Ateneo de Manila University - ADMU vs The University of Auckland vs Purdue University vs Lagos State University of Science and Technology vs Victoria University of Wellington - VUW
Side-by-side comparison from 226 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Quality education and excellent educators
- +Skill development through diverse opportunities
- +Supportive community and student welfare
- +Passionate, world-class faculty and academic support
- +Quality education, resources, and learning environments
- +Strong career guidance and student backing
- +Strong academic programs and challenging coursework
- +Supportive community and inclusive atmosphere
- +Valuable career opportunities and hands-on learning
- +Dedicated, attentive, and knowledgeable lecturers
- +Emphasis on practical skills and research
- +Conducive and engaging learning environment
- +Helpful and expert faculty
- +Real-world learning and industry connections
- +Welcoming and inclusive environment
- +Supportive staff and accessible resources
- +Relevant coursework and flexible learning options
- +Vibrant campus life and social opportunities
- +Hands-on learning and industry professionals
- +Supportive and collaborative student community
- +Diverse and practical course offerings
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of necessary resources are significant drawbacks.
- -Poor communication and lack of transparency from staff are recurring complaints.
- -Inadequate faculty instruction and feedback quality.
- -Lack of student support services and social integration.
- -High cost not justified by the overall educational value.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and technology hinder learning.
- -Lack of clear communication and support is a recurring problem.
- -Administrative and management issues are a frequent complaint.
- -Outdated facilities and resources are a major disappointment.
- -Lack of communication and support are recurring themes.
- -Stale and uninspired curriculum with outdated materials.
- -Repetitive and uncreative assignments.
- -Lack of valuable learning outcomes.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Facilities and equipment are often outdated and poorly maintained.
- -Communication from staff is frequently unclear or lacking.
- -Administrative and management issues frustrate students.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of resources are a concern.
- -Course content and teaching methods are perceived as unengaging or irrelevant.
This institution garners strong approval across various aspects. Student life stands out as the highest-rated category. Areas of particular strength also include value and professors. Location and accommodation receive solid, above-average scores. Internationality is also well-regarded. Facilities represent the lowest-rated area among the surveyed categories.
This institution garners strong marks in several key areas, with its location and professors receiving the highest ratings. Student life and accommodation, while still respectable, present areas for potential improvement. The university also scores well in terms of internationality and value, indicating a generally positive overall student experience.
This university garners particularly high marks in Internationality, rated at 4.55, and Accomodation, at 4.41. Value and Professors also received strong scores, both above 4.38. Student Life and Facilities are also well-regarded, exceeding 4.20. The Location, however, represents the weakest area, with a score of 3.96.
This institution garners high marks, particularly excelling in **Value** (4.6) and **Student Life** (4.26). Areas like **Facilities** (4.16), **Location** (4.11), **Professors** (4.1), and **Internationality** (4.1) also received strong positive feedback. The lowest-rated aspect is **Accomodation**, which stands at 3.59.
This institution demonstrates strong performance in several key areas, with the highest ratings awarded to its Professors (4.26), Internationality (4.24), and Facilities (4.22). Value for money also scores well at 4.14. Conversely, the Location (3.96) and Accomodation (3.99) received the lowest scores, suggesting areas for potential improvement. Student Life is rated moderately well at 4.07.
An evaluation of the university reveals generally positive feedback, with standout scores for Facilities and Professors, both receiving high marks. Location and Internationality also perform well. Student Life emerged as the area with the lowest rating, while Accomodation and Value received solid scores, indicating a generally favorable university experience.
Overall, this institution receives strong marks, particularly for its **value**, which is the highest-rated aspect. **Location** and **Professors** also score very well. The primary area for improvement seems to be **Accomodation**, where ratings are noticeably lower compared to other categories. Other factors like Facilities, Student Life, and Internationality are all rated positively and consistently.
Nearly all reviews are positive, praising quality education and skill development opportunities. Students appreciate the supportive community and enriching experiences. No negative feedback was recorded.
Approximately 95% of reviews are positive, citing passionate lecturers, quality education, and ample resources. A small percentage of negative feedback mentions limited lecturer availability and insufficient feedback on assignments.
Approximately 97% of reviews are positive, highlighting strong academics, career opportunities, and a welcoming community. No negative feedback was reported.
With 4.35/5 stars from 20 reviews, ~90% are positive, highlighting excellent, attentive lecturers and a conducive, green environment. Practical skills and research are also frequently praised. There's no negative feedback in the provided samples.
Of 74 reviews, ~99% are positive, highlighting helpful and expert staff, enjoyable courses, and real-world impact. A single negative review mentioned a stale curriculum and repetitive assignments.
With 100% positive feedback and an average rating of 4.42/5, students praise supportive staff, relevant coursework, and flexible learning options. The campus environment and social opportunities are also frequently highlighted.
Students highly praise the university, noting a supportive atmosphere, hands-on learning, and diverse program offerings. Friendly student interactions and helpful staff are frequently mentioned. No negative feedback was reported.
Ateneo is a great place to grow and thrive, the community is welcoming and friendly, and the subjects taught, no matter what you are majoring in, are essential to a student's development. The educators are also well-experienced.
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
I love the university because I learnt a lot in the prestigious institution,I graduated with HND in mass communication in 2018 and since then I have being making use of things I learnt. I will recommend to any one over and over again
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show