University of Amsterdam - UvA vs Leiden University vs Tilburg University vs TIAS School for Business and Society vs Fontys University of Applied Sciences
Side-by-side comparison from 365 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +Accessible programs and flexible study structures
- +Supportive and approachable lecturers
- +Well-designed, up-to-date curriculum
- +Exceptional academic quality and renowned professors
- +Supportive and friendly student community
- +Comprehensive programs and student support services
- +Excellent professors and specialized programs
- +Inclusive and diverse environment with international peers
- +Strong analytical skill development and practical learning opportunities
- +Personal assistance and welcoming atmosphere
- +Engaging professors and insightful discussions
- +Supportive and caring staff
- +Practical and international experience opportunities
- +Strong academic foundation and career preparation
- +Engaging, hands-on learning connected to real careers.
- +Supportive, diverse community and international connections.
- +Vibrant campus life and modern facilities.
Nothing to show
- -Lack of administrative and faculty support
- -High costs with perceived low value and outdated facilities
- -Poor communication and inflexible policies
- -Administrative and communication issues are prevalent.
- -Educational quality and professor engagement are lacking.
- -Perceived lack of equal opportunity and support for diverse student needs.
- -Disorganized administration and lack of student guidance.
- -Poor teacher support and patronizing interactions.
- -High cost of living and unpleasant city environment.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and technology impede learning and comfort.
- -Lack of clear communication and support from staff is a recurring problem.
- -Lack of perceived learning despite accumulating credits.
- -Indifference from faculty and management to student concerns.
- -Outdated facilities and poor campus conditions.
- -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and a lack of resources hinder learning.
- -Inconsistent teaching quality and ineffective curriculum are common complaints.
Nothing to show
This university scores exceptionally well in several key areas, with Location standing out as the highest rated at 4.59. Internationality also receives a strong score of 4.49. Conversely, Accomodation is the weakest point, with a significantly lower rating of 2.96. Other aspects like Facilities, Professors, Student Life, and Value are all rated around the 4.0 to 4.2 mark, indicating solid but not exceptional performance in these domains.
This university garners excellent scores across most aspects, with location being its standout strength. Facilities, student life, and internationality also receive very positive feedback. The value proposition is rated a solid 4. Conversely, accommodation presents the weakest area, with a noticeably lower score compared to other metrics. Professors' ratings are also respectable, though slightly lower than the overall average.
This institution garners excellent marks for its **Facilities** and **Internationality**, both scoring a high 4.22. **Professors** are also highly regarded at 4.14, with **Student Life** and **Value** receiving solid ratings of 4.06 and 4.08 respectively. **Location** is rated moderately well at 3.83. The weakest area identified is **Accomodation**, which received a notably lower score of 2.78.
Across the surveyed categories, this institution excels in its **facilities, professors, location, internationality, and perceived value**, all receiving perfect scores. In contrast, areas for development appear to be **student life and accommodation**, with significantly lower ratings in these aspects.
Offering a robust academic and campus experience, this university shines brightest in its **Facilities**, receiving a 4.42 rating. **Professors** are also highly regarded at 4.29. While **Location** and **Value** both score well at 4.25, **Student Life** is rated slightly lower at 3.83. The area with the most room for improvement is **Accomodation**, which received a 3.36 rating.
The university demonstrates notable strengths in **Location** and **Facilities**, both receiving ratings above 4.2. **Student Life** and **Value** also score well, indicating a positive student experience and perceived return on investment. **Accomodation** and **Internationality** emerge as areas with the lowest scores, suggesting potential for improvement in these aspects of university life. The average rating across all categories remains solid.
Nothing to show
~96% of reviews are positive, praising accessible programs, supportive lecturers, and useful facilities. A small ~4% of feedback highlights concerns about value, student support, and communication.
With ~82% of 78 reviews being positive, students praise high-quality learning, renowned professors, and comprehensive programs. A small percentage (~3.9%) express dissatisfaction with bureaucracy and teaching quality.
The university receives overwhelmingly positive feedback, with ~92% of reviews rating it 4-5 stars. Students praise excellent teaching, expert professors, and strong program specialization. A small percentage of negative reviews mention disorganization and limited guidance.
With one review, the average rating is 5/5. This suggests a highly positive experience, with feedback praising personal assistance and engaging professors. No negative feedback was reported.
