Instituto Tecnológico de Nogales - ITN vs Qassim University vs IUT De Sceaux vs State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta - UIN vs King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals

Side-by-side comparison from 12 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Arab Open University (4.40)
Instituto Tecnológico de Nogales - ITN: wins 3/6 categories
Qassim University: wins 0/6 categories
IUT De Sceaux: wins 0/6 categories
State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta - UIN: wins 1/6 categories
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals: wins 1/6 categories
Arab Open University: wins 1/6 categories
42 Wolfsburg - 42Wob: wins 0/6 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Mechanical Engineer
Buraydah, Saudi Arabia
Not rated
Read more reviews
0 reviews
×
Sceaux, France
3.70
Read more reviews
2 reviews
×
Best programme: Banking and Finance
Best programme: English Literature
Best programme: petroleum refining and Petrochemical engineering
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
4.40
Top
Read more reviews
5 reviews
×
Best programme: Bsc Information Technology
Wolfsburg, Germany
4.00
Read more reviews
1 reviews
×
Best programme: Software Engineering
Category ratings
Facilities
3.00
Not rated
4.00
3.00
4.00
4.40
Win
4.00
Location
5.00
Win
Not rated
3.20
4.00
2.50
4.00
3.00
Professors
5.00
Win
Not rated
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.80
4.00
Internationality
5.00
Not rated
3.90
5.00
4.50
4.40
5.00
Student life
4.00
Not rated
4.20
5.00
Win
3.00
4.40
4.00
Value
5.00
Win
Not rated
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.40
4.00
Accommodation
3.00
Not rated
3.00
4.00
4.50
Win
4.00
2.00
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +Excellent teachers and engaging learning opportunities.

Nothing to show

  • +Relevant practical experience and industry-connected faculty
  • +High-quality educational system overall
  • +Strong recommendation to others
  • +Integration of Islamic values with modern sciences
  • +Opportunities for personal, spiritual, and leadership growth
  • +Active student organizations and extracurricular involvement
  • +Excellent engineering programs and facilities
  • +Supportive administration and alumni network
  • +Good professors and grading practices
  • +Flexible study programs balancing personal and professional life
  • +Supportive and knowledgeable professors with real-world focus
  • +Diverse student body and engaging university activities
  • +Student-led learning and experimentation
  • +Problem-solving curriculum structure
  • +Creative and diverse learning environment
Cons
  • -Excessive administrative burden and poor management.
  • -Outdated and poorly maintained facilities.
  • -Lack of engaging and relevant course content.

Nothing to show

  • -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and lack of resources are a problem.
  • -Course content and teaching quality can be disappointing.
  • -Administrative and management issues are a significant source of frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and technology detract from the learning experience.
  • -Lack of clear communication and support from staff is a common complaint.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and technology hinder learning.
  • -Poor communication and lack of support are recurring problems.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources hinder the learning experience.
  • -Lack of career support and unclear future prospects are common concerns.
  • -Administrative and management issues are a frequent source of frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and equipment are a recurring complaint.
  • -Lack of clear communication and support from staff is problematic.
Rating summary
What students say

This institution garners exceptional scores in several key areas, notably achieving perfect marks for its professors, location, internationality, and value. Student life also scores highly, indicating a vibrant campus experience. However, facilities and accommodation received more moderate ratings, suggesting these could be areas for potential improvement.

Nothing to show

Overall, this institution garners a strong performance with an average rating of 3.8. Student life shines brightest, achieving an impressive 4.2, closely followed by facilities and value, both scoring a solid 4. Conversely, accommodation presents the most significant area for improvement, receiving a rating of 3. Location also falls slightly below the average at 3.2.

With impressive scores in Student Life and Internationality, this institution shines. Its professors, location, accommodation, and overall value are also rated highly, indicating a well-rounded experience. The weakest area, Facilities, still received a respectable score, suggesting room for improvement but not a significant detractor from the overall positive assessment.

This institution demonstrates notable strengths in its accommodations and international student experience, both receiving a high rating of 4.5. Facilities and professors are also well-regarded, scoring 4. Student life and value are solid at 3 and 4 respectively. The primary area for improvement lies in its location, which received the lowest score of 2.5.

Academic excellence shines through with professors receiving the highest marks. Facilities and student life are also well-regarded, alongside internationality and value for money. Location and accommodation, while still positive, represent the areas with slightly lower, yet still solid, scores. This indicates a generally strong offering with particular strengths in teaching quality.

This institution demonstrates impressive strengths in its **internationality**, receiving a perfect score, and also performs well in **facilities**, **professors**, **student life**, and **value**, all rated a strong 4. However, **accommodation** stands out as a notable weakness, with a significantly lower rating of 2. The **location** is rated moderately at 3.

Reviews summary
Highlights

This university has a 4/5 average rating, with all feedback being positive. The single review highlights good teachers and learning opportunities. However, it also notes a recurring theme of dirty bathrooms.

Nothing to show

With an average rating of 3.5/5, reviews are largely positive, highlighting the quality of the system and helpful professors. One review specifically praised the work-study program and recommended the university. No negative feedback was recorded.

With a 4/5 average rating, feedback is largely positive (~100% positive reviews). Students highlight a unique blend of Islamic values and modern sciences, alongside active student organizations and community involvement opportunities.

With one positive review, students highlight good engineering programs, labs, and infrastructure. The average rating is 3.5/5 stars, with ~50% positive sentiment. Campus life was noted as a bit boring.

With an average rating of 4.4/5, ~80% of reviews are positive. Students highlight program flexibility and supportive professors. Some minor points mention less active student activities and occasional exam concerns.

With an average rating of 4/5, this university receives highly positive feedback. Students praise the problem-solving curriculum and opportunities for creative exploration and experimentation.

Rating distribution
5★
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
60%
0%
4★
100%
0%
50%
100%
50%
20%
100%
3★
0%
0%
50%
0%
50%
20%
0%
2★
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1★
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our Privacy Policy for more details.
Close