Ibn Zohr University vs Strayer University vs EMAA Business School vs Institut Supérieur des Professions Infirmières et des Techniques de Santé Agadir - ISPITS

Side-by-side comparison from 13 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Institut Supérieur des Professions Infirmières et des Techniques de Santé Agadir - ISPITS (5.00)
Ibn Zohr University: wins 0/6 categories
Strayer University: wins 0/6 categories
EMAA Business School: wins 0/6 categories
Institut Supérieur des Professions Infirmières et des Techniques de Santé Agadir - ISPITS: wins 6/6 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Biology
Washington, D.C., United States
3.80
Read more reviews
5 reviews
×
Best programme: Business Administration
Agadir, Morocco
Not rated
Read more reviews
0 reviews
×
Best programme: Social Assistance and Philosophy
Category ratings
Facilities
3.14
3.60
Not rated
5.00
Win
Location
3.57
5.00
Not rated
5.00
Professors
3.57
3.80
Not rated
5.00
Win
Internationality
2.86
4.00
Not rated
5.00
Win
Student life
2.43
4.00
Not rated
5.00
Win
Value
3.71
3.40
Not rated
5.00
Win
Accommodation
2.86
3.60
Not rated
4.00
Win
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +Helpful and supportive professors
  • +Practical and understandable programs
  • +Value for money
  • +Flexible and self-paced learning options
  • +Supportive and knowledgeable faculty and staff
  • +Sense of community and welcome atmosphere

Nothing to show

  • +Practical, skill-building experience and qualified instructors
  • +Well-structured program balancing theory and practice
Cons
  • -Administrative and management issues, including a lack of funds and transparency, negatively impact student experience and facilities.
  • -Outdated curriculum and insufficient resources hinder teachers from providing optimal education.
  • -Lack of meaningful learning and academic integrity is a significant concern.
  • -Online classes fail to provide actual education.

Nothing to show

  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
  • -Lack of clear communication and support negatively impacts the student experience.
Rating summary
What students say

Overall, the university presents a varied rating profile. The strongest areas are **Value** (3.71), **Professors** (3.57), and **Location** (3.57), indicating positive perceptions in these aspects. Conversely, **Student Life** (2.43) emerges as the weakest area. **Facilities** (3.14) and **Accommodation** (2.86) also fall in the mid-range, with **Internationality** (2.86) performing similarly to accommodation.

Performance across key university metrics reveals a mixed but generally positive picture. The strongest area is undeniably the **Location**, receiving a perfect score of 5. **Student Life** and **Internationality** also stand out with solid ratings of 4. Conversely, the **Value** proposition presents the weakest area, scoring 3.4, closely followed by **Facilities** and **Accomodation** at 3.6. **Professors** are rated commendably at 3.8.

Nothing to show

This institution achieves near-perfect scores across most surveyed areas, excelling in Facilities, Professors, Location, Student Life, Internationality, and Value. The sole area showing a slight dip, though still strong, is Accomodation, rated at a commendable 4. Overall, the university presents a robust and highly-rated educational experience.

Reviews summary
Highlights

Approximately 43% of reviews are positive, highlighting practical skills and approachable professors. While ~14% of feedback is negative, mentioning issues with resources and facilities, the average rating is 3.43/5.

With a 3.8/5 average rating, ~74% of reviews are positive, highlighting flexibility, supportive faculty, and community. A small portion of feedback (~20%) criticizes the learning depth and instructor engagement.

Nothing to show

The single review is positive, with a 5/5 average rating. This reflects ~100% positive feedback, highlighting a well-structured program, qualified instructors, and beneficial clinical placements.

Rating distribution
5★
14%
40%
0%
100%
4★
29%
20%
0%
0%
3★
43%
20%
0%
0%
2★
14%
20%
0%
0%
1★
0%
0%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

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