Université de Nantes vs SKEMA Business School vs EDHEC Business School vs Ecole Centrale de Nantes vs IMT Atlantique – Graduate Engineering School
Side-by-side comparison from 226 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Diverse course options and competent instructors
- +Abundant extracurricular activities and social events
- +Strong industry reputation and career opportunities
- +strong international exposure & opportunities
- +practical and relevant program curriculum & skills
- +valuable alumni network & career support
- +Rigorous academic and practical preparation for careers
- +Strong alumni network and career services support
- +International exposure and diverse student body
- +Strong engineering curriculum and practical application focus.
- +Knowledgeable, supportive, and approachable professors.
- +Excellent hands-on learning opportunities and advanced facilities.
- +Strong French language support
- +Rigorous academic programs
- +Practical, group-focused learning and professional initiation.
- +High-quality teaching and supportive faculty mentorship.
- +Strong professional network and vibrant student life.
- +Modern facilities and accessibility
- +Strong student associations, especially technical ones
- +Well-regarded programmes
- -Students dislike the administrative and management issues.
- -Outdated facilities and poor upkeep are frequently mentioned.
- -The curriculum and teaching quality are sources of dissatisfaction.
- -Administrative and management issues, including poor communication and disorganization.
- -Perceived focus on profit over student welfare, with concerns about teaching quality and discrimination.
- -Ineffective career guidance and support for students.
- -High tuition fees and perceived low return on investment.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning and comfort.
- -Lack of clear communication and support from staff is a persistent problem.
- -Administrative and management issues caused frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and resources were a recurring problem.
- -Lack of clear communication and support was a common complaint.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance.
- -Lack of student support and responsiveness from administration.
- -Uninspiring curriculum and teaching methods.
- -Inefficient administrative processes and unclear communication.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of necessary resources.
- -Poor teaching quality and irrelevant curriculum.
This university's student life stands out with the highest rating, indicating a vibrant campus experience. Conversely, accommodation received the lowest score, suggesting potential areas for improvement in housing facilities. Other aspects like facilities, professors, location, internationality, and value fall within a mid-range of positive assessments, painting a generally favorable picture with specific strengths and weaknesses.
A comprehensive assessment reveals a university with distinct strengths and areas for improvement. Professors and internationality stand out as particularly strong aspects, receiving high marks. Student life and facilities are also rated positively. However, accommodation emerges as the weakest area, with a noticeably lower score compared to other metrics. Value for money is also a solid, though not exceptional, performer in this rating overview.
Academic and student experience aspects generally receive positive marks, with **Internationality** standing out as the strongest area with a rating of 4.41. Professors and Facilities are also highly rated. Conversely, **Accomodation** presents the weakest area at 3.14, indicating room for improvement in this regard. Location and Student Life are moderately rated, suggesting a solid but not exceptional experience in those domains.
This institution receives strong accolades for its Facilities, Professors, and Internationality, all scoring an impressive 4.67. Student Life and Value are also highly rated at 4.33. The University's Location garners a solid 4. However, Accomodation stands out as the area with the lowest score, receiving a 3.67 rating.
This institution demonstrates notable strengths in its **Facilities**, **Student Life**, **Internationality**, and **Value**, all receiving high ratings. Areas of average performance include **Professors**, **Location**, and **Accommodation**. The university offers a well-rounded experience with particularly positive aspects in its infrastructure, student engagement, global outlook, and cost-effectiveness.
This university demonstrates notable strengths in its **Location**, receiving a high rating of 4.64. **Student Life** and **Internationality** are also well-regarded. Conversely, **Accomodation** stands out as the weakest area, with a significantly lower score of 2.5. Other aspects like **Facilities**, **Professors**, and **Value** fall within a moderate to good range.
Academic strengths and facilities are notable highlights, with professors receiving a perfect score and facilities earning a strong 4 out of 5. Conversely, student life, location, and internationality received moderate ratings of 3, indicating areas where improvements could be considered. Overall, the institution offers good value and accommodation options.
Most students are highly satisfied, praising diverse academic options, competent instructors, and active student organizations. Integrations and online platforms are effective. No negative feedback was recorded.
Around 97% of reviews are positive, praising international opportunities, practical curriculum, and helpful alumni networks. A small percentage (around 3%) cite issues with management, communication, and organization.
With a 4.24/5 average, ~98% of reviews are positive, highlighting intense courses, strong alumni networks, and excellent career services. A small percentage of feedback mentioned high tuition fees.
All three reviews are positive, with an average rating of 4.33/5. Students highlight the rigorous engineering curriculum, hands-on learning, and knowledgeable, supportive professors. Limited accommodation is a minor drawback.
With a 4/5 average rating, student feedback is predominantly positive. One reviewer highlighted a challenging yet rewarding academic experience with French and English program requirements.
Most student feedback is positive (~63% 4-5 stars), highlighting excellent pedagogy, practical experiences, and supportive staff. The average rating is 3.81/5, with no negative reviews.
With a 4/5 average rating, this university receives overwhelmingly positive feedback. Students praise its modern and accessible environment, though some note challenges joining student associations. Negative feedback is minimal (~0%).
Nothing to show
My experience in SKEMA Business School is very much enriching. It definitely help me to shape my career aspirations which align with my personal value and even worldview. The management system in my university quite efficient and systematic. Every year, we, students are required to give personal feedback on our learning and courses for each semesters. It is very helpful as it could assist my university to improve its lacking in every aspects.
I absolutely love everything about EDHEC, beginning from the pedagogy to the atmosphere it provides to the students (especially international) on campus. The extracurricular activities like sports, associations are very helpful. Also, the career service provided is top-notch. Therefore, I would call it an enriching experience so far.
Nothing to show
IMT Atlantique Brest was an interesting phase in my academic life. Coming from an Anglophone educational system to a Francophone teaching style was quite a challenge at the beginning, but worthwhile in the end. My programme was in both French and English(60/40). Although I spoke a bit of French, it still required more knowledge to sail through the programme. This was made possible through the school's compulsory weekly French classes. The programme was very rigorous as we spent most of our time in class, in lab sessions or doing group projects. The professors are knowledgeable in their field and try to engage the students in each lesson, although some of them aren't good at transferring knowledge appropriately. The career seminars and job dating events were very beneficial in finding an internship and a job in the long run. Lastly, the intercultural environment helped me learn about different cultures, and also prepare me to work in multicultural teams in the real world. Overall, it was a good experience as I learned to study in a new language, make new friends and stand on my own in a new country. I just wish I did more research into the French teaching style before starting the programme.
This university has a lot of qualities such as adapting to students in order to optimize learning, and the desire to confront the student as quickly as possible with the world of work. On the other hand, I would criticize this school for poorly disseminated information and a gloomy community life.
Nothing to show
