Lesya Ukrainka East European National University vs SKEMA Business School vs Lutsk Polytechnic National University - NTU vs Atatürk University vs MIM Kyiv Business School - MIM
Side-by-side comparison from 188 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Highly skilled and professional faculty.
- +Abundant opportunities for research and language practice.
- +Engaging extracurricular activities and events.
- +Practical skills and real-world business application
- +International environment and diverse experiences
- +Career development and professional growth
Nothing to show
- +Opportunities for personal and career development through clubs.
- +Diverse student body and international recognition.
- +Comprehensive business understanding and accessible teaching
- +Experiential learning, mentorship, and community events
- +Real-world application and career preparation
- +Accessible and supportive professors.
- +Engaging and relevant course content.
- +Vibrant campus life and social opportunities.
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues, including poor communication and lack of support.
- -Outdated and inadequate facilities, with complaints about cleanliness and functionality.
- -Overpriced tuition relative to the quality of education and resources provided.
- -Administrative & management issues
- -Poor communication and guidance
- -Outdated facilities and teaching faculty
Nothing to show
- -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
- -Lack of clear communication and support is common.
- -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- -Outdated facilities and a lack of modern resources are significant drawbacks.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.
- -Lack of administrative support and unresponsive communication regarding diplomas and queries.
- -Unfulfilled promises of tutor interaction and academic support after enrollment.
Nothing to show
This institution excels in accommodations and value, both receiving perfect scores. Its facilities, professors, student life, and internationality are also highly regarded, each earning a 4-star rating. The university's weakest area, however, is its location, which received a score of 0, indicating a significant drawback in this aspect.
Across surveyed categories, this institution demonstrates robust strengths in **Internationality (4.43)** and **Professors (4.37)**. Student life, location, and facilities also received positive scores. However, **Accomodation** stands out as the lowest-rated area at **3.70**, suggesting potential room for improvement in that specific aspect. The overall value is also rated favorably at 4.09.
Nothing to show
This institution receives high marks in several key areas, notably Internationality and Value, both scoring an impressive 4.5. Facilities, Professors, and Accomodation also fare well, with scores of 4. Location and Student Life are rated slightly lower at 3.5, representing the areas with the most room for improvement within its otherwise strong profile.
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.
This university presents a generally positive profile with consistent ratings. Its strongest areas include facilities, professors, location, student life, and internationality, all receiving a solid 3 out of 5. The weakest point appears to be accommodation, scoring 2.5, suggesting this aspect may require further improvement. Overall, the value proposition also aligns with the average rating of 3.
Nothing to show
All 5 reviews are positive, averaging 4/5 stars. Students praise skilled teachers and research opportunities, especially within the English and French Philology department. Minor points include improving heating and reducing photocopy costs.
With a 4.37/5 average rating from 175 reviews, approximately 97.7% of students provide positive feedback. Key highlights include practical skills, international opportunities, and professional development. A small percentage of negative feedback mentions poor management and organization.
Nothing to show
Reviews indicate a highly positive student experience, with all feedback being positive. Students highlight opportunities for personal development through clubs and career advancement. The university is recognized for its educational history and international student body.
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.
With ~100% negative feedback, reviews highlight significant issues with diploma processing delays and unresponsive customer support. Students report unanswered emails and a lack of assistance regarding academic queries.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Studying at Skema Business School in Sophia Antipolis was a fantastic experience. The campus is modern and located in a wonderful tech hub. The professors bring real-world business experience to the classroom. I loved the multicultural environment and the group projects. Skema gave me great friends, a strong global network, and the right skills for my career.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
I enrolled in Structuralia’s Master’s in Project Management based on their catalogue and General Enrollment Terms, which clearly promised: Regular tutor interaction and feedback Support for doubts, assignments, and technical issues The right to cancel or request a refund if the course is not delivered properly Unfortunately, my experience has been the complete opposite. Lack of Academic Support: I submitted multiple academic queries (e.g., on March 31, April 7, April 9, and April 25), including questions about exam grading and self-assessment errors. Despite multiple follow-ups, I received either no response or vague promises that “IT was working on it.” No resolution ever came. Language & Accessibility Issues: Although my settings were clearly marked as English, I repeatedly received course content, platform communications, and mandatory surveys in Spanish. This persisted despite more than five documented complaints. My ability to engage with the program was significantly hindered. No Tutor Engagement: There were no course bulletins, academic feedback, or real tutor interaction beyond automated responses. The so-called “personalized academic support” advertised was nonexistent. Breach of Contractual Terms: Clause 14 of Structuralia’s own enrollment terms states that students can request cancellation or price reduction if the course is not delivered properly. My experience is a textbook case of poor delivery. Yet Structuralia has refused to cancel my enrollment or refund the €1,460 I’ve already paid. Still Demanding Payment: Despite my formal withdrawal and written notice not to charge my card, Structuralia continues to send payment demands — while failing to acknowledge their service failures. Their 14-day withdrawal clause is being used to override more fundamental consumer rights. I made every effort in good faith to participate, logging over 190 hours. But due to the lack of academic support, persistent technical failures, and broken communication, I had no choice but to stop. I’ve formally requested cancellation and refund multiple times. I’ve now been forced to pursue a chargeback via my financial institution. Summary: If you’re considering a Structuralia Master’s program, proceed with extreme caution. Their marketing paints a picture of structured support and engagement. The reality is an under-delivered program that fails to meet professional or academic standards — and a refusal to take responsibility for it.
Nothing to show
