AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Cynthia Kaufman

PHIL10 · PHIL049 · PHIL002 · PHIL4 · PHIL2 · PHIL02 · PHIL3 · PHIL49 · PHILOSOPHY17 · PHILO49 · PHIL20ABC · POLITICALPHILO · POLI17 · PHIL17H · ICS17 · PHILMORPOL · PHIL17 · PHIL20AB · SOC49 · PHIL20A · 69 lifetime ratings

AI rating
96/100
RMP rating
4.6/5
Take again
93.33%
Difficulty
2.5

The decision

if you want a and are willing to read, write, and participate.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerInspirationalCaringDiscussion BasedReading HeavyFlexible Grading
  • Students overwhelmingly describe her as caring, inspiring, and discussion-centered.
  • The grade is usually very reachable because , and effort-based assignments.
  • The , and occasional organization issues.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

83/100

An A is very attainable through participation, reading, papers, and rewrites, but it is not always effortless because .

Online reviews make the A sound easier, while , and occasional tough grading.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

64/100

The class is accessible and discussion-based, but the , and writing can be intellectually demanding.

Online reviews describe manageable work, while and challenging discussion.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

58/100

marking attendance mandatory and others saying it is not required.

Online reviews mostly show required participation or attendance, while .

Is this professor recommended?

MustTake

93/100

Students strongly recommend her because , and makes philosophy and social issues feel meaningful.

Both formats are strongly favorable, with online reviews especially praising class connection and in-person reviews praising inspiration.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Lenient

78/100

because students cite easy A , and no tests, though some papers are graded strictly.

Format shift

Online reviews emphasize easy assignment grading, while and tougher essay grading.

Workload

Moderate

48/100

Workload is moderate because many students mention heavy reading, papers, group work, and .

Format shift

Online workload centers on reading and participation, while , and community engagement.

Teaching experience

Excellent

91/100

Students consistently describe her as caring, inspiring, respectful, and excellent at leading meaningful discussions.

Format shift

Both formats support excellent teaching, though in-person reviews include more comments about occasional disorganization.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

18/100

Assessment is dominated , and service work rather than tests.

Format shift

Both formats consistently describe assignments and discussion as the core assessment method.

Luni fit check

Weigh these signals against your actual schedule.

Get help balancing workload, grading, and timing when no option is an obvious fit.

Course format

Compare the in-person and online experience.

Classroom format

In person

45 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person reviews praise her as inspiring and caring, but , and occasional disorganization.

Main concern

Students who dislike reading, writing, or open discussion may find the class frustrating.

What students said

“If and .”
ICS17
“The , so you really have no clue what to expect half the time.”
PHIL17

Remote format

Online

5 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

Online reviews are very positive, with , and and participation demands.

Main concern

The main concern is keeping up with reading and .

What students said

“This was an online class, but we still had a very strong class connection and we had really thorough and insightful discussions.”
ICS17
“Doing the bare minimum for .”
POLI17

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews repeatedly say there are no tests or and assignment-based.

No TestsNo Final ExamEssays With RewritesPresentation Final Mentioned

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

92/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

exam, paper rewrites, and a presentation or service-based final in some sections.

No TestsNo Final ExamUnlimited RewritesPresentation Final
“There are exam.”
PHIL10
“ !”
PHIL3

Online

Online , but they do not clearly prove webcam, proctoring, Lockdown Browser, open-book, or .

No Tests MentionedNo Clear Proctoring Evidence
“ . no tests.”
ICS17

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Cynthia is such a good teacher and one of the .”

Voice snapshots generated from 50 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and discussion style; credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

91/100

“DeAnza has some great instructors but Cynthia is without equal.”

👍 Recommendation Rate

93/100

“I would 100% take this class again.”

📚 Workload Reality

48/100

“The class , but Cynthia makes class so engaging and it's very inspirational.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She loves what you have to say and respect your opinions.
  • Cynthia is a professor that cares deeply about her students.
  • She is absolutely inspiring, intelligent, open-minded and wonderful.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Doing the bare minimum for .
  • No tests? No quizzes? No problem.
  • , but she gives you unlimited rewrites

Theme 3

📚

  • If and .
  • A lot of and a lot of group discussion in class.
  • class is discussion based and is only as good as you make it.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

50

Recent reviews read by the AI

69

Lifetime ratings

92/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is high because 50 reviews across many years are detailed and highly consistent about teaching style, workload, and grading.

Inside 50 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 553
4 out of 512
3 out of 53
2 out of 51
1 out of 50

Course coverage

ICS1712 reviews
PHIL178 reviews
PHIL20A4 reviews
PHIL23 reviews
PHIL33 reviews
Show 15 more courses
POLI173 reviews
PHIL0022 reviews
PHIL17H2 reviews
PHIL492 reviews
PHIL021 review
PHIL0491 review
PHIL101 review
PHIL20AB1 review
PHIL20ABC1 review
PHIL41 review
PHILMORPOL1 review
PHILO491 review
PHILOSOPHY171 review
POLITICALPHILO1 review
SOC491 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

19 reported outcomes

A range

16

A+ 1 · A 13 · A- 2

B range

2

B 2

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Rather_Not_Say 1