéro, or supelec" !!! (where did you see that I could've said that?? I never did). I don't have any family or nothing in those schools. My brother is at ENS Ulm. I just made a very very prestigous prepa, and I saw the behaviour of those kids that were pushed by their wealthy parents. I don't defend INSA nor ENSAM blindly. I'm just being fair.

The problems of the rankings is that they separate 5 year schools and after prepa ones. So how do you want to make an objective and descent ranking? However, some magazines that rank both schools exist: Here they are:

http://www.industrie-technologies.com/article/page_article.cfm?idoc=32269 1 - Mines Paris, 2 - INSA Lyon, 3 - ENSAM.

I know that you're gonna tell me that this ranking looks nonsense. BUT, it's a justified one as it ranks 'partnership with companies'. This doesn't mean that Insa and Ensam are in the three best schools of France, but it just means that they're famous and recognized by industrials.

http://emploi.journaldunet.com/magazine/1073/

(ENSAM=4, INSA Lyon=9) I agree, it's a bit weird but anyway it is.

http://www.cefi.org/CEFINET/Ratings/INDEXNOT.HTM

(from the CEFI, a serious organism: ENSAM=5, and INSA Lyon=7, because it is a popularity poll)

http://www.epf.fr/pdf_fr/Nvel%20Economiste06.pdf

(from Le Nouvel Economiste: ENSAM=9, INSA Lyon=10)

We could find more....

I agree: INSA Lyon is as good as ENSTB, Centrale Lyon or Mines Nancy, BUT not better: that's for sure! Where did you see that I said the opposite???

We both agree, but I want to "give back to Cesar what belongs to him": the top tier list we put in wiki, was to separate famous schools from other schools. In that sense INSA Lyon and ENSAM are very very well known because of their giant network. In france, grandes écoles are too small, that's why we created Paris Tech. ENSAM and INSA Lyon are just big enough.

Please, give me a ranking that says that ENSAM or INSA Lyon are far away from the other schools, and I would agree with you. (I'm am not talking about rankings that separate the 2 types of schools)


I have never said that INSA Lyon and ENSAM are groupe A schools, because I think that they both are groupe B. However, we didn't list the groupe A schools but the most famous ones, because this page is written for foreigners so that they understand our system. (However I see that I made a mistake on the wiki page, because ENSAM is better than INSA Lyon, sure.)


Concerning Mines Pa et centrale Pa (should I understand that you're from ECP :)), I did it because that's what the rankings generally write, but I agree our 2 schools are very prestigous and quite equivalent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hendrix elec (talk • contribs) 12:30, 20 May 2007

66.108.163.103

[edit]

Can you please stop massively edit this page without discussion ?? You seems to have a "parisan"-centered view by deleting schools as EM, and others ...

Please on an disputed article like this one, this kind of edits only shows a lot of direspect to the people participating to it. So give your arguments here before editing. And wait for a consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.229.78.66 (talk • contribs) 01:38, 23 July 2007

I would add ESC Toulouse in the Top province Business School as it belongs to the top ten for 5 years, rated 7th in the rankings and present in the Financial Time rating — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.84.220.72 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 16 August 2007

Untitled

[edit]

http://www.lepoint.fr/html/grandes_ecoles/ecoles_ingenieurs/post_prepa/classement_general.jsp

In the latest ranking from Le Point, the top 12 schools also happen to be the ones have traditionally been recognized as the Top Tier (Groupe A) schools. It is for historical reasons rather than based on absolute quality. No doubt ENSAM would be at the top of Groupe B (which in my opinion doesn't mean it is less good than the last of Groupe A). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.183.25 (talk) 02:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Silly Discussion

[edit]

I do hope that the quality of the English as well as the low level of debating style of this discussion is not a measure of the quality of the grandes écoles :-(

I asked a very experienced recruiter (ex Google) about where my daughter should study after she finishes her second year in prépas. A grandes école or a Dutch technical university. Sadly, her answer was:

From a recruiting and talent selection perspective anything that's called university and has a website and an international reputation is typically more sought after than grande ecoles.

