Université du Québec à Montréal - UQAM vs Concordia University vs École de technologie supérieure - ETS vs Cestar College of Business, Health & Technology vs Herzing College
Side-by-side comparison from 177 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Approachable and qualified professors with effective teaching methods.
- +Practical, career-focused learning and development of useful skills.
- +Strong student support and integration for international students.
- +Welcoming and supportive faculty
- +Practical and relevant programs
- +Positive and engaging campus environment
- +Lack of English support for international students
- +Limited scholarship opportunities for non-French speakers
- +Difficulty finding part-time employment
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- +Industry-active instructors and professional preparation
- +Supportive and welcoming atmosphere
- +Emphasis on practical, project-based learning
- -Lack of support and poor communication from the university.
- -Poor teaching quality and difficult-to-understand instructors are a recurring issue.
- -Students dislike the outdated and uncomfortable facilities.
- -Exam design and content quality, including errors and excessive difficulty, are a significant concern.
- -Administrative and management issues are a significant problem.
- -Outdated facilities and lack of necessary resources are a common complaint.
- -The quality and relevance of the curriculum are often criticized.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Facilities are frequently described as outdated and in poor condition.
- -Teaching quality and curriculum relevance are inconsistent and often disappointing.
Among surveyed categories, this institution excels in **Location** with a rating of 4.6, followed closely by **Professors** at 4.28 and **Student Life** at 4.24. The **Value** for money emerges as the comparatively weaker area, scoring 3.83. Ratings for Facilities, Accomodation, and Internationality are all solid, falling between 3.9 and 4.1.
This university garners its highest marks in **Internationality (4.53)** and **Location (4.50)**, indicating these are significant strengths. Student life and value are also well-regarded, both scoring above 4.2. The weakest area is **Accomodation**, receiving a rating of 3.92, suggesting room for improvement. Professors and facilities are rated competently around the 4.1 mark.
A notable strength of this institution is its prime **Location**, scoring a high 4.5. Conversely, **Student Life** presents a significant area for improvement, with a low rating of 1.5. The university also received solid ratings in **Professors** and **Value** (both 3.5), with **Facilities** and **Accomodation** averaging 3. **Internationality** sits in the middle at 2.5.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
This institution demonstrates exceptional strengths in its **Value** (4.67) and **Facilities** (4.47), indicating high satisfaction in these key areas. **Accomodation** (4.33) and **Student Life** (4.20) also received positive scores. However, the university's **Location** (3.13) stands out as a comparatively weaker aspect, with **Internationality** (3.87) also receiving a moderate rating.
With a 4.32 average rating, nearly all (~95%) of 19 reviews are positive. Students praise approachable, qualified professors and enjoyable, practical teaching methods. One review noted a lack of support.
With ~90% positive feedback and an average rating of 4.28/5, students praise the friendly, inclusive, and entrepreneurial campus environment. A small percentage of negative reviews mention issues with teaching quality and exam design.
With an average rating of 4/5 from two reviews, positive feedback comprises approximately 50% of the sentiment. Students highlight French language requirements and inflation as challenges, while one positive review commends the university for not requiring French for graduate students.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
With a 4.4/5 average rating from 15 reviews, ~93% are positive. Students praise quality teaching from industry professionals and a supportive, welcoming atmosphere. The heavy workload and project-focused curriculum prepare them well for professional careers.
After considering UQAM for my studies, I ultimately decided against it due to the lack of support I experienced. While the university's programs seemed promising, the insufficient support infrastructure made me hesitant to commit. The limited communication channels and slow response times left me feeling uncertain about my ability to navigate challenges effectively. Ultimately, I chose to pursue my education elsewhere, where I felt confident in the support system provided.
Concordia University's linguistics program is a well-rounded introduction to the field of study for any aspiring linguist. The required courses allow students to browse all areas of the field, ranging from syntax to historical linguistics. Once you find your niche within the program, you can pick and choose what to learn from the more advanced courses. My favorite course during my time in the program was a special topics class on Old Egyptian. Mark Hale, the incredible professor who taught the course, inspired my passion for classical languages. My only critique of the program is the lack of advertised resources pertaining to post-graduate endeavors in the field. More information shared on graduate studies might have been helpful early on in the program. In conclusion, Concordia University is a great institution as long as you're passionate about your studies and well-engaged in your program.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
