Swiss School of Management - SSM vs The British University in Egypt vs Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport - AASTMT vs Al-Azhar University - Azhar vs German University in Cairo - GUC

Side-by-side comparison from 63 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Tie
Swiss School of Management - SSM: wins 2/4 categories
The British University in Egypt: wins 0/4 categories
Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport - AASTMT: wins 0/4 categories
Al-Azhar University - Azhar: wins 0/4 categories
German University in Cairo - GUC: wins 0/4 categories
Egyptian Russian University: wins 0/4 categories
Heliopolis University For Sustainable Development - HU: wins 2/4 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Bachelor of Business Administration
Best programme: Bachelor of Nursing
Best programme: Architectural Engineering
Best programme: Accounting
Best programme: Computer Engineering
Best programme: Electronics and Telecommunication
Category ratings
Facilities
4.67
4.63
3.74
3.89
4.60
3.00
5.00
Win
Location
5.00
4.36
3.71
4.14
4.11
2.00
5.00
Professors
4.33
3.94
4.13
4.00
4.60
5.00
5.00
Internationality
5.00
Win
3.94
3.91
3.78
3.60
3.00
3.00
Student life
4.33
4.33
3.48
4.25
4.40
3.00
5.00
Win
Value
5.00
4.31
4.17
3.56
4.40
3.00
5.00
Accommodation
5.00
Win
4.13
3.64
3.63
3.36
1.00
2.00
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +Practical, real-world preparation
  • +Personal and professional growth
  • +International experience
  • +Expert, supportive professors and rigorous, challenging academics
  • +High-quality campus facilities and learning resources
  • +Vibrant campus life, social activities, and diverse student body
  • +Practical skill development and future career preparation
  • +Supportive and engaging campus atmosphere with diverse fields of study
  • +Internationally recognized and respected degrees
  • +Accessible professors and heard opinions
  • +Relevant curriculum and qualified teachers
  • +Prestigious Islamic studies legacy and diversity
  • +High-quality, practical education with global competitiveness
  • +Strong career preparation and development of essential soft skills
  • +Vibrant and supportive creative or like-minded community
  • +Strong international focus and challenging courses
  • +Dedicated faculty and close-knit community
  • +Unique educational experience
  • +Broad range of extracurricular and personal development subjects
  • +Emphasis on student well-being and a positive university experience
Cons
  • -Frustrating administrative and management issues.
  • -Outdated and poorly maintained facilities.
  • -Lack of engaging and relevant curriculum.
  • -Unhelpful professors and poor social engagement were major disappointments.
  • -Limited and exclusive extracurriculars restricted student participation.
  • -Limited student life and campus facilities.
  • -Lack of parking and dining options.
  • -Insufficient university expansion for student needs.
  • -Administrative and management issues are a frequent complaint.
  • -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are often cited.
  • -Lack of clear communication and support is a recurring problem.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and technology hinder the learning experience.
  • -Lack of adequate support for students, both academic and personal, is a recurring problem.
  • -Students dislike administrative and management issues.
  • -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are a common complaint.
  • -Lack of resources and limited course availability frustrate students.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
  • -Inconsistent and unclear communication from instructors and the institution is a recurring problem.
Rating summary
What students say

This institution boasts exceptional scores in several key areas, notably achieving perfect marks for **Location**, **Accomodation**, **Internationality**, and **Value**. The **Facilities** also stand out with a strong rating of 4.67. Areas showing slightly less consistent strength, though still positive, include **Professors** and **Student Life**, both rated at 4.33.

This university garners excellent marks for its facilities, achieving a high score of 4.63. Student life and value also stand out with strong ratings around 4.33 and 4.31 respectively. Accommodation is well-regarded at 4.13. However, the university's professors and internationality received the lowest ratings, both scoring 3.94. The location also scored a respectable 4.36.

Review of the university indicates a strong performance in academics, with the highest ratings for **Value** (4.17) and **Professors** (4.13). **Internationality** also scores well at 3.91. Conversely, **Student Life** received the lowest rating (3.48), suggesting this is an area for potential improvement. Other aspects like Facilities, Location, and Accomodation fall within a moderate to good range.

Analyzing the provided ratings reveals several strong points for the institution, particularly in **Student Life (4.25)** and **Location (4.14)**. Professors also received a solid rating of 4. The weakest areas, however, are **Value (3.56)** and **Accomodation (3.63)**, indicating room for improvement in these aspects.

This institution receives excellent marks for its **Facilities** (4.6) and **Professors** (4.6), suggesting high-quality learning environments and academic instruction. **Student Life** (4.4) and **Value** (4.4) also score well. However, **Accomodation** (3.36) presents the lowest-rated aspect, along with **Internationality** (3.6), indicating areas for potential improvement compared to other surveyed categories. **Location** (4.11) falls in the mid-to-high range.

This institution demonstrates significant strengths in faculty quality, receiving a perfect score. However, it faces considerable challenges regarding accommodation, which received the lowest possible rating. Facilities, student life, internationality, and overall value are rated moderately. The location is also identified as a weaker area, with a score of two.

This institution excels in key areas, earning top marks for its facilities, professors, location, and student life, all rated a perfect 5. Value for money also scores highly at 5. However, accommodation presents a significant weakness with a rating of 2, and internationality is a moderate area at 3.

Reviews summary
Highlights

All three reviews are overwhelmingly positive, awarding a perfect 5/5 rating. Students highlight the university's encouragement of creativity and practical, real-world business preparation. The international experience and the balance between theory and practice are also frequently praised.

Nearly all feedback (approximately 94%) is positive, highlighting rigorous academics, expert professors, and good facilities. A small amount of criticism (~6%) notes limited social life and occasional administrative responsiveness issues.

With a 4.09 average rating from 23 reviews, approximately 83% highlight growth and skill development through challenging coursework and formative experiences. A small amount of feedback (~4%) mentions poor student life and lack of campus activities.

With a ~100% positive sentiment, students praise accessible professors, strong community, up-to-date curriculum, and high-quality instruction. Some highlight its Islamic studies excellence and international diversity. No negative feedback was noted.

Reviews are overwhelmingly positive, with an average rating of 4.7/5. Students highlight high-quality education, excellent preparation for the job market with technical and soft skills, and a vibrant, supportive creative community. No negative feedback was recorded.

The sole review for Egyptian Russian University is positive, with an average rating of 4/5 stars. Positive feedback highlights the international focus and challenging courses, though minor administrative issues were noted.

With one review, the university received a perfect 5/5 rating. This feedback was entirely positive, highlighting an appreciation for diverse, non-major subject offerings.

Rating distribution
5★
100%
44%
30%
33%
70%
0%
100%
4★
0%
44%
52%
33%
30%
100%
0%
3★
0%
6%
13%
33%
0%
0%
0%
2★
0%
0%
4%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1★
0%
6%
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