Stockholm University - SU vs Royal Institute of Technology - KTH vs Karolinska Institute - KI vs Linnaeus University - LNU vs Jönköping University - JU
Side-by-side comparison from 89 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Inspiring and knowledgeable professors
- +Engaging and flexible course content
- +Supportive campus environment
- +World-class facilities and inspiring study atmosphere
- +Strong academic programs with practical application and flexibility
- +Engaging and approachable instructors
- +Student-centered approach and mentorship
- +International environment and diverse teaching staff
- +High-quality research and opportunities for engagement
- +Supportive and helpful professors and staff.
- +Good facilities and diverse academic programs.
- +Welcoming international environment and convenient resources.
- +International and diverse student body
- +Practical, hands-on learning with real-world projects
- +Supportive environment with inspiring teachers
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- -Poor administrative and management responsiveness to student issues.
- -Lack of adequate support for academic and personal conflicts.
- -Administrative & management issues frustrate students.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are common complaints.
- -Lack of resources and support hinder learning.
- -Lack of teacher and staff investment.
- -Inefficient and repetitive course content.
- -Poor support for independent thesis work.
- -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.
- -Poor academic quality and unhelpful faculty.
- -High tuition costs are not justified by the educational experience.
- -Significant challenges with job prospects and societal inclusion for immigrants due to racism.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Perceived strengths of this institution lie with its professors, receiving a strong rating of 4.24. Value and facilities also scored well, both above 4.1. Conversely, the location was the least favorably rated category at 3.77. Student life and accommodation are rated at a solid 4 and 3.85 respectively.
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 excels in several key areas, most notably its **Internationality**, receiving a perfect score. **Location** is another strong point, rated 4.8. However, **Student Life** appears to be the weakest area, scoring 3.2, with **Accomodation** also rating comparatively lower at 3.6. Other aspects like Facilities, Professors, and Value fall within a solid mid-to-high range.
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 generally receives positive feedback, with particular strengths in **internationality (4.2)**, **value (4.1)**, and **professors (4)**, alongside excellent **facilities** and **student life**. Accommodation is the comparatively weakest area, scoring **3.4**. The location also received a slightly lower, though still respectable, rating.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
With an average rating of 4.11/5, ~96% of reviews are positive, praising approachable and knowledgeable professors, engaging teaching, and good campus life. A small percentage of negative feedback exists.
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 an average rating of 4.14/5, ~86% of reviews are positive, praising student-centered learning, international diversity, and quality facilities. A small portion (~14%) of feedback notes uninvested teachers and course organization issues.
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.
With an average rating of 4.21/5, ~93% of reviews are positive, highlighting a highly international environment, practical learning, and student life. One ~7% review found the study difficulty low.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
SU is a quite vibrant school and I am quite satisfied so far. I believed my programme can help unlock multiple career prospects in the future, The professors are kind and always willing to provide assistance.
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
