Babes-Bolyai University - UBB vs Romanian-American University vs Faculty of Economics and Business Administration - FSEGA vs University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj-Napoca vs Technical University of Cluj-Napoca - UTCN
Side-by-side comparison from 71 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Diverse academic programs and international opportunities
- +Engaging and knowledgeable professors
- +Modern facilities and a vibrant social atmosphere
- +Excellent, knowledgeable, and approachable professors.
- +Practical and well-structured courses with real-world application.
- +Numerous career, internship, and international exchange opportunities.
- +Supportive and accessible professors
- +Relevant and enriching programmes
- +Opportunities for personal growth and networking
- +Strong career preparation and skill development opportunities.
- +Renowned reputation and good research facilities.
- +Supportive learning environment with helpful staff.
- +Practical learning with modern labs and relevant company involvement
- +Friendly and supportive staff, students, and active student organizations
- +Lively campus, diverse programs, and well-located facilities
Nothing to show
- +Passionate professors and clear explanations
- +Practical application and industry relevance
- +Effort-based learning and supplemental resources
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and technology are a major drawback.
- -Communication and support from staff are often inadequate.
- -Constant and disruptive construction noise negatively impacts sleep and living conditions.
- -Administrative & management issues are a frequent source of frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and insufficient resources are commonly cited.
- -Inconsistent or unengaging teaching quality impacts learning.
- -Frustrating administrative processes and unresponsive management.
- -Outdated or poorly maintained facilities and resources.
- -Lack of clear communication and support from instructors.
- -Poor and inconsistent communication channels lead to missed information.
- -Lack of practical application and outdated teaching methods frustrate students.
- -Limited student engagement and irrelevant theoretical focus hinder academic growth.
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance create a difficult learning environment.
- -Lack of instructor engagement and irrelevant course material are common complaints.
Performance metrics reveal a university with notable strengths in key areas. Location and student life are highly rated at 4.46 and 4.33 respectively, with value also scoring well at 4.23. Professors are also highly regarded at 4.14. The weakest areas identified are accommodations, rated at 3.50, and internationality at 3.75. Facilities received a rating of 3.88.
This institution demonstrates a well-rounded performance, with **Internationality** standing out as its strongest attribute. Students also rated **Professors** highly. Areas for potential improvement include **Location** and **Accomodation**, which received the lowest scores. Other aspects like Facilities, Student Life, and Value fall within a solid mid-range.
This university garners exceptionally high marks in several key areas, notably Facilities, Location, and Value, all receiving ratings above 4.8. Student Life and Accommodation also score well, with 4.5 and 4.2 respectively. Professors are rated a solid 4. The weakest area appears to be Internationality, which at 3.83 is the lowest score among the surveyed categories.
This university scores exceptionally well, with perfect marks for Location, Student Life, and Internationality. Facilities, Professors, and Accommodations are also highly rated at 4.33. Value stands out as another strength at 4.67. The weakest area, though still strong, is Facilities, Professors, and Accommodations, which all received a 4.33 rating.
Excellent ratings were observed for this university, particularly in **Location** (4.41) and **Student Life** (4.36). **Value** also scored well at 3.86. Conversely, **Internationality** emerged as the weakest area with a rating of 3.23. Ratings for Facilities, Professors, and Accommodations were all in the mid-range, around 3.6.
Nothing to show
Across various metrics, this institution demonstrates impressive strengths, particularly in its **professors (5/5)** and **internationality (5/5)**, along with excellent **value (5/5)**. Facilities, location, and accommodation also receive solid ratings of 4/5. The area with the lowest score is **student life (3/5)**, suggesting room for improvement in that aspect of the university experience.
University reviews highlight diverse programs (~74%), well-trained and engaging professors encouraging critical thinking, and excellent international collaboration opportunities. Facilities are modern and well-maintained, with a positive academic and social experience.
With an average rating of 4.17/5, ~83% of reviews are positive. Students praise knowledgeable and approachable professors, well-structured curricula, and interactive teaching methods. One negative review mentioned disruptive drilling noise.
With ~100% positive feedback, students highlight great teachers, modern facilities, and strong communication. They also praise student organizations and a supportive campus atmosphere. No negative reviews were provided.
With an average rating of 4.33/5, reviews are overwhelmingly positive (~67%). Students highlight strong reputation, research, and career preparation. Some mention outdated teaching styles, but note recent improvements.
Approximately 74% of reviews are positive, highlighting beautiful campuses, friendly staff and students, and practical learning experiences. About 18% of feedback is negative, citing issues with communication and teaching methods.
Nothing to show
With an average rating of 4/5 and no negative feedback, this university garners highly positive reviews. Students praise the solid program foundation, passionate professors, and relevant curriculum. Practical work is available, encouraging self-driven skill development.
As a student you have high expectations of the teachers - they should be role models and inspire you to learn, be active and have progress. There are some teachers that are the opposite: full of themselves, over-dressed and tona of make-up, looking from somewhere above to all the mortal people that are not like them. Ms Ciot is one of them and students see that she acts superior, she speaks superior and we don't need this. No matter if you are rich or poor, smart or not so smart - you cannot have this attitude - she needs to change or the management needs to take action. We think these people should not be allowed to teach to students - as the country does not need more Ms Ciot Gabriela for sure. Other than this - I feel I can learn - great university and great atmosphere - great covid policy enjoyed it even during hard times - thanks!
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
A lot of one's academic achievements come down to personal effort and interest in the subjects being taught. A university is supposed to facilitate that process, however this university falls short in a few areas: - Communication Channels: A major drawback of the university is its heavy reliance on the website announcement board for communication, rendering student email addresses practically redundant. - Class Recording Policy: During the pandemic, the ability for students to record classes proved highly beneficial for exam preparation. However, the university's lack of clear rules regarding class recording indicates a missed opportunity for a simple and valuable solution. Implementing guidelines for recording lectures would greatly enhance the learning experience for students. - Support for International Students: Regrettably, the university falls short of providing adequate support for international students. During my time as a student, our series consisted of approximately 10 international students, but since the lectures were not conducted in English, they faced a lot of difficulties in understanding the course material, resulting in all of them dropping out within the first semester. - Professionalism of Staff: The use of personal email addresses by staff members for official communication is unprofessional and jeopardizes the university's reputation. Requiring the use of official email accounts would enhance professionalism and secure communication channels. - Security Risks and Data Protection: The university's internal website poses significant security risks, potentially compromising students' personal data. Addressing these concerns through robust security measures and data protection protocols is crucial for safeguarding student privacy. This being said, there are also areas where the university has shown progress: - Quality of Teaching: The majority of teachers at the Technical University of Cluj-Napoca demonstrate dedication and passion for their subjects. While exceptions exist, the overall commitment of the teaching staff positively contributes to the learning experience. - Investment in Infrastructure: The university's investment in new laboratory buildings and infrastructure improvements is commendable. These efforts enhance the learning environment and provide students with valuable research opportunities.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
