Moscow State University of Printing Arts - MGUP vs National Research University Higher School of Economics - HSE vs Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia - RUDN vs Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO vs Moscow International Higher Business School - MIRBIS
Side-by-side comparison from 36 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Engaging classes with practical application
- +Exceptional professors encouraging discussion and offering support
- +Rewarding academic challenges
- +High academic quality & skilled faculty
- +Global outlook & diverse programs
- +Career opportunities & strong network
- +Engaging academics, practical skill development, and career support
- +Vibrant, multicultural atmosphere with global connections and cultural exchange
- +Diverse program options and research opportunities
- +Engaging, relevant instruction from passionate, supportive faculty.
- +Emphasis on analytical thinking and practical application of concepts.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- +Student-centered support and inclusivity
- +Welcoming and understanding community
- -Administrative and management issues create an unwelcoming atmosphere.
- -Insufficient space and outdated facilities detract from the learning environment.
- -Administrative and management issues hinder student support.
- -Inconsistent teaching quality and subjective academic processes are problematic.
- -Unrealistic exam difficulty and demanding workloads cause frustration.
- -Administrative and management issues, including allegations of corruption and biased treatment.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Facilities are often outdated and poorly maintained.
- -Course content can be irrelevant or not up-to-date.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Facilities are often described as outdated or poorly maintained.
- -Course content is perceived as irrelevant or not up-to-date.
Receiving perfect scores across the board, this institution demonstrates outstanding strengths in every evaluated aspect. Facilities, professors, location, student life, accommodation, internationality, and value are all rated a perfect 5. With such uniformly excellent feedback, identifying a weakest area is not possible; the university excels across the entire spectrum of student experience.
This institution demonstrates a particularly strong showing in its **Location**, receiving the highest rating. Value and Professors are also highly regarded. Conversely, the **Accomodation** received the lowest score among the evaluated aspects. The university also scores well in Internationality, Facilities, and Student Life, indicating a generally positive overall perception with a few areas for potential improvement.
This institution demonstrates a robust student life, scoring a 4.5, and excellent internationality and location at 4.2. However, accommodation presents the lowest score at 3.2, with facilities and professors also receiving moderate ratings of 3.8. Value is rated a solid 4.0, suggesting a generally positive experience balanced by some areas for improvement.
This institution achieves perfect scores across all assessed areas. Its facilities, professors, location, student life, accommodation, internationality, and overall value are all rated a stellar 5 out of 5. This indicates an exceptionally strong and well-rounded university experience with no discernible weak points based on this rating system.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
This institution demonstrates exceptional strengths, with perfect scores awarded for Facilities, Professors, Location, Student Life, and Value. These areas represent the university's most outstanding attributes. The accommodation rating of 3 indicates a moderate but not exceptional aspect of the student experience. Internationality also scores well at 4, suggesting a generally welcoming environment for global students.
With a 3/5 average rating, reviews highlight engaging classes and helpful professors (~33% positive). However, some negative feedback points to issues with budget allocation and library facilities (~33% negative).
Around 96% of reviews are positive, highlighting high-quality education, excellent faculty, and valuable connections. A small portion of feedback mentions issues with some professors and the grading system.
With a 4/5 average rating from 8 reviews, ~75% are positive. Students praise academic exploration, diverse cultures, and career preparation. A small portion (~12.5%) mention administrative delays and corruption allegations.
With one review, the average rating is 5/5. The feedback is overwhelmingly positive, highlighting engaging coursework, interactive instructors, and supportive guidance. No negative feedback was received.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
With one review, the university is highly rated at 5/5. This positive feedback highlights excellent student care and a welcoming environment. No negative reviews were received.
Entering this educational institution into the correspondence form of training with the use of distance educational technologies (DOT), I expected a lot of interesting lectures, seminars and skype conferences with teachers. However, the reality of me admitted a lot of surprise. Video-lectures turned out to be very small, Skype conferences were not in sight. Instead of exams and preparation for them, intermediate tests for 10-15-20-25 questions are used, which after the n-th passage begin to be repeated, the exam in total consists of 40-45 assignments.
Nothing to show
"Based on my experience in the PhD Department of Plastic Surgery at the Russian University of Peoples' Friendship named after Patrice Lumumba, significant allegations of corruption have arisen. Faculty members have repeatedly suggested that PhD students engage third parties to bypass direct scientific interactions in exchange for financial incentives. Despite my diligent efforts, I faced biased exams after refusing to participate in these corrupt practices. Complaints to higher authorities yielded no action, and the review committee failed to impartially assess my claims. Consequently, I was expelled in my third year. Now, I struggle to gain readmission or transfer due to pervasive corruption in the field of plastic surgery. I have provided evidence, including a screenshot of a conversation with my supervisor and an audio recording with the department head. My initial aspirations to contribute to scientific advancement have been shattered by the corruption I encountered, leaving me deeply disillusioned and distressed."
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show