Almaty University of Power Engineering and Telecommunications - AUPET vs Almaty Management University - ALMA vs Kazakh-British Technical University - KBTU vs Turan University vs KIMEP University - KIMEP
Side-by-side comparison from 70 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Focused, career-oriented engineering education
- +Skills for growing tech fields
- +Strong regional reputation in engineering
- +Experienced and engaging professors
- +Practical, hands-on learning opportunities
- +Strong academic foundation and competitive programming opportunities
Nothing to show
- +Engaging student community
- +Accessible and approachable instructors
- +Excellent campus facilities and modern learning environments
- +Supportive and dedicated staff/faculty with engaging teaching
- +Strong career support and employment opportunities
Nothing to show
- -Inefficient administrative processes and unclear communication.
- -Outdated facilities and lack of necessary resources.
- -Inconsistent teaching quality and unengaging curriculum.
- -Administrative and management issues are a frequent source of frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of modern resources are a recurring complaint.
- -The curriculum is often perceived as irrelevant and poorly structured.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
- -Inflexible policies and lack of support are problematic.
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues are a major source of frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
- -Lack of engagement and relevance in course content is a recurring complaint.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
- -Lack of support and unclear communication from staff are problems.
Nothing to show
This institution demonstrates notable strengths in several key areas. Student life, accommodation, and professor quality all receive excellent scores of 4.5. The location is also well-regarded at 4. While facilities and value are rated a respectable 3.5 and 3 respectively, the university's internationality is its weakest point, scoring a low 2.
Regarding university ratings, student life stands out as a significant strength, achieving a perfect score. Conversely, accommodation presents a notable weakness with a low rating. Other aspects like facilities, professors, and value are rated moderately. Location receives a strong positive score, while internationality is somewhat lower.
This institution achieves outstanding marks across nearly all aspects, with a perfect score in **Facilities** setting it apart. Student life, professors, location, accommodation, and internationality are all highly rated at 4.5. The university also presents a strong **Value** proposition at the same mark. With no significantly weak areas identified, the ratings paint a picture of a well-rounded and desirable educational environment.
Nothing to show
This institution achieves high marks, particularly excelling in its prime **location** and vibrant **student life**, both receiving perfect scores. Conversely, its **facilities** and **professors** are rated as areas with the most room for improvement, scoring a respectable but lower 3 out of 5. Overall, the university presents a positive profile with strong showings in student experience and accessibility.
Overall, the university receives solid ratings across most aspects, with professors and location being standout strengths. Student life and value for money also perform well. However, accommodation and internationality present areas for improvement, receiving the lowest scores in the survey. Facilities are rated moderately.
Nothing to show
With a 3.5/5 average rating from two reviews, ~50% of feedback is positive. Students highlight the university's strong engineering focus and career-oriented education in fields like radio engineering and telecommunications. No negative feedback was provided.
With one positive review and no negative feedback, the university receives an average rating of 3.5/5. This suggests a generally positive student experience, with ~50% of feedback being positive and ~0% negative.
With an average rating of 4/5 from two reviews, feedback is overwhelmingly positive. Students highlight strong programming foundations and active participation in competitive olympiads. No negative feedback was received.
Nothing to show
With a 4/5 average rating from one review, approximately 100% of feedback is positive. This single piece of feedback highlights good people, though it also mentions rising prices and some professors lacking competence.
The university receives overwhelmingly positive feedback, with ~81% of 64 reviews rating it 4-5 stars. Students praise excellent campus facilities and supportive staff. There are no negative reviews.
Nothing to show
The educational process is just fine; a university is an excellent option for people who speak Kazakh or Russian natively; I enrolled in 2019 in a complete English-based education, and let me briefly explain how each year went. The first year was challenging because the university did not provide a preparation year, so it was tough. The second year was somehow more accessible since we had already gotten used to the languages and started icebreaking. The third year was great. We could handle everything related to studies. In the fourth year, which is the current year, I'm having a serious problem related to the writing of the graduational diploma since most of the process isn't ready to handle international students. As I said previously, the university is excellent for Kazakh and Russian native speakers. But be ready to handle a lot of paperwork, and most of the time, you won't be able to write the "statement" or "application" in Russian. It's "заявление."
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show