Trying to rank the schools is impossible unless you have some objective measure. Some proposals:

Sort by Alphabet
Sort by (number of people doing the exam) / admissions, this will show exclusivity
Sort by average salary of a student leaving the school
Sort by a citation index
Sort by international ranking
Sort by hits on Google
Sort by quality of the website

I think showing a table of schools, sorted alphabetically, with all the relevant information is more informative that adding and deleting schools based on some subjective measure, let the reader judge the ranking. It is valuable to have a list of French schools.

I read this item in Wikipedia after I got a reply from the recruiter. I like my kids to study in France because that is where we live. The bickering in this article did not help to improve my regard for the system ...

--90.42.218.45 (talk) 07:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC) (Peter Kriens)[reply]

I would suggest deleting this list altogether, Wikipedia is not a collection of lists, and rankings are not neutral, they are subjective as they pick and ponder a handful of criteria, with some of them difficult to measure and error-prone. I propose to point to lists by type and/or category, which are by far much more interesting and reliable, see for example:

for good starting points. Links to rankings may also be added to inform the reader further, but this article shouldn't be yet-another-ranking. This would also give more exposure to the real encyclopedic content on Grandes Écoles like the history of these institutions.

And please, everybody here, calm down, anyway your so-called "famous grandes écoles" are way at the bottom of international rankings, and nobody really cares for what is in this article as it doesn't look very reliable anyway ;-)

--Cnb (talk) 16:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


French Grandes Ecoles are really special in the french business ecosystem. This list is of great informative value if you want to work in France. The fact that you dislike french Grandes Ecoles or prefer to study in an University is irrelevant to the topic. Deleting this list would mean that it's not significant in the french educational landscape. Actually it's what matters most to the students. You cannot also make any comparison with the british or american elite schools, because there's no prépas there. It's worthy to note that most of the technical knowledge of french engineers comes from their 2/3 years in prépas, not from the Grande Ecoles. Thanks for not deleting this article, which looks fairly good as it is, even though there is some obvious bias but nothing is perfect ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.65.145.101 (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the recruitment methods and rules

[edit]

It should be noted that the Grandes Ecoles don't require you to have studied in a prépa before. The exam is open to anybody. If you pass the exam, you can go to corresponding Grande Ecole. In the top Grandes Ecoles, tuition fees are approx. 0€, which means anybody can afford that. This stresses a big difference between french elite schools and any other country in the world: France's elite schools basically get the smartest, regardless of if they are rich or not, of their cultural background, etc. - only the smartest. But, statistically, almost all the students managing to pass the exam are the ones who studied in the classes prépas. Indeed, you learn a lot of mathematics in classes prépas. From a foreign point of view, it should also be noted that the exam to the french Grandes Ecoles (ENS, X, ENSAE) are much more difficult than the exam that you might have to pass to enter a great university like Harvard or the MIT. Also, in the french Grandes Ecoles you hardly work. Most of the time is dedicated to doing nothing (the so-called "glande") or partying. In the US or the UK, people really have to work to pass the exams. In the french Grandes Ecoles also, you don't learn much. That's the biggest criticism you can have against these schools. When you come out of the top 3 Grandes Ecoles, you don't know anything about life or business. The only thing you know is the math you've been learning in the prépas... I think somebody should write something about that, because it really stresses out the particularities of the french elite educational system. Please correct me if you think i'm wrong, but I've been studying in two of the top 3 french Grandes Ecoles for engineering, and, honestly, this is the truth.

81.65.145.101 (talk) 00:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)Me[reply]

POV Tags

[edit]

This is about tag cleanup. As all of the tags are more than a year old, and there is a great deal of editing done since the tags were placed, they will be removed. This is not a judgement of content. If there is cause to re-tag, then that of course may be done, with the necessary posting of a discussion as to why, and what improvements could be made. This is only an effort to clean out old tags, and permit them to be updated with current issues.Jjdon (talk) 16:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional information in the "Categories" section

[edit]

The observations at the beginning of this section may be interesting, but they need copy-editing, as well as references to verify that they are not original research. It should also be migrated to a more relevant section; it does not really relate to how the schools are categorized, but seems to have been inserted at random. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordan Gray (talk • contribs) 12:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial vs non profit organization under the 1901 law

[edit]

I changed the "commercial" adjective because an organization created under the 1901 law is a non-profit organization ("association à but non lucratif" in French). It doesn't say that an association can't do any profit but these profits can't be shared between the founders or shareholders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.175.208.153 (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

French Science?