With a 4/5 average rating, approximately 96% of reviews are positive, praising supportive staff, great facilities, and valuable opportunities. A small portion of feedback (~4%) expresses concerns about learning outcomes.
Around ~99% of reviews are positive, highlighting a supportive community and modern, hands-on learning connected to real-world careers. There are no negative reviews to summarize.
Nothing to show
I didn’t felt the program was worth my money and it was definitely not what I expected. From the professors to the actual syllabus I didn’t learned much and I feel this debt I just acquired was definitely a waste of time a big mistake
This faculty in particular only serves the interest of the upper middle class and the rich. It screams DEI and inclusivity, but the message remains hollow, especially since most of these groups include individuals, who have said xenophobic and other discriminatory things about other students and staff in the past. DEI should celebrate all different diversities and not just a single issue one. There is an extrem lack of equal opportunities its always just opportunities for the same old people. How can the same person hold 3-4 positions in the faculty, and yet call the faculty a heaven of "equal opportunities"? To no surprise its just the already wealthy who get every opportunity. They eve created a grassroots funding system where the same old rich students, received yet another opportunity.... Its so cool that you give already rich students more money, instead of addressing structural issues within the faculty. And the worst thing is you leave traces of evidence everywhere, you even suck at false advertising. Theres a lot of hypocrisy in leiden and many students of vulnerable backgrounds are being ignored, slandered and even held back career wise. Yet the perpetrators can still remain in the drivers seat. The perpetrators are both students and staff. The administration/study advisors is terrible and quite frankly useless since everything has just become automated emails, there are no mentors and supervisors only like to serve students who are wealthy. A student could die and they would not care if they are still alive. The building is pretty but it had some leaks in the past. Overall after 2 suicide attempts thanks to their constant harassment and slander. I would give this faculty less than one star. Leiden archaeology is only for the rich conservatives who had failed so hard in their own economic system, that they had to enter a public university (with no entry barriers) because they couldn't compete with people that applied to go to Oxford or Cambridge . It truly is a neoliberal university.
The city is quite bad to live in and ugly, on top of very expensive. The faculty of psychology is quite okay. Studying there has given me a good theoretical base. However, I have one major complaint, which is the way the university treats students individually. The student desk is the only way to obtain official documents from them (for example, the documents I needed to apply for a Master's degre) and aside from the difficult office hours and long wait time on the phone, I was literally told upon requesting a very necessary document "sorry, we´re not going to do that for you, it is too much work for us". when I suggested that I could put the document together myself and then just have it reviewed and stamped by them, she said htat it wouldn´t be valid. This resulted in me not being able to apply for Masters that year and taking a gap year, which is not the impact I ever thought a clerk would have on my life. Another complaint I have that resulted in a life-changing event is about my thesis. I chose to do a systematic review (within the Clinical Track) because it interested me, and I was fully informed that the program of the systematic review was still a pilot and subject to change. My supervisor was lovely and I had a great experience with her, that left me feeling like I learned something, and I was going to get a decent grade on said thesis that would then allow me to apply for a Clinical Psychology Masters in the Netherlands. For context, up until this point in my education, I had never failed an exam or a course as I always had average to high grades and I dedicate the appropriate time and effort to my studies. My thesis, on the other hand, was rather controversial. I received the grade I expected from my supervisor (which was within the range of my grades overall), whereas the second assessor failed me on half the criteria and didn't put in the effort to provide appropriate feedback. As the two grades were too different from each other, my thesis was reviewed by a third assessor, who just did the averages between the grades of the first two assessors and included sad faces ":(" in her feedback for my months of work, which all resulted in a grade that still hinders me in my academic progress, two years later. Upon respectfully confronting the third assessor I was offered neither an explanation nor a justification (perhaps I had been misled during the process of writing my thesis) for the feedback (which at times was completely erroneous as it contradicted published and peer reviewed literature I had consulted while while writing), and I was told that my thesis would just not be reasessed. I would not still be going on about this if it wasn't for the fact that I was just taught the findings of my thesis (which I was told was completely wrong) while studying for the master's degree that I did manage to get into with my grades. To sum up, while this faculty rigurously prepares students through content and theory, the students are nothing to them.
Nothing to show
I like the possibility to self study, find materials and information, as well as the freedom of learning what I am interested in, while receiving feedback from my teachers which helps me getting on the right track.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
