Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv vs National Technical University of Ukraine Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute - NTUU KPI vs MIM Kyiv Business School - MIM vs Kyiv National Linguistic University vs Bogomolets National Medical University - NMU

Side-by-side comparison from 29 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: International University of Finance - IUF (5.00)
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv: wins 0/5 categories
National Technical University of Ukraine Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute - NTUU KPI: wins 0/5 categories
MIM Kyiv Business School - MIM: wins 0/5 categories
Kyiv National Linguistic University: wins 0/5 categories
Bogomolets National Medical University - NMU: wins 0/5 categories
GoIT Neoversity: wins 0/5 categories
International University of Finance - IUF: wins 5/5 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Political Science
Best programme: MBA
Best programme: Accounting and Business Finance
Kiev, Ukraine
Not rated
Read more reviews
0 reviews
×
Best programme: Accounting and Finance
Category ratings
Facilities
3.78
3.00
5.00
3.33
2.00
Not rated
5.00
Location
4.11
4.50
4.50
5.00
4.33
Not rated
5.00
Professors
3.89
2.00
4.33
3.67
2.33
Not rated
5.00
Win
Internationality
3.67
2.50
4.67
4.67
2.67
Not rated
5.00
Win
Student life
4.00
3.00
4.67
4.33
3.33
Not rated
5.00
Win
Value
4.33
2.50
4.67
3.67
3.67
Not rated
5.00
Win
Accommodation
3.33
2.50
4.67
3.00
2.67
Not rated
5.00
Win
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +Excellent teaching and encouraging professors
  • +Diverse opportunities and engaging student life
  • +Strong academic reputation and well-organized programs
  • +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
  • +Strong business and language programmes
  • +Effective learning and task completion
  • +Positive learning experience
  • +Expert instructors and engaging teaching methods.
  • +Relevant and practical curriculum with up-to-date content.
  • +Supportive learning environment and strong career services.

Nothing to show

  • +Strong campus atmosphere and good friendships
  • +Nice and approachable teachers
Cons
  • -Poor teaching quality and unfair assessment practices.
  • -Dissatisfaction with the university system and overall experience.
  • -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.
  • -Administrative & management issues are a recurring problem.
  • -Outdated facilities and lack of necessary resources are frustrating.
  • -Poor communication and a lack of support create a negative experience.
  • -Excessive workload and focus on written assignments over practical skills.
  • -Ineffective and demanding remote learning practices.

Nothing to show

  • -Administrative and management issues are consistently frustrating.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources hinder the learning experience.
  • -Lack of communication and support from staff is a major concern.
Rating summary
What students say

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.

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.

Regarding university performance, the location received a perfect score, standing out as its strongest attribute. Conversely, accommodation was rated the lowest. Professors, student life, internationality, and value all garnered solid ratings, reflecting well on these aspects. Facilities also received a respectable, though mid-range, score.

This institution demonstrates a strong showing in its location, which received the highest rating. Conversely, its facilities are the weakest point, scoring significantly lower than other aspects. Student life and value also received favorable marks, while professors, accommodation, and internationality fall in the middle range.

Nothing to show

Consistently scoring a perfect 5 across all metrics, this institution demonstrates exceptional strength in every surveyed area. Facilities, professors, location, student life, accommodation, internationality, and value are all rated outstandingly. There are no discernible weak areas, as the university achieves top marks uniformly. This indicates a uniformly excellent and well-rounded educational experience.

Reviews summary
Highlights

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 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.

Two out of three reviews are positive, contributing to an average rating of 4/5. Students praise the learning experience and curriculum, with minimal negative feedback.

With an average rating of 2/5, two out of three reviews are negative (~67%). Students report excessive assignments and a focus on online tasks over practical learning.

Nothing to show

The single review is highly positive, rating the university 5/5. The student enjoyed the atmosphere and appreciated the nice teachers, strongly recommending it.

Rating distribution
5★
50%
33%
67%
33%
0%
0%
100%
4★
31%
33%
33%
33%
0%
0%
0%
3★
6%
0%
0%
33%
33%
0%
0%
2★
13%
0%
0%
0%
33%
0%
0%
1★
0%
33%
0%
0%
33%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Typical Post-Soviet medical university

A certain hierarchy reigns in the university in which professors and the dean’s office are considered gods, and students and laboratory assistants are secondary characters. Despite this, there are people that ready to teach and help you I consider the opportunity to become more independent as a plus in NMU. Many faculties and campuses can also be attributed to the merits of university. The complexity of learning unites students so that you can turn a blind eye to shortcomings…

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