[edit]

The fact that science is taught at a number of Grandes écoles is not sufficient to justify the French Science box that has been given great prominence at the right hand side of this page. -- MyPOV (talk) 00:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and removed it. -- MyPOV (talk) 01:53, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia ranking of Grandes écoles

[edit]

Wikipedia traffic statistics can be used as an objective criterion to rank Grandes écoles wikipedia pages.

Top ranking 200901 for more than two hundreds Grandes Écoles d'Ingénieurs and Écoles Normales Supérieures" :

Top ranking 200901 for Grandes Écoles de Commerce and Instituts politiques:

The above clause has been removed by MyPOV as being Unreferenced and unscientific original research. How can Wikipedia traffic data be unreferenced material, whereas it is linked from wikipedia history page of Grande Ecole ? This is indeed Wikipedia-generated material !!! It is straightforwards from Wikipedia to double-check that the traffic statistics for each page is in the decreasing order as stated in the ranking provided in the removed section. How can the traffic figure and the order of ranking that results be considered unscientific original research, as this is just reformating pre-existing Wikipedia traffic data ? So that the ranking is not original : Wikipedia system is the original source ! MyPOV removed the above clause as being 'Unreferenced and unscientific original research' but does not comment on the preceeding clause about so-called 'famous schools' (copied-pasted below for discussion), which is unreferenced either and which is further more unscientific as being not related to anything. At least the rank above has some background evidence to define a ranking, whereas the unstable list of most famous things has not reality.

So that it is better to be consistent and either bring back the above clause or re-work heavily the section about Most famous engineering schools and like schools. Normal lionne (talk) 08:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia traffic statistics" is not a sufficient reference. Which statistics? How measured? Over what period of time? Where are the results to be found (no link was provided)? Etc. Then: what conclusions are to be taken from this ranking? It is not clear. It is not a methodology that has been validated for reaching any conclusions aside from determining the ranking of page visits to articles. This inclusion is a clear violation of the Wikipedia policy on original research (Wikipedia:NOR). -- MyPOV (talk) 20:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial "most famous" things

[edit]

Begin of controversial section copy-paste -- to be re-worked with references and scientific research sources ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Normal lionne (talk • contribs) 08:35, 4 February 2009

Most famous Engineering Schools

[edit]

There is a broad spectrum of engineering schools, many recruiting after scientific preparatory class. Things may be a bit confusing since many schools have a lengthy official name (often beginning with École nationale supérieure or École supérieure), a shortened name, an acronym and, for the most famous, a nickname (and often a nickname for their students). Most of them are grouped in leagues, like Centrale and Supélec, ParisTech, Mines, the Institut TELECOM (previously Groupe des écoles des télécommunications, GET), the Université de Technologie (UT) in most public universities in all regions of France, etc. Most of them are also joint graduate schools from several regional universities where they are located, sometimes in association with other international higher education networks. They are:

Grandes Écoles d'Ingénieur located in France (non-exhaustive list)

[edit]

Grandes écoles with multiple specialization domains:

Grandes écoles of physics:

Grandes écoles of information technology and telecommunications:

Grandes écoles of applied physics and technology or civil and industrial engeering:

Grandes écoles of biology and natural sciences:

end of copy-paste of controversial section that miss scientific research references.

