London School of Economics and Political Science - LSE vs University of Leicester vs De Montfort University - DMU vs EM Normandie - EM Normandie vs University of Loughborough
Side-by-side comparison from 561 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Expert, approachable faculty and high-quality teaching
- +Strong career preparation and marketable skills development
- +Excellent facilities and a supportive learning environment
- +Strong academics and supportive faculty
- +Welcoming and diverse student community
- +Affordable and convenient location
- +Engaging professors with subject passion and practical teaching
- +Strong academic quality and research opportunities
- +Supportive learning environment with industry connections and extracurriculars
- +Practical, industry-relevant courses and inspiring professors
- +Rich international environment and diverse student body
- +Personal and professional development opportunities
- +Strong academic programs with real-world relevance and expert faculty
- +Vibrant campus life with diverse and collaborative community
- +Excellent enterprise support and focus on innovation
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
- -Poor teaching quality and unclear learning expectations.
- -Lack of structure and significant workload.
- -Disappointing careers service and limited social life.
- -Exam issues like insufficient time and difficulty.
- -Poor academic quality and lack of progression to higher education.
- -Unresponsive and unhelpful faculty, with vague or harsh feedback.
- -Technical issues with submitting work.
- -Financial concerns and perceived low educational value.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Outdated facilities and lack of resources hinder learning.
- -Inconsistent teaching quality and insufficient support are prevalent concerns.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
This institution demonstrates remarkable strengths in its **Internationality** and **Location**, both receiving scores nearing 4.8. **Professors** also score highly at 4.26. Conversely, **Student Life** is the lowest-rated area, with a score of 3.64, followed by **Accomodation** at 3.79. Other aspects like Facilities and Value fall within a solid mid-range.
Student life and location emerge as the university's strongest attributes, both receiving ratings above 4.3. Internationality and facilities also score highly, near 4.3 and 4.29 respectively. Professors and overall value are rated well, exceeding 4.2 and 4.0 respectively. The weakest area identified is accommodation, with a rating of 3.77.
With a generally positive evaluation, this university excels in its **Location** (4.35) and **Student Life** (4.33). **Facilities** also received a high score (4.32), closely followed by **Internationality** (4.30). While **Accomodation** (4.13) and **Value** (4.12) are still solid, **Professors** (4.07) represent the lowest-rated aspect among the surveyed categories.
This institution garners excellent marks in several key areas. Facilities, Professors, Internationality, and Value all received high scores of 4.125. Student Life and Accommodations are rated lower, at 3.625 and approximately 3.57 respectively, indicating these are areas with more room for improvement compared to its other strengths. The Location score sits at 3.75.
Overall, the university scores well across multiple categories. Its strongest area is **Facilities**, boasting an impressive 4.69 average. **Student Life** and **Value** also received high marks, both exceeding 4.3. The lowest-rated aspect is **Location** at 4.0, while other areas like Professors, Accomodation, and Internationality remain solid with scores above 4.2.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nearly 74% of reviews are positive, highlighting a supportive environment, knowledgeable faculty, and excellent facilities. A small percentage (around 3.4%) mention issues like poor lecturing, inconsistent grading, and lack of social life.
With a 4.24 average rating, ~85% of reviews are positive, highlighting strong academics, affordable and safe city location, and good student support. A small minority (~1.2%) noted issues with exam time constraints.
~82% of reviews are positive, highlighting excellent academic quality, engaging professors, and great facilities. A small amount of negative feedback, around 3%, mentions challenges with accessibility and feedback quality for some courses.
Most reviews praise the inspiring professors, practical learning, and international environment, contributing to a ~74% positive sentiment. One review expressed dissatisfaction, calling it a money-making scheme with mediocre teaching.
With a ~95% positive sentiment, reviews highlight diverse courses, work experience opportunities, and a vibrant campus. Students appreciate the supportive, collaborative atmosphere and lack of a strong drinking culture. No negative feedback was recorded.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
LSE is a great place to create life-long connections and friends. There's a certain sense of community that is special to the university. The staff are hands-on and approachable. The facilities are modern and well-equipped.
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
