Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena vs De Montfort University - DMU vs Temple University vs Dallas Baptist University vs Qassim University
Side-by-side comparison from 143 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Supportive professors and inclusive environment
- +Abundant resources and welcoming atmosphere
- +Excellent location and appealing surroundings
- +Engaging and passionate lecturers
- +Strong academic quality and learning experiences
- +Excellent facilities and community environment
- +Welcoming atmosphere, friendly students, and supportive community.
- +Excellent professors, engaging teaching, and valuable academic programs.
- +Good facilities, nice campus, and ample social and extracurricular activities.
- +Supportive professors and strong community
- +Positive life-changing academic experience
- +Christ-centered education with good study environment
Nothing to show
- +Supportive and experienced professors
- +Valuable knowledge and experience sharing
- +Personalized guidance on graduation projects
Nothing to show
- -Terrible teachers and lack of continuous evaluation.
- -Few electives and limited specialization options.
- -Limited Erasmus destinations and few international students.
- -Ineffective teaching and poor feedback processes.
- -Administrative and management issues.
- -Substandard facilities.
- -Administrative and management issues frustrate students.
- -Outdated facilities and equipment are a common complaint.
- -Lack of resources and poor communication are significant concerns.
- -Lack of adequate administrative support and unclear communication.
- -Outdated facilities and insufficient resources.
- -Overcrowded classrooms and large class sizes.
Nothing to show
- -Outdated facilities and lack of resources are frequently cited issues.
- -Administrative and management problems, including poor communication, cause frustration.
- -The curriculum is perceived as outdated and not well-aligned with current industry needs.
Nothing to show
Rankings for this institution reveal a mixed bag of strengths and weaknesses. The university excels in its **location** and **value for money**, both receiving a strong 4.5 rating. **Student life** and **internationality** also score well at 3.75. However, **professors** emerge as the weakest area with a rating of 2.5, while **facilities** are rated moderately at 3.25. **Accommodations** are a solid performer at 4.
With strong performance in **location** (4.34) and **student life** (4.33), this university garners high marks in several key areas. Facilities (4.32) and internationality (4.29) also received favorable scores. The university's **professors** represent its lowest-rated category at 4.07, though accommodation and value scored similarly at 4.12.
This institution receives excellent marks, with its strongest areas being **Internationality** (4.08) and **Value** (4.12). Professors are also highly regarded (4.15), and Student Life garners a solid rating (4.03). The weakest, though still respectable, area is **Accomodation** (3.84). Facilities (3.87) and Location (3.98) also received good scores.
The university demonstrates exceptional performance in its facilities and internationality, both receiving a perfect score of 5. Professors, location, student life, accommodation, and value also score highly, all at 4.5. This indicates a well-rounded institution with particular strengths in global engagement and campus resources. The highest-rated aspects are facilities and internationality, while all other categories are consistently strong.
Nothing to show
This institution garners exceptional ratings across all surveyed categories, achieving a perfect score of 5 out of 5 in every area. Its strengths are universally distributed, with no single aspect standing out as significantly stronger or weaker than the others. The university excels uniformly in its facilities, professors, location, student life, accommodation, internationality, and perceived value.
Nothing to show
With an average rating of 3.92/5, ~85% of reviews are positive, highlighting ease of integration, professor professionalism, and good facilities. A small portion (~7.7%) of feedback notes poor teaching and limited course offerings.
Around 97% of reviews are positive, praising academic quality, passionate professors, and excellent facilities. A small percentage (3%) of negative feedback mentioned issues with foundation year credits and unsupportive teaching staff.
With ~97% positive sentiment, reviewers praise Temple University's vibrant atmosphere, supportive community, and top-notch facilities. Smaller classes and excellent support systems enhance the academic experience. There were no negative reviews.
With an average rating of 4.5/5, the university receives overwhelmingly positive feedback. Students highlight excellent professors, a supportive community, and Christ-centered education as key strengths. There are no negative reviews to report.
Nothing to show
The sole review is positive, rating the university 4 out of 5 stars. This feedback highlights cooperative and experienced professors who support students, particularly with graduation projects. Negative feedback is approximately 0%.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Regrettably, I cannot offer a recommendation for Comic and Concept art due to the following reasons: Firstly, the accessibility of the teachers proved to be quite challenging as they were unresponsive to multiple email attempts throughout the entire year. Moreover, the feedback provided was often overly vague and lacked constructive criticism, occasionally even being unnecessarily harsh. In some instances, no feedback was given at all. Submitting work was frequently an arduous task, as specific file formats were required that were incompatible with the content, such as demanding PDFs for documents that couldn't be formatted accordingly and were subsequently rejected. Furthermore, the lessons themselves were lacking in quality. Some lecturers would digress into unrelated topics, consuming valuable class time. The teaching approach was disappointingly minimal, with students being assigned tasks without any guidance or instructional techniques provided. If feedback was given, it was generally unhelpfully brief, merely stating that improvements were needed. The learning materials provided during the lessons were also subpar. Often, we were presented with pre-recorded 10-minute videos and expected to navigate our own way through the material. This lack of effort on the part of the lecturers was unfair and disheartening, making it challenging for students to invest their own efforts. The workload imposed on students was excessive and overwhelming, leading to the majority falling behind. Consequently, many students experienced a negative impact on their mental well-being, ultimately resulting in some dropping out. Additionally, the university failed to provide necessary information about the course, leaving students to rely on each other for essential details. Timetables and key information, including student cards, were significantly delayed without any valid explanation. Technological tools such as email, Blackboard, Teams, and attendance systems frequently malfunctioned, causing further frustration and hindrance to the learning experience. Tragically, instances of bullying were pervasive both within the classroom and online, including incidents targeting vulnerable individuals. Despite reporting these matters to the course leader, no action could be taken without the full names of the involved students, which was a requirement I couldn't fulfill. Regrettably, when I brought these concerns to the attention of the class representatives, they chose to ignore my pleas for assistance. Lastly, living in Leicester City proved to be unsafe, with prevalent cases of sexual harassment, homophobic and transphobic threats. Disturbingly, both the police and the university failed to take any meaningful action in response to these issues.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
