Royal Institute of Technology - KTH vs University of Gothenburg vs Umea University - UMU vs Linnaeus University - LNU vs Stockholm Business School
Side-by-side comparison from 49 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +World-class facilities and inspiring study atmosphere
- +Strong academic programs with practical application and flexibility
- +Engaging and approachable instructors
- +Supportive and knowledgeable faculty
- +Well-equipped research environments and facilities
- +Interesting and well-organized programs
- +Welcoming international community
- +Positive professor interactions
- +Well-structured campus environment
- +Supportive and helpful professors and staff.
- +Good facilities and diverse academic programs.
- +Welcoming international environment and convenient resources.
- +Excellent teaching quality and global student community
- +Broadened horizons and expanded knowledge in business and political science
- +Abundant working opportunities to offset living costs
Nothing to show
- +Industry-focused, unique programs with international connections.
- +Excellent, knowledgeable professors with high student expectations.
- -Administrative & management issues frustrate students.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are common complaints.
- -Lack of resources and support hinder learning.
- -Outdated facilities and insufficient resources are a persistent problem.
- -Lack of clear communication and organizational issues from the administration frustrate students.
- -Course content and teaching quality are often seen as inadequate or uninspiring.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and insufficient resources hinder learning.
- -Lack of clear communication and support from instructors is a problem.
- -Administrative and management issues, particularly concerning international student affairs.
- -Mediocre teaching quality with limited value beyond independent learning.
- -Lack of industry connections and career support.
- -administrative & management issues
- -outdated facilities
- -lack of engagement
Nothing to show
- -Excessive administrative and management issues create unnecessary hurdles.
- -Outdated facilities and insufficient resources hinder learning.
- -Lack of clear communication and inconsistent policies lead to frustration.
Exceptional marks were awarded in several key areas, notably a perfect score for **Internationality**. **Facilities** and **Value** also received very high ratings. The university performs well across **Student Life** and **Accomodation**, with solid scores for **Professors** and **Location**. While no area received a low rating, **Location** represents the comparatively weakest aspect among the surveyed categories.
This institution garners exceptional marks for its location, boasting a rating of 4.86. Facilities and internationality are also highly regarded, both scoring 4.71. Professors receive a solid 4.57, and the overall value is rated at 4.29. Student life scores a respectable 4. The weakest area by a significant margin is accommodation, with a score of just 2.86.
This institution excels in its internationality, receiving a perfect score of 5. Academics and facilities are also highly regarded, both earning a 4. Conversely, accommodation presents the most significant area for improvement, with a rating of 2. Student life and overall value are also positively rated at 4. The location receives a moderate score of 3.
Academic and student life aspects of the university received high marks. The institution particularly excelled in Internationality (4.27) and Student Life (4.23), reflecting a vibrant and globally-connected campus environment. Facilities (4.16) and Professors (4.12) also garnered positive feedback. Conversely, Value (3.81) and Location (3.83) were the lowest-rated categories, suggesting areas for potential improvement. Accommodations also scored moderately (3.92).
This institution shines with perfect scores in Facilities, Professors, Location, and Internationality. Student Life also receives a strong endorsement. However, Accomodation and Value for money present areas for potential improvement, indicated by their lower ratings compared to other aspects of the university experience.
Nothing to show
With overwhelmingly positive feedback, this institution excels particularly in its **professors, location, internationality, and value, all receiving perfect scores**. Its **facilities and accommodation are also highly regarded**, earning a strong 4 out of 5. The primary area for improvement appears to be **student life**, which, while still good, is rated slightly lower at 3.
All 12 reviews are positive, averaging 4.75/5. Students praise world-class research facilities, inclusive culture, and opportunities for theory-practice integration. Friendly, engaging instructors and diverse, flexible courses are also highlighted.
With a 4.71/5 average rating from 7 reviews, students report overwhelmingly positive experiences, highlighting exceptional faculty and enriching academic environments. No negative feedback was recorded.
The sole review is positive, rating 4/5. Students praise the university's nice structure and professors, noting a significant international student presence. Minor areas for improvement were mentioned in the chemistry department.
About 80% of reviews are positive, highlighting supportive professors, a welcoming atmosphere, and good facilities. A small portion (~7%) of negative feedback points to issues with teaching quality and administrative support.
This university garners a 4/5 average rating, with 100% of feedback being positive. Students praise exceptional teaching quality and opportunities for personal and academic growth.
Nothing to show
This university garners an average rating of 4/5, with 100% of feedback being positive. Students highlight excellent professors and unique, industry-collaborative programs.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Rating: ★★☆☆☆ (2/5 — one extra star because tuition was free) I studied Software Technology at Linnaeus University between 2022 and 2025. In my experience, the quality of teaching was mediocre. I quickly stopped attending lectures because most added little beyond what I could learn independently. Industry connections were almost nonexistent: no internship support, no company-led workshops, no hackathons, and no clear pathways into the tech sector. The only recurring event was the annual job fair, but many representatives seemed unsure what they were seeking; most offered no internships or projects and there was rarely any follow-up, so it felt more promotional than student-focused. Entrepreneurship support was minimal. When we started a student project, there was no funding, no events, no network, and very limited guidance — essentially just one counsellor providing basic advice. Faculty culture felt very political and unresponsive to student feedback. When issues were raised formally, they were often dismissed, though quiet changes were occasionally made later. I personally experienced hostile and dismissive behaviour from a lecturer in the tech faculty, which I reported to the Student Union in 2024 along with other classmates. The case was closed in the lecturer’s favour, yet the university quietly implemented some of the changes we had requested. The complaint process left me uncertain about its independence, and I believe there’s a need for more transparent procedures and external oversight. On the positive side, there are a few excellent professors who genuinely care about their students and involve them in research, but they are a small minority and you have to actively seek them out. Overall, I’m deeply disappointed with the university’s approach to education and student development. I feel I wasted three years of potential growth and opportunity here. Prospective students should do thorough research and speak directly with current students before enrolling.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
