Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv vs National Pedagogical Dragomanov University vs National Aviation University vs Institute of Ecology, Economics and Law vs National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy
Side-by-side comparison from 26 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Excellent teaching and encouraging professors
- +Diverse opportunities and engaging student life
- +Strong academic reputation and well-organized programs
- +Positive atmosphere and friendly teachers
- +Beautiful and quiet campus
- +Supportive and manageable academic environment
- +Excellent faculty and engaging teaching methods
- +Valuable practical experience and career preparation
- +Supportive learning environment and strong community
Nothing to show
- +High academic standards and international focus
- +Opportunities for practical learning and creativity
- +Strong reputation and European standards
- +Strong technical foundation and useful experience
- +Cool community and interesting social life
- +Intense but manageable workload
- +Comprehensive business understanding and accessible teaching
- +Experiential learning, mentorship, and community events
- +Real-world application and career preparation
- -Poor teaching quality and unfair assessment practices.
- -Dissatisfaction with the university system and overall experience.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are common complaints.
- -Course content is often perceived as irrelevant or poorly delivered.
- -Outdated facilities and equipment.
- -Poor English proficiency among professors.
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues cause frequent problems.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are major concerns.
- -Unresponsive and unhelpful support staff are a recurring complaint.
- -Administrative and management indifference to student well-being.
- -Outdated facilities and ongoing maintenance problems.
- -Poor administrative support and unclear communication are frequent complaints.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of modern resources are significant drawbacks.
- -The curriculum is often perceived as irrelevant or lacking practical application.
This institution scores exceptionally well for **Value**, its highest-rated aspect. **Location** and **Student Life** also received strong marks. Conversely, **Accomodation** emerged as the weakest area, with a comparatively lower rating. Other categories like **Facilities**, **Professors**, and **Internationality** fall in the mid-range, indicating areas for potential improvement alongside its strengths.
This university exhibits a uniformly unimpressive profile, with zero ratings across all evaluated aspects. Consequently, no specific areas stand out as either strong or weak. The institution scores equally low in facilities, professors, location, student life, accommodation, internationality, and perceived value, suggesting a pervasive need for improvement in all these domains.
This institution's ratings present a mixed picture. Its strongest points are location, earning a respectable 3, suggesting good accessibility and surroundings. However, areas such as accommodation, professors, facilities, student life, and internationality all received a 2, indicating a need for significant improvement in these crucial aspects of the student experience. The value also received a 2, reflecting concerns about the return on investment.
Nothing to show
This institution excels particularly in areas like Student Life (4.6), Location (4.5), and Facilities (4.3), indicating a vibrant and well-situated campus environment. Conversely, Accomodation and Internationality received the lowest scores, both at 3. Despite these areas, Value stands out with a perfect 5, suggesting a strong return on investment. Professor ratings are a moderate 3.7.
Analysis of this university's ratings reveals strengths in its **Location (4.5)**, standing out significantly. Conversely, the weakest areas appear to be **Professors (2)** and **Accomodation (2.5)**, both receiving considerably lower scores. Facilities and Student Life are rated moderately at 3, while Internationality and Value fall within the lower-average range.
This institution receives high marks across most categories, with Facilities standing out as its strongest area at a perfect 5. Student Life, Accomodation, Internationality, and Value are also exceptionally strong, each scoring 4.67. Professors represent the weakest area, though still solid at 4.33, with Location also performing well at 4.5.
Approximately 74% of reviews are positive, highlighting strong academic traditions and supportive teachers. A small percentage of feedback notes dissatisfaction with the system or specific instructors.
With a perfect 5/5 average rating from one review, the university is described as beautiful, quiet, and having a fine atmosphere. Students found exams easy, teachers lighthearted, and facilities bright.
The single review indicates a highly negative experience. The reviewer cited old equipment not meeting program needs and professors with poor English proficiency, even in an English-taught program. This represented ~100% of feedback, resulting in a 1/5 average rating.
Nothing to show
With an average rating of 4.5/5, 100% of feedback is positive. Students praise educational quality, practical lessons, encouraged critical thinking, and opportunities for creativity.
With an average rating of 3.33/5, approximately 67% of reviews are positive, highlighting a cool community, useful experience, and strong technical foundation. Some negative feedback (33.3%) mentions areas for improvement such as building repairs and heating issues.
Students highly praise the comprehensive curriculum and excellent teaching staff, finding instruction accessible and engaging. Experiential learning opportunities and supportive faculty are frequently highlighted. No negative feedback was provided.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show