Universidad Sergio Arboleda vs Instituto Superior Mariano Moreno - ISMM vs Politecnico Grancolombiano - PGC vs Corporación Universitaria Minuto de Dios - UNIMINUTO vs Servicio Nacional de Aprendizaje - SENA

Side-by-side comparison from 31 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Politecnico Grancolombiano - PGC (4.90)
Universidad Sergio Arboleda: wins 1/7 categories
Instituto Superior Mariano Moreno - ISMM: wins 0/7 categories
Politecnico Grancolombiano - PGC: wins 2/7 categories
Corporación Universitaria Minuto de Dios - UNIMINUTO: wins 0/7 categories
Servicio Nacional de Aprendizaje - SENA: wins 1/7 categories
Fundación Universitaria Konrad Lorenz - KonradLorenz: wins 3/7 categories
Asociación Colombiana de Facultades de Administración - ASCOLFA: wins 0/7 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Industrial Engineering
Best programme: Computer Engineering
Best programme: Administration
Best programme: Bachelor of Tourism Management
Best programme: Psychology
Category ratings
Facilities
4.11
Not rated
4.60
4.20
4.86
Win
4.00
Not rated
Location
4.56
Not rated
4.00
3.80
4.43
5.00
Win
Not rated
Professors
4.00
Not rated
4.67
Win
4.17
4.57
4.00
Not rated
Internationality
4.33
Not rated
4.67
Win
3.00
3.29
3.00
Not rated
Student life
4.44
Win
Not rated
4.20
4.20
4.29
4.00
Not rated
Value
4.22
Not rated
4.17
4.50
4.71
5.00
Win
Not rated
Accommodation
3.89
Not rated
4.00
3.00
4.17
5.00
Win
Not rated
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +Passionate professors and vibrant learning environment
  • +Modern facilities and academic opportunities
  • +Strong career support and personal development

Nothing to show

  • +High academic quality and standards
  • +Flexible study options and time management
  • +Committed and qualified professors
  • +Accessible and opportunity-focused education for diverse backgrounds
  • +Engaging and interactive learning with skilled, supportive professors
  • +Practical programs promoting personal and professional growth
  • +Innovative and practical programs with real-world application
  • +Supportive and experienced instructors
  • +Valuable facilities and career opportunities
  • +Practical, relevant assignments and knowledgeable professors.
  • +Strong psychology program.

Nothing to show

Cons
  • -Lack of academic rigor and unchallenging coursework.

Nothing to show

  • -Excessive administrative burdens and ineffective management.
  • -Outdated facilities and lack of modern resources.
  • -Poor communication and unsupportive faculty.
  • -Poor syllabus quality and outdated academic programs are disappointing.
  • -There are significant administrative and management issues present.
  • -Administrative and management issues are a significant source of frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources are consistently criticized.
  • -Course content and teaching quality are often deemed inadequate.
  • -Administrative & management issues frustrate students.
  • -Outdated facilities hinder learning and comfort.
  • -Lack of transparency and communication causes dissatisfaction.

Nothing to show

Rating summary
What students say

This institution demonstrates notable strengths in its **location**, receiving a high rating of 4.56, and in its **student life**, scoring 4.44. **Facilities** also fare well with a rating of 4.11. Conversely, the **accommodation** category shows the lowest score at 3.89, indicating it as a potential area for improvement. Ratings for professors, internationality, and value fall within a solid mid-range.

Nothing to show

This institution demonstrates considerable strengths, particularly in its **Facilities** and **Internationality**, both scoring an impressive 4.66. **Professors** also receive high marks. Conversely, **Location** and **Accomodation** are the areas with the lowest scores, at 4. These ratings suggest a well-regarded university with some room for improvement in specific logistical aspects.

This institution shines particularly in its value for money, boasting a 4.5 rating. Facilities and student life also received strong marks at 4.2, closely followed by professors at 4.17. However, accommodation and internationality represent areas for potential improvement, both scoring a 3. Location, while decent at 3.8, is not a standout feature compared to the university's strengths.

With a robust showing in several key areas, this university excels in its **Facilities**, earning a near-perfect score. **Value** and **Professors** also received commendably high marks. Conversely, **Internationality** stands out as the lowest-rated aspect. While **Student Life** and **Accomodation** received solid scores, they represent areas with room for growth when compared to the university's strongest attributes.

With excellent scores in accommodation and location, this institution shines. Its facilities, professors, and student life also received positive marks. However, its internationality received a more moderate rating, representing the weakest area. Overall, the university offers strong value.

Nothing to show

Reviews summary
Highlights

About 56% of reviews are positive, highlighting academic opportunities, professors, and growth. A small portion (11.1%) of negative feedback mentions a lack of academic challenge and lazy professors.

Nothing to show

All 7 reviews are positive, with an average rating of 4.86/5. Students praise the university's high academic quality, committed professors, flexible study options, and practical learning model.

With 5 positive reviews (~63%) and 1 negative (~12.5%), students highlight accessible education and practical programs. Some appreciate teacher quality and learning technology, while one found syllabus issues in a specific program.

Reviews are highly positive, with an average rating of 4.43/5. Students praise excellent facilities, well-maintained equipment, and innovative programs. Technical and soft skills development, along with valuable professor support, are frequently mentioned.

With one review averaging 4/5 stars, feedback is overwhelmingly positive (~100%). Students highlight great professors and practical assignments, though infrastructure issues were noted.

Nothing to show

Rating distribution
5★
11%
0%
86%
43%
43%
0%
0%
4★
44%
0%
14%
29%
57%
100%
0%
3★
33%
0%
0%
29%
0%
0%
0%
2★
11%
0%
0%
14%
0%
0%
0%
1★
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our Privacy Policy for more details.
Close