Normal lionne (talk) 08:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest a good place to start would be to establish a list that is indeed exhaustive by some externally verifiable criterion, as the present list is not exhaustive. It should be of all grandes écoles, not just of engineering schools, since this article is an article on grandes écoles in general. One place to start is the list of members of the Conférence des Grandes Ecoles. I encourage using the list of members of the Conférence despite what is presently said in the article, and in discussions above, about that list, unless someone can identify another reputable list of what constitutes a grande école. Then, it makes sense to group the schools by type and discipline, as is already done. (The Ecoles normales supérieures in one sub-list, engineering schools in another, administrative schools in another, etc.) One can also attempt to sort them by certain objective measures, such as whether they require preparatory classes or not, as is also already done. Beyond that, if one wants to establish criteria based upon reputation, any such ranking needs to come from an outside reputable source. The present article's listing of "Most famous Engineering Schools" is completely unsourced for its criterion, and has been tagged as deficient in this respect since July 2008. One possible source to look at is the set of books by L'Etudiant that list and describe French schools. (An example here.) Good luck! -- MyPOV (talk) 21:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Complete list of the French elite management schools in 2009 (Grandes Écoles de Commerce)

[edit]

List in alphabetical order (Members of the "Conférence des Grandes Écoles") :

Only public or also private?

[edit]

Are there private Grandes écoles? --Max Shakhray (talk) 12:31, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation

[edit]

I should point out that the Grandes Ecoles may be capitalised, unlike in the article. Pierrehenri8ieme (talk) 11:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ParisTech moi. Pierrehenri8ieme (talk) 11:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC) I am unable to capitalise the heading of the article. Please help. Pierrehenri8ieme (talk) 11:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SPAM

[edit]

In view of ongoing spam here, please note this useful link for checking members of the Conférence des Grandes Ecoles.— Racconish Tk 08:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Louis-le-Grand picture is wrong

[edit]

The picture put to show Lycée Louis-le-Grand is wrong. Indeed the first building on the right is not Louis-le-Grand but Pantheon Center of Paris I and II Universities (ancient Faculty of Law of the ancient Université de Paris). Louis-le-Grand is only the second building on the right, being separated from Pantheon Center by Cujas street. Excuse my wrong English. I am a professor at Paris-Sud Université — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.230.85.18 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 15 October 2013

Sciences-Po

[edit]

I deleted the Sciences-Po section. Sciences-Po Paris is no doubt an elite institution, and is more selective than many lower-ranked Grandes Ecoles, but it is not a Grande Ecole, especially now since its admissions process has gradually shifted away from the "concours" model (see the admissions process at the Master's level). Though it is true that the Conférence des grandes écoles is "only" an association, it cannot be separated from the concept of "Grande école." "Magistere" tracks within Universities are highly selective; yet they are not "Grandes écoles." The "concours" is the essence of what is a grande école (see http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=9191DF61EDAAAE3CB87334804F9BB8B1.tpdjo11v_1?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000359000&dateTexte=20140215 for a legal definition of grande école: "A grande école is a higher education institution that admits its students through a concours . . . ." Sciences-po Paris does not admit its students through a concours, but either through an examination (http://www.sciencespo.fr/admissions/fr/college-examen-admission) or through a process that is more similar to that of the U.S. Universities (http://www.sciencespo.fr/admissions/fr/master-examen-admission).

I'd by happy to discuss this issue, but I do not believe that Sciences Po belongs to this page (FYI, the French version of this articles does not reference the Institutions d'études politiques as being Grandes écoles, see http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_école). That's not to diminish the importance of Sciences Po in the French higher education system; obviously, Sciences Po Paris is more selective and more renowned than many grandes écoles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.136.180 (talk) 04:18, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paris Dauphine University and CELSA

[edit]

