London School of Economics and Political Science - LSE vs University of Leicester vs De Montfort University - DMU vs EM Normandie - EM Normandie vs University of Loughborough
Side-by-side comparison from 552 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
- +Supportive and accessible faculty
- +Engaging and flexible academic programs
- +Welcoming and diverse student community
- +Engaging and passionate lecturers
- +Strong academic quality and learning experiences
- +Excellent facilities and community environment
- +Industry-relevant courses for job readiness
- +Positive learning atmosphere and helpful, knowledgeable professors
- +Valuable international exposure and personal/professional development
- +Strong academic programs with real-world relevance and expert faculty
- +Vibrant campus life with diverse and collaborative community
- +Excellent enterprise support and focus on innovation
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- -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.
- -Inefficient exam formats and time constraints.
- -Ineffective teaching and poor feedback processes.
- -Administrative and management issues.
- -Substandard facilities.
- -Poor quality education and value for money.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Outdated facilities and lack of resources hinder learning.
- -Inconsistent teaching quality and insufficient support are prevalent concerns.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
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 demonstrates particular strengths in student life, with a rating of 4.375, and location, scoring 4.319. Internationality also performs well, at 4.307. Conversely, accommodation received the lowest score at 3.75, suggesting it is the weakest area. Facilities and professors also received solid scores above 4.0. Value for money is also rated positively at 4.08.
With strong performance in **location** (4.34) and **student life** (4.33), this university garners high marks in several key areas. Facilities (4.32) and internationality (4.29) also received favorable scores. The university's **professors** represent its lowest-rated category at 4.07, though accommodation and value scored similarly at 4.12.
This institution garners high marks in several key areas. Its Facilities, Professors, and Value are all rated consistently well at 3.83. Internationality stands out as a significant strength with a perfect score of 4. Conversely, Accomodation is a weaker point, rated at 3.2, with Location also receiving a comparatively lower score of 3.33. Student Life falls in the middle with a rating of 3.5.
Overall, the university scores well across multiple categories. Its strongest area is **Facilities**, boasting an impressive 4.69 average. **Student Life** and **Value** also received high marks, both exceeding 4.3. The lowest-rated aspect is **Location** at 4.0, while other areas like Professors, Accomodation, and Internationality remain solid with scores above 4.2.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
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 an average rating of 4.24/5 from 80 reviews, ~82.5% are positive. Students praise a friendly, student-focused environment with effective communication, cost-friendliness, and safety. A small ~1.3% of feedback mentioned issues with exam timing.
Around 97% of reviews are positive, praising academic quality, passionate professors, and excellent facilities. A small percentage (3%) of negative feedback mentioned issues with foundation year credits and unsupportive teaching staff.
With a 3.67/5 average, most reviews are positive (~74%), highlighting personal growth, industry-relevant courses, and a good learning atmosphere. One negative review (~16.7%) criticizes the school as a money-making scheme with mediocre teaching.
With a ~95% positive sentiment, reviews highlight diverse courses, work experience opportunities, and a vibrant campus. Students appreciate the supportive, collaborative atmosphere and lack of a strong drinking culture. No negative feedback was recorded.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
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
Regrettably, I cannot offer a recommendation for Comic and Concept art due to the following reasons: Firstly, the accessibility of the teachers proved to be quite challenging as they were unresponsive to multiple email attempts throughout the entire year. Moreover, the feedback provided was often overly vague and lacked constructive criticism, occasionally even being unnecessarily harsh. In some instances, no feedback was given at all. Submitting work was frequently an arduous task, as specific file formats were required that were incompatible with the content, such as demanding PDFs for documents that couldn't be formatted accordingly and were subsequently rejected. Furthermore, the lessons themselves were lacking in quality. Some lecturers would digress into unrelated topics, consuming valuable class time. The teaching approach was disappointingly minimal, with students being assigned tasks without any guidance or instructional techniques provided. If feedback was given, it was generally unhelpfully brief, merely stating that improvements were needed. The learning materials provided during the lessons were also subpar. Often, we were presented with pre-recorded 10-minute videos and expected to navigate our own way through the material. This lack of effort on the part of the lecturers was unfair and disheartening, making it challenging for students to invest their own efforts. The workload imposed on students was excessive and overwhelming, leading to the majority falling behind. Consequently, many students experienced a negative impact on their mental well-being, ultimately resulting in some dropping out. Additionally, the university failed to provide necessary information about the course, leaving students to rely on each other for essential details. Timetables and key information, including student cards, were significantly delayed without any valid explanation. Technological tools such as email, Blackboard, Teams, and attendance systems frequently malfunctioned, causing further frustration and hindrance to the learning experience. Tragically, instances of bullying were pervasive both within the classroom and online, including incidents targeting vulnerable individuals. Despite reporting these matters to the course leader, no action could be taken without the full names of the involved students, which was a requirement I couldn't fulfill. Regrettably, when I brought these concerns to the attention of the class representatives, they chose to ignore my pleas for assistance. Lastly, living in Leicester City proved to be unsafe, with prevalent cases of sexual harassment, homophobic and transphobic threats. Disturbingly, both the police and the university failed to take any meaningful action in response to these issues.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
