AI Rate Professor

Fine Arts

Elizabeth Bresnan

ART2F · HUM16 · ARTS1A · HUMI7 · ARTS2B · ARTSD001A · ART101 · ART · ARTS2A · ARTAART1 · 1A · HUMI15 · ARTHISTORY · HUMID016 · ART1A · HUMANITIES · ARTHISTORY2A · HUMI16 · ART2A · 61 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
2.7/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.2

The decision

Avoid unless you are comfortable with , and a highly mixed teaching style.

Best fit · Effort For RewardUnclear AssignmentsHarsh GradingRude ToneBoring LecturesMixed Extra Credit
  • Many students , and a rude or condescending tone.
  • A smaller group says the class is manageable if students attend, study, and use .
  • The course content is not always described as hard, but grading and communication make the experience risky.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

52/100

Some students report getting an A through attendance, notes, study, and , but many others describe harsh or .

The Online evidence is negative and grade-risk focused, while In person evidence is mixed with .

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

The subject matter is usually manageable, but unclear lectures, ambiguous exams, and .

The , and In person reviews repeatedly mention confusing lectures and tests.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

42/100

as mandatory, but many students say class notes, lectures, and occasional roll matter.

The , while In person reviews often advise attending class.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

34/100

Most negative comments warn students away because of , and .

The Online review is strongly negative, and In person reviews are mixed but .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

30/100

Students repeatedly call her a tough or though some say and studying can help.

Format shift

The Online review says papers are graded harshly, while In and .

Workload

Moderate

50/100

Workload includes reading, forum participation, papers, homework, notes, tests, and , but it is not always described as overwhelming.

Format shift

The Online review highlights papers, while In person , and .

Teaching experience

Poor

40/100

Repeated comments describe unclear teaching, dry lectures, poor organization, and rude behavior, despite some strong positive reviews.

Format shift

The Online review is very negative, while In person reviews are polarized but often criticize clarity and tone.

Assessment method

Balanced

60/100

Grades appear to come from tests, papers, homework, participation, and rather than one single assessment type.

Format shift

The Online review emphasizes papers, while In , and participation.

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

49 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In person reviews are polarized, but repeated complaints , and rude interactions.

Main concern

Students may work hard but and expectations are inconsistent.

What students said

“She is by far the .”
HUMI16
“ , and study and you'll get an A.”
ARTS1A
“Unclear, unhelpful, stubborn, unreasonable, unrealistic, rude, arrogant.”
ART1A

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

The only Online review is strongly negative and , and .

Main concern

and harsh grading make the online experience high risk.

What students said

“This is by far the !”
HUMI16
“She is very rude and .”
HUMI16

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

, but they do not clearly prove open-book, proctoring, webcam, or closed-book rules.

Ambiguous Test QuestionsStudy Guide RiskExam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Assessment risk

Varies

42/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In person reviews mention ambiguous tests and weak exam guidance, but .

Ambiguous Test QuestionsStudy Guide Risk
“She tells you what material is going to be on the test but then asks ambigious questions.”
ART1A
“does not give good guidance for ”
HUMI16

Online

The Online review does not clearly .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“She is by far the .”

Voice snapshots generated from 50 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and course format. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

40/100

“She is unclear in direction, condescending with students, does not follow her own syllabus, inconsistent with .”

⚖️

30/100

“ .”

📈 A Path

52/100

“ , and study and you'll get an A.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She is extremely rude.
  • The most unprofessional teacher I've ever had.
  • and helpful.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • .
  • , if you're smart and , if not stay away.
  • As long as you do your work you can earn and A.

Theme 3

🧭 About Clarity

  • Everything is done on her website, so you might as .
  • She posts assignment requirements on the web for convenient access

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

50

Recent reviews read by the AI

61

Lifetime ratings

78/100

Evidence confidence

The dataset has 50 reviews across many years with detailed comments, but most reviews are old and opinions are polarized.

Inside 50 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 513
4 out of 511
3 out of 58
2 out of 512
1 out of 517

Course coverage

HUMI1616 reviews
ART1A10 reviews
ARTS1A6 reviews
ARTS2A2 reviews
HUM162 reviews
Show 14 more courses
1A1 review
ART1 review
ART1011 review
ART2A1 review
ART2F1 review
ARTAART11 review
ARTHISTORY1 review
ARTHISTORY2A1 review
ARTS2B1 review
ARTSD001A1 review
HUMANITIES1 review
HUMI151 review
HUMI71 review
HUMID0161 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

B range

0

No reported values

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values