London School of Economics and Political Science - LSE vs Brunel University London vs University of West London vs University of Roehampton vs London School of Commerce - LSC
Side-by-side comparison from 553 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Expert and experienced faculty
- +Supportive and collaborative community atmosphere
- +Diverse and flexible learning and assessment methods
- +Practical, career-focused learning with industry experience
- +Supportive and inspiring lecturers with expertise
- +Accessible campus facilities and resources
- +Industry connections and career opportunities
- +Engaging and relevant curriculum
- +Supportive staff and positive campus environment
- +Practical experience through placements and hands-on training
- +Supportive and dedicated lecturers
- +Positive campus environment and community feel
- +Accessible resources and supportive faculty
- +Engaging learning environment and quality instruction
- +Opportunities for exposure and growth
- +Flexible and accessible distance learning
- +Practical, real-world application of knowledge
- +Ability to study at own pace while working
- +exceptional quality of teaching and knowledgeable, approachable instructors
- +strong emphasis on precision, quality, and professional skill development
- +welcoming environment and supportive alumni network
- -Poor teaching quality and lack of structure in academic programs.
- -Inadequate support services and limited social opportunities.
- -High fees with perceived low value and administrative issues.
- -Course content is often repetitive and not applicable to real life.
- -Teaching methods are confusing and make concepts difficult to grasp.
- -Administrative and management issues create frequent problems.
- -Facilities are outdated and poorly maintained.
- -Course content is irrelevant or outdated.
- -Administrative & management issues are a major source of frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and equipment hinder learning.
- -Lack of support and resources is frequently mentioned.
- -Administrative and communication issues cause stress.
- -Lack of support is a recurring problem.
- -Outdated or poorly developed course content.
- -Ineffective instruction and lack of expert guidance.
- -Poor communication and administrative issues.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and technology hinder the learning experience.
- -Lack of career support and industry relevance leads to dissatisfaction.
Perceived strengths of this institution lie significantly in its **Location** and **Internationality**, both receiving top marks. Conversely, **Student Life** emerges as the area with the lowest reported satisfaction. Ratings for Facilities, Professors, Accomodation, and Value fall within a moderate to good range, indicating generally positive feedback across these aspects.
This university garners strong performance in several key areas, notably **Internationality** at 4.36 and **Value** at 4.16. Ratings for **Professors** (4.06) and **Facilities** (4.01) are also commendable. The university's **Location** (3.74) and **Student Life** (3.86) are rated moderately well. The weakest area appears to be **Accomodation**, receiving the lowest rating at 3.63.
This university demonstrates strong performance in several key areas, with exceptionally high marks for Internationality (4.49) and Professors (4.48). Facilities and Location also received very favorable scores. Student Life and Value are well-regarded, though Accomodation presents as the weakest area with a rating of 3.93.
Professors and facilities are highly regarded at this institution, earning top marks. Student life and location also receive favorable reviews. While generally positive, accommodation and value represent the areas with the lowest scores, indicating potential for improvement. Internationality is rated solidly in the middle.
This institution shines brightest in its location, receiving a near-perfect score. Student life and internationality are also areas of moderate strength. Conversely, accommodation stands out as a significant weakness, along with the perceived value of the education. Ratings for facilities and professors are average.
The university presents a varied profile, with its strongest aspects being internationality and value, both scoring a solid 4 out of 5. Conversely, facilities, location, student life, and accommodation are rated at a respectable but average 3. The academic environment, indicated by professor ratings, falls slightly above average at 3.75. Overall, the institution excels in global appeal and affordability, while other areas maintain a consistent performance level.
This institution receives high marks for its Location, scoring 4.78, and for its Professors and Internationality, both at 4.67. Facilities also rate well at 4.56. Student Life and Value are both solid at 4.00. The weakest area is Accomodation, which received a rating of 3.22.
Most reviews (~74%) are positive, praising academic reputation, expert faculty, and excellent resources. A small percentage (~3.4%) express dissatisfaction with lecturing quality, course structure, or career services.
With a 4.17 average rating from 118 reviews, ~98.3% of feedback is positive, highlighting practical, career-focused learning, helpful lecturers, and good campus resources. A small amount of negative feedback exists.
With a 4.45/5 average rating from 51 reviews, ~88% of feedback is positive. Students frequently praise the great experiences, strong industry connections leading to job placements, relevant curriculum, and supportive staff. No negative feedback was recorded.
With an average rating of 4.49/5, ~91% of 45 reviews are positive. Students praise the holistic, evidence-based nursing practice, valuable clinical placements, and supportive environment. Some mention inconsistent mentor support and slow administration.
The university receives predominantly positive feedback (~75%) with students praising supportive instructors and good facilities. A smaller portion of reviews (~25%) notes administrative delays and communication issues.
Most university student reviews (approximately 75%) are positive, highlighting accessible distance learning and program applicability. A smaller portion (about 25%) express frustration with course content and delivery.
All 9 reviews are positive, with an average rating of 4.67/5. Students highlight exceptional teaching quality and knowledgeable instructors, along with impeccable facilities. The curriculum and emphasis on precision are frequently praised.
LSE is a great place to create life-long connections and friends. There's a certain sense of community that is special to the university. The staff are hands-on and approachable. The facilities are modern and well-equipped.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
I rarely leave reviews, but I felt compelled to share my experience to help others make an informed decision before enrolling in this school. What was promised as a professional, expert-led learning journey turned out to be an extremely frustrating and misleading experience from start to finish. Firstly, the course content itself was a major red flag. It became quickly apparent that the material was not developed or delivered by qualified human experts. The writing style, structure, and overall quality is regurgitate and regenerated AI—often incoherent, repetitive, and lacking the depth and critical insight one would expect from an accredited educational provider. They admitted in writing to me their courses where generated by OpenAI. I could have simply gone on ChatGPT and asked for the course, without paying for it. There was little to no evidence of real academic or industry expertise behind the materials, and attempts to clarify or engage with instructors were met with vague, generic responses that did not address the content or questions raised. Secondly, and more alarmingly, this school advertises affiliations and accreditations with well-known awarding bodies to bolster its credibility. Out of concern, I contacted several of these organisations directly to verify their connection to the school. Every single one I reached out to confirmed that they have no affiliation whatsoever with the institution. This level of misrepresentation is not only unethical but borders on fraudulent, especially for prospective students relying on these claims to make decisions about their education and future. This experience has been both disappointing and infuriating. I invested time, money, and trust into this course, only to discover that it fails to meet even basic standards of legitimacy and academic integrity. To anyone considering enrolling: please do thorough research. Ask for proof of accreditation and human-led instruction. Do not rely solely on what’s displayed on the website or in promotional materials. There are many credible, high-quality educational providers out there—but unfortunately, this is not one of them.
I really enjoyed my time at LCB! I've found that my skills when I entered the work force were much higher than others. I think though there was a big portion missing in recipe development and composition. True- we did learn it through memorizing the recipes, but we really were missing classes on how different ingredients affect the final textures.. how you can change them... etc. That I still am not an expert in .. and I create recipes! Ouf! Also, I don't know if you still do a month of sugar work... but that really wasn't necessary and should be either cut or minimized to just 2 lessons. It's such a niche skill to know that I would have really preferred more technical skills. I loved the old location. The "rumors" I'm getting about the new location are that it's not as good, unfortunately - that i's become more of a money focused/marketing machine. I really hope that this image can be fixed as I love LCB and enjoyed my time there! Oh also - there should be more help for students to get jobs and featuring old students accomplishments - from cookbook launches to new bakeries so that current and old students can support them.
