Sapienza – Università di Roma vs LUISS Business School vs Rome Business School vs Swiss School of Management - SSM vs Guglielmo Marconi University
Side-by-side comparison from 192 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Well-structured programs with relevant, real-world applications
- +Knowledgeable and supportive professors fostering interactive learning
- +International environment and ample opportunities for growth
- +Strong career focus and job market alignment
- +Caring professors and engaging learning experiences
- +International environment and practical application
- +Insightful, professional professors and well-rounded curriculum
- +Practical, real-world application and business simulations
- +Diverse, multicultural student body and global networking opportunities
- +Practical, real-world preparation
- +Personal and professional growth
- +International experience
- +Relevant and in-depth subject matter
- +Competent and knowledgeable professors
- +Convenient telematics access
- +Structured learning and international community
- +Positive location and good opportunities
- +Practice-oriented approach and practical application of skills
- +International perspective and understanding of the industry
- +Teachers as current specialists
- -Administrative and organizational issues cause students to feel like a number.
- -Outdated facilities and labs limit the quality of education and practical experience.
- -Lack of preparation for the job market and unhelpful teaching staff are recurring concerns.
- -Poor organization and low-level course content.
- -Ineffective student coordination and support.
- -Lack of planning and poor execution of program elements.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant delays and unfulfilled promises.
- -Lack of professional support and competence from staff leads to unresolvable problems.
- -Programs and lessons are perceived as low-quality and not meeting advertised standards.
- -Frustrating administrative and management issues.
- -Outdated and poorly maintained facilities.
- -Lack of engaging and relevant curriculum.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are a constant concern.
- -Inflexible and poorly communicated academic policies frustrate students.
- -Limited career services and support hinder post-graduation prospects.
- -Administrative and management issues
- -Outdated facilities and resources
- -Lack of effective communication
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of modern resources are a consistent source of frustration.
- -Students often complain about administrative inefficiency and poor communication.
- -Course content is frequently perceived as irrelevant or not up-to-date.
Considering the provided ratings, this institution demonstrates particular strengths in **Location** and **Value**, both scoring above 4.0. Professors also receive a strong rating. Conversely, **Accomodation** emerges as the weakest area, scoring the lowest. Student life and internationality are rated moderately well, falling between the strongest and weakest aspects.
This university is distinguished by exceptional ratings in its **Location**, scoring an impressive 4.58. Its **Facilities** also received a strong evaluation at 4.17. Conversely, the university's weakest areas are **Accomodation**, rated at 2.92, and **Student Life**, with a score of 3.25. **Professors** and **Value** are moderately rated, while **Internationality** sits at a decent 3.58.
This institution garners high marks in several key areas, notably excelling in **Internationality** and **Location**, both receiving scores above 4.6. **Professors** and **Value** also perform very well, with ratings above 4.35. Student life and facilities are also positively reviewed. However, **Accommodations** stand out as the weakest area, with a score of 3.76.
This institution boasts exceptional scores in several key areas, notably achieving perfect marks for **Location**, **Accomodation**, **Internationality**, and **Value**. The **Facilities** also stand out with a strong rating of 4.67. Areas showing slightly less consistent strength, though still positive, include **Professors** and **Student Life**, both rated at 4.33.
This institution demonstrates significant strengths in its academic offerings, with high ratings for Professors and Value. Conversely, several core areas require substantial improvement. Facilities, Location, Student Life, and Accomodation all received zero ratings, indicating considerable deficiencies. Internationality presents a moderate but still underdeveloped aspect, with a rating of two.
With exceptional scores in Facilities, Professors, Location, and Internationality, the university demonstrates considerable strengths. Student Life and Value also receive positive feedback, indicating a generally well-rounded experience. The primary area for improvement lies in Accomodation, which received the lowest rating.
With outstanding scores in several key areas, this institution shines in **Professors**, **Location**, and **Internationality**, all receiving perfect marks. Student life is also highly regarded, scoring a 4. Accommodations are rated a 3, representing a moderate aspect. The university's weakest area by a significant margin is **Facilities**, which received a score of 0. Overall, the value proposition is excellent, also rated a 5.
~74% of reviews are positive, highlighting well-structured programs, knowledgeable professors, and international opportunities. Negative feedback, representing ~4.8%, mentions disorganization and unengaging teaching.
With 5 out of 12 reviews being positive, students highlight smooth admissions, well-organized programs aligned with the job market, and an international environment. One review mentioned organizational gaps and a need for more versatile examples.
~92% of reviews are positive, highlighting insightful instructors, holistic education, and diverse networking opportunities. A small percentage (~8%) of negative feedback mentions issues with diploma delivery, unprofessionalism, and unmet offerings.
All three reviews are overwhelmingly positive, awarding a perfect 5/5 rating. Students highlight the university's encouragement of creativity and practical, real-world business preparation. The international experience and the balance between theory and practice are also frequently praised.
With a 4/5 average rating, this university receives overwhelmingly positive feedback (~100%). Students highlight well-suited second-year subjects, particularly in marketing and computer science, taught by competent professors.
Based on one review, the university receives a 4/5 rating. The program is praised for its structure and international community, though some opportunities may be less accessible than presented.
With a single review, the university has a perfect 5/5 rating. The feedback highlights a strong professional stage, theoretical and practical understanding of the industry, and a practice-oriented approach with current specialists.
I studied at the Sapienza University of Rome. I think it is one of the best Italian universities, among its strong points we have: prestigious professors and a super active student community. the negative point is that there are many students and sometimes they are difficult to follow everyone. Beyond this I recommend the university. I studied in the economics faculty and I must say that it is really well organised. there are numerous study rooms, laboratories and there is a canteen which allows students to eat good food for a few euros. Sapienza is today a point of reference in the Italian community for capable young graduates!
The first half of the year the program is very basic, this is done in hopes of having all students with the same base knowledge but unfortunately, students with a business/economics background have no engagement or academic challenge as these courses cover the introduction of management courses very briefly.
Participating in the Business Simulation Game as part of my MBA at Rome Business School was one of the most practical and impactful experiences of the program, It provided a realistic environment to test strategic decision making under pressure and highlighted the strong interdependence between market dynamics, operational performance, cost discipline, people management, pricing strategy and profitability.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