Paris Dauphine University is certainly a grande école, but as it is suggested by its name, it is still a university ! So,the student are mainly enrolled after high school graduation, not after prep classes. Only one place for this, in the section "Grandes écoles without preparatory classes" ! I don't know what can be bothering you User:Erostratos ? On their website it is even considered to be an alternative path to prep classes ! see : [2] (french, sorry for english speakers). My duty is also to warn people that even if the whole CELSA is included in the CGE, only one of their program is accredited by the CGE and it does not include proper "journalism", it is never mentionned on the webpage [3]. Thus, It can't be considered as a journalism school from the CGE point of view. I let you a chance to prove my analysis is wrong, but without references it should be reverted too. Maxicar (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paris Dauphine has an ambiguous statute since it's a university, a grand école and also a great establishment, I guess you're right to mention that it doesn't have its place as a "Business school", however I believe the prep' class argument may not be valuable. Since the category "Business schools" doesn't explicitly mention the preparatory classes I believe it has a legit place there. Some BS such as INSEEC, ESSCA, IESEG, ESCEM don't recruit after a preparatory class. I Concerning the CELSA, I guess that you mistake the "Mastère spécialisé" ( as you can speak French : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mast%C3%A8re_sp%C3%A9cialis%C3%A9 ) program delivered by the CGE (as a very specific diploma from the Grande École Conference) and the school which is wholly accredited by this institution. The CELSA only has one Ms which is the one you previously mentioned User:Maxicar however all programs are accredited by the CGE since there are a part of the school. If we use the the same argument as yours so can we also point that not even HEC or ENA "Grandes écoles" programs are accredited by the CGE since it is not written on the page (only MS) : http://www.cge.asso.fr/nos-membres/ecoles/151-hautes-etudes-commerciales-de-paris , http://www.cge.asso.fr/nos-membres/ecoles/44-ecole-nationale-d-administration ). Moreover, the CELSA is a journalism school also accredited by the the journalists profession and a part of the Grande École establishment http://www.cnmj.fr/basedocumentaire/ecoles-journalisme-reconnues/ . Hope I bring you some point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erostratos (talk • contribs) 20:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, your explanation seems to be completely legit for CELSA. The only programs displayed must be the MS, others seem not to be included in the website, even if they are accredited. Sorry for this argument, you convinced me !
Concerning PDU, considering your comments, my advice would be to create 2 subcategories in the business school section, the ones without and the ones with prep classes. You see, it is not really recommended to write twice the same thing in 2 different sections.
And as you mentionned it, the status of PDU is special and very new, and it remains a university more than a grande école, so I still think it should be written in the section "without prep classes".
(Nb : remember to sign your message)
Maxicar (talk) 21:54, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Someone deleted Paris-Dauphine University from the list without any reason nor commenting there. I believe this is highly wrong as Dauphine University is a Grande Ecole since 2014 and has joined the Financial Times ranking in 2016 in the management category. To avoid any other fights I have created category named "others" and add Dauphine in there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:B92C:4000:49E3:3458:1927:CB58 (talk) 00:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rankings

[edit]

Recently, a user whose edits seem centred on ESSEC business school removed the sourced Financial Times ranking (in which ESSEC was fifth in France) and replaced it with their personal opinion (ESSEC is one of the two best schools in France). That is certainly WP:OR, and pretty close to vandalism. And deleting sourced content because of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not serious. We could definitely discuss adding a second ranking as long as it's a respected one, but the one by Financial Times has been used in this article for years. Suddenly degrading Financial Times because a school one user happens to like fell in its ranking is not serious.Jeppiz (talk) 19:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've repeatedly tried to get the disruptive user to stop, but instead they insist on vandalizing, socking, and inserting nonsense. The ranking they want to censor is from Financial Times which they replace by this "source" [4] that fails WP:RS by a mile.Jeppiz (talk) 22:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The rankings have nothing do to on such a global page. Only the whole number of ranked school might be interesting. Even if the other users, Deepbug and the other IP, are pushing Essec, they have a point. If you mention one ranking you have to mention all the existing others. Otherwise it can be considered as POV Pushing (Why is it right to favor one ranking instead of another ?). Anyway i'm deleting the ranking details right now. Information can be add on the pages of the institutions. Please Jeppiz, do not try to re-write it, everybody is losing time on this. But do continue to add interesting facts if you have non-biased sources. Maxicar (talk) 00:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maxicar, I do see your point but if you do away with the rankings, please put the schools in alphabetical order. I don't see the idea of having them in the order of prominence if no ranking is given. (For the record, I'm not the one who brought in the FT ranking; the POV-ESSEC users were perfectly happy to use it while their school ranked better than the competition. I updated to the latest version.)Jeppiz (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Page title

[edit]

I think the page title should be changed to the singular number, Grandes école. That is in line with University. It is the concept of Grandes école that is covered here, not the existing collection of Grandes écoles. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Grandes écoles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:41, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

pronunciation

[edit]

I wonder if the /d/ is actually sounded?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grande_école&oldid=1202423207"