Student review [#91469] for Political Science
at Central European University - CEU

Having completed my undergraduate studies in the UK, I entered this MA programme with high expectations — particularly in terms of academic structure, intellectual engagement, and critical discourse. Unfortunately, I found the experience to be more reminiscent of a rigid secondary school model than a postgraduate academic environment.

The overall intellectual quality of the programme was disappointing. Classes lacked critical engagement and interactive formats. I was enrolled in as many as eight courses per term, often delivered in a uniform style regardless of whether the session was a seminar, lecture or workshop. Readings were poorly contextualised, and the lack of structured resources (such as key and supplementary readings) was a stark contrast to the support typically provided at UK institutions.

One particularly disheartening example was a course on cosmopolitanism and global justice. While addressing inequality and injustice, it failed to include any discussion of colonial legacies, systemic racism, or non-Western perspectives — an omission the lecturer justified by citing time constraints. This exclusion fundamentally undermined the course’s legitimacy. The delivery was also overly prescriptive, with students expected to mirror the lecturer’s opinions rather than critically engage with material.

The department’s broader curriculum reflects a similar lack of diversity and critical depth. A clear decolonial perspective was missing, and most courses presented a narrow, Eurocentric viewpoint. The structure of the classes — 90-minute blocks with little variation — made engagement difficult.

There were some notable exceptions. I had the opportunity to take electives from the legal and public policy departments, which were far more rigorous and rewarding. That said, cross-departmental enrolment was administratively complex.

The statistics module was particularly mismanaged. Crammed into four weeks (due to the instructor’s lack of availability) with 4-hour-long lectures once a week and no realistic preparation time, it covered an overwhelming amount of content. With help from the student representative, we were able to postpone the exam by two weeks — an essential adjustment that enabled most of us to pass.

Administratively, the university often felt disorganised. Although I passed the exemption test for the academic writing course, the credit was never formally recorded. After deferring my thesis submission due to mental health reasons, I was informed — weeks after successful submission and defence — that I was missing two credits and could not graduate. The coordination team was empathetic and helpful in resolving this, but the miscommunication caused unnecessary stress and delay.

Despite these challenges, there were positives. I met wonderful peers, my thesis supervisor was supportive, and the university regularly hosted social receptions. I also had the freedom to pursue an independent thesis topic, which, though academically isolating, was ultimately rewarding.

In summary, while there were individual highlights and supportive staff members, I cannot recommend this MA programme due to its structural flaws, lack of academic rigour, and limited critical engagement with global perspectives.