University of Tuzla - UNTZ vs European University Kallos Tuzla - EU Kallos Tuzla vs International Business Information Academy - IPIA vs The University of Auckland vs JPTS Institute Of Science, Management And Technology
Side-by-side comparison from 152 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +High-quality, professional, and helpful professors
- +Good educational programs fulfilling expectations
- +Supportive environment and career prospects
- +Friendly and accessible professors
- +Good learning opportunities
- +Modern facilities and location
- +Quality education with supportive staff and professors
- +Modern and well-equipped facilities and classrooms
- +Passionate and supportive faculty
- +High quality education and learning resources
- +Valuable career guidance and growth opportunities
- +Engaging opportunities and open opinion sharing
- +Strong career prospects and support
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and organizational issues are pervasive.
- -Lack of practical application and outdated facilities are significant problems.
- -Some professors exhibit poor teaching methods and rudeness.
- -Administrative and management issues are frequently cited as a major source of frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of modern resources hinder the learning experience.
- -Poor communication and lack of support from staff leave students feeling neglected.
- -Administrative and management issues create confusion and frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of necessary resources hinder learning.
- -The curriculum feels irrelevant, lacking practical application and depth.
- -Outdated curriculum and repetitive content.
- -Poor teaching quality and insufficient feedback.
- -Lack of student support and impersonal administration.
- -Lack of accessible and helpful administrative support.
- -Inadequate or outdated facilities and resources.
- -Poor communication and disorganization from the institution.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Regarding university performance, professors and location stand out as the strongest aspects, both receiving ratings around 4.0. Student life and value are also well-regarded, scoring above 3.5. Areas for potential improvement include facilities, accommodation, and internationality, which are rated in the low 3s. Overall, the university demonstrates a solid but varied performance across these key metrics.
This academic institution received consistently low ratings across all surveyed categories. Areas like facilities, professors, location, student life, accommodation, internationality, and value all scored zero. Consequently, there are no standout strengths or weaknesses to highlight, as the university appears to perform poorly across the board according to this assessment.
This institution demonstrates outstanding performance, achieving a perfect score in Professors, Location, Student Life, Accommodation, Internationality, and Value. Its strongest areas are clearly these aspects, reflecting a highly positive student experience and excellent offerings. The Facilities rating, while still very good at 4, represents the only slight area for potential improvement within an otherwise exceptional overall assessment.
This university receives strong endorsements for its Location, with a rating of 4.05, and its Professors, scoring 4.02. Internationality also ranks well at 3.96. Conversely, the areas needing the most attention are Accomodation, rated at 3.63, and Student Life, at 3.66. Facilities and Value fall within a respectable mid-range.
This institution achieves strong ratings in several key areas, notably Professors, Location, Internationality, and Value, all scoring a solid 4. Conversely, Student Life and Accommodation received zero ratings, indicating significant areas for improvement. Facilities are rated moderately at 3.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Around 46% of reviews are positive, praising high-quality staff and curriculum, with some noting occasional subjective grading. About 17% are negative, citing poor organization and lack of practical application. The average rating is 3.49/5.
With an average rating of 4.33/5 based on 3 reviews, feedback is overwhelmingly positive (~100%). Students praise the modern design, great location, and the kindness and professionalism of professors and staff. Some suggest improvements for certain faculties regarding curriculum and practical experience.
The sole review is highly positive, awarding 5 out of 5 stars. Students praise the quality education, supportive professors, and modern, well-equipped facilities. No negative feedback was recorded.
Approximately 74% of reviews are positive, praising passionate lecturers, supportive faculty, and high-quality learning environments. A small percentage of negative feedback notes repetitive course content and limited instructor feedback.
This single review offers a positive outlook, highlighting the university's great ideas, opportunities, convenience, and excellent career prospects. Approximately 100% of feedback is positive.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
The price for the master's is insanely expensive considering what it has to offer. I got an MA in translation and interpreting, but sadly, my colleagues and I barely had any practical exercises in these subjects. Most of the professors were alright though. Bearing in mind where they work, most of them try to do their best. The university is politicized, since the politicians play with it like with ping-pong balls. The only aim is to employ their own people, no matter how incompetent they are, instead of the people who are actually able to do proper work. Anyone in their right mind (since I was not one of those people) will opt to study abroad and obtain the MA degree somewhere else. I paid 2500 KM so I can have a degree from an XY rated university, instead of studying in, say, Germany or Austria, where the prices are identical, or even lower, and where students can also get real scholarships if they're good enough. Once again, a waste of money. If only they (politicians) invested all that money in infrastructure and better equipment, the university would be a much nicer place and the main Uni building would not have 40 YO doors and windows.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
I found that the overall university experience was not really worth my time and money. Respected professors were only actually lecturing for 1-2 weeks per course, with PhD graduates teaching the majority of the course. Sometimes these PhD graduates weren't able to speak fluent English, which made the learning and teaching actually going on very questionable. In addition to this, you would submit a 3000 word essay, and receive a 15-20 words of feedback. I am certain that very little learning, improvement and education can occur when the feedback loop is so minimal, often generic. In addition to this, many of the "lab" or "tutorial" components were actually university students completing post-graduate experiments as part of their thesis studies. For example, in my psych201 tutorial, we had to spend 2 hours looking at a screen only pressing the "X" or "Z" key a total of 1200 times, and if we did not attend this lecture, we would lose 2% of our total grade. Overall, I question how much education and learning goes on, specifically in the Commerce and Science Faculties. I found my high school classes to go into more depth, with the teachers actually providing many one-on-one conversations to ensure learning is taking place, and this is the learnings that allowed me to pass my first 3 years of papers before any new content was covered, after which, the lectures would have half the class walk out because they couldn't speak fluent english, with students opting to self-teach themselves. If you are requiring students to partake in a study, they must be reimbursed for their time, especially if no learning is taking place. If you are charging students $1000 per course, then the university can afford to pay for staff to assess all of the PHD candidates fluency in English, before they are allowed to teach. In addition, no learning can take place when a question is asked in a foreign language, and the tutor/lecturer replies in a foreign language.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show