Uppsala University vs Royal Institute of Technology - KTH vs Umea University - UMU vs Linnaeus University - LNU vs Malmö University - MAU
Side-by-side comparison from 122 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted
- +High-quality education and research-driven learning
- +Friendly and knowledgeable academic and non-academic staff
- +Practical, real-life learning experiences and student-centered guidance
- +World-class facilities and inspiring study atmosphere
- +Strong academic programs with practical application and flexibility
- +Engaging and approachable instructors
- +Excellent teachers and engaging student life.
- +Pleasant and convenient location and facilities.
- +Positive international atmosphere and good university reputation.
- +Supportive and helpful professors and staff.
- +Good facilities and diverse academic programs.
- +Welcoming international environment and convenient resources.
- +Supportive and approachable professors
- +Relevant and forward-thinking curriculum
- +Diverse and inclusive learning environment
- +International and diverse student body
- +Practical, hands-on learning with real-world projects
- +Supportive environment with inspiring teachers
- +University's quality and campus facilities.
- -Negative peer attitudes and lack of collaboration hinder learning.
- -Disappointing program quality and instructor approach.
- -Student disinterest and sabotage of work.
- -Administrative & management issues frustrate students.
- -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are common complaints.
- -Lack of resources and support hinder learning.
- -Administrative & management issues cause frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and poor resources detract from learning.
- -Lack of clear communication and support from staff is a problem.
- -Administrative and management issues, particularly concerning international student affairs.
- -Mediocre teaching quality with limited value beyond independent learning.
- -Lack of industry connections and career support.
- -Administrative and management issues
- -Outdated facilities and resources
- -Misaligned curriculum and teaching methods
- -Poor academic quality and unhelpful faculty.
- -High tuition costs are not justified by the educational experience.
- -Significant challenges with job prospects and societal inclusion for immigrants due to racism.
- -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
- -Outdated facilities and equipment are a significant drawback.
- -Lack of effective communication and unclear expectations are problematic.
Examining the university's performance reveals a strong showing in academic and campus-related aspects. Professors (4.15) and Facilities (4.10) received particularly high marks. Student Life (4.08) and Internationality (4.00) also scored well. Conversely, the university's Location (3.66) and Accomodation (3.68) represent areas for potential improvement, while Value (3.98) falls in the mid-range.
Exceptional marks were awarded in several key areas, notably a perfect score for **Internationality**. **Facilities** and **Value** also received very high ratings. The university performs well across **Student Life** and **Accomodation**, with solid scores for **Professors** and **Location**. While no area received a low rating, **Location** represents the comparatively weakest aspect among the surveyed categories.
This institution garners exceptionally high marks for its Facilities, Student Life, Internationality, and perceived Value, all receiving a near-perfect score. Professors are also rated favorably, while Location scores a solid 4. The primary area for improvement seems to be Accomodation, which received the lowest rating of 3.67.
Academic and student life aspects of the university received high marks. The institution particularly excelled in Internationality (4.27) and Student Life (4.23), reflecting a vibrant and globally-connected campus environment. Facilities (4.16) and Professors (4.12) also garnered positive feedback. Conversely, Value (3.81) and Location (3.83) were the lowest-rated categories, suggesting areas for potential improvement. Accommodations also scored moderately (3.92).
Analyzing the university's performance reveals a mixed but generally positive picture. The institution excels in its **Internationality** (3.95) and **Professors** (4), indicating strong global engagement and a well-regarded academic staff. Conversely, **Accomodation** (3.23) presents the lowest score, suggesting room for improvement in this area. Other aspects like Facilities, Location, Student Life, and Value fall within a moderate range.
This institution generally receives positive feedback, with particular strengths in **internationality (4.2)**, **value (4.1)**, and **professors (4)**, alongside excellent **facilities** and **student life**. Accommodation is the comparatively weakest area, scoring **3.4**. The location also received a slightly lower, though still respectable, rating.
This institution presents a mixed rating profile. Its strongest areas include professors and value, both receiving a solid 3.5. Conversely, accommodation stands out as the weakest point, scoring a low 2. Facilities and internationality are rated moderately at 2.5, while location and student life achieve a respectable 3.
With 43 reviews, ~98% are positive, praising academic excellence, quality education, and friendly staff. One review expressed disappointment with a specific course's peer and instructor attitudes.
All 12 reviews are positive, averaging 4.75/5. Students praise world-class research facilities, inclusive culture, and opportunities for theory-practice integration. Friendly, engaging instructors and diverse, flexible courses are also highlighted.
With an average rating of 4.67/5, all three student reviews were positive. Recurring themes highlighted good teachers, great student life, and convenient facilities. No negative feedback was provided.
About 80% of reviews are positive, highlighting supportive professors, a welcoming atmosphere, and good facilities. A small portion (~7%) of negative feedback points to issues with teaching quality and administrative support.
Most students (~74%) praise Malmö University's forward-thinking environment, modern facilities, and supportive professors. A small percentage (~9.5%) report issues with resources like printers and overpriced course materials.
With an average rating of 4.21/5, ~93% of reviews are positive, highlighting a highly international environment, practical learning, and student life. One ~7% review found the study difficulty low.
With a 3.5/5 average rating, most feedback is positive (~100%). One student found the Borlänge campus building great but struggled with obtaining student information through confused online platforms.
Uppsala itself is a great city, it's easy to go to Stockholm and Arlanda. But to be in Uppsala as a university student is a whole experience on its own. With Nations, parties, fikas, cafés, parties (yes again), bars, knitting groups and many other events Uppsala has a place for everyone. (The other Universities in the top 3 would be Lund University and...... well the third is not set in stone as there are a few universities and "högskolor" to choose from" In my experience professors and teachers, competence will vary depending. But the great ones are really great.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Rating: ★★☆☆☆ (2/5 — one extra star because tuition was free) I studied Software Technology at Linnaeus University between 2022 and 2025. In my experience, the quality of teaching was mediocre. I quickly stopped attending lectures because most added little beyond what I could learn independently. Industry connections were almost nonexistent: no internship support, no company-led workshops, no hackathons, and no clear pathways into the tech sector. The only recurring event was the annual job fair, but many representatives seemed unsure what they were seeking; most offered no internships or projects and there was rarely any follow-up, so it felt more promotional than student-focused. Entrepreneurship support was minimal. When we started a student project, there was no funding, no events, no network, and very limited guidance — essentially just one counsellor providing basic advice. Faculty culture felt very political and unresponsive to student feedback. When issues were raised formally, they were often dismissed, though quiet changes were occasionally made later. I personally experienced hostile and dismissive behaviour from a lecturer in the tech faculty, which I reported to the Student Union in 2024 along with other classmates. The case was closed in the lecturer’s favour, yet the university quietly implemented some of the changes we had requested. The complaint process left me uncertain about its independence, and I believe there’s a need for more transparent procedures and external oversight. On the positive side, there are a few excellent professors who genuinely care about their students and involve them in research, but they are a small minority and you have to actively seek them out. Overall, I’m deeply disappointed with the university’s approach to education and student development. I feel I wasted three years of potential growth and opportunity here. Prospective students should do thorough research and speak directly with current students before enrolling.
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
Nothing to show
