AI Rate Professor

Photography

Julia Dean

PHOTO002 · PHOTO2 · 3 lifetime ratings

AI rating
18/100
RMP rating
2.0/5
Take again
33.33%
Difficulty
4.3

The decision

Avoid unless you want a blunt street-photo boot camp and can tolerate harsh public critique.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerTough GraderHarsh CritiqueUncomfortable EnvironmentImpossible StandardsOld-School
  • Two of three reviews describe harsh public criticism and failing or dropping despite effort.
  • and expensive reshoots waste film and money.
  • One student says give her a chance if you .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

MissionImpossible

12/100

Reported outcomes include F and .

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

22/100

Photo 2 is treated as demanding street photography with repeated reshoots and high bar work.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

15/100

as mandatory.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

28/100

Only one of ; the other two urge avoidance after harsh experiences.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

12/100

and failing or dropping despite full assignment submission dominate.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Workload

Heavy

28/100

Lots of , and film costs pile on beyond normal intro load.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Teaching experience

Poor

24/100

, but most describe rude, unsupportive critique.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

22/100

, and reshoots rather than formal exams.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

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

3 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person Photo 2 is intense, attendance-heavy, and often feels emotionally harsh with vague standards.

Main concern

, and grades that can tank despite full effort.

What students said

“Creates an uncomfortable environment with vague, harsh public criticism.”
PHOTO2
“Julia is rude and condescending.”
PHOTO002
“DON'T. MAKE. HER. ANGRY.”
PHOTO2

Remote format

Online

0 reviews

Low confidence

No stored summary is available for this format.

Main concern

No main concern is stored for this format.

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove traditional exams; assessment is assignment and critique driven.

Project BasedPublic CritiqueReshootsNo Clear Exam Policy

Assessment risk

Standard

40/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Assessment is through photography assignments, harsh public critiques, and repeated reshoots.

Public CritiqueAssignment ReshootsTough Standards
“I turned in every assignment and still got an F.”
PHOTO2
“ and waste money on film”
PHOTO002

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Creates an uncomfortable environment with vague, harsh public criticism.”

Voice snapshots generated from 3 in-person Photo 2 reviews. Credibility rating: Low.

🚫 Harsh Environment

24/100

“Julia is rude and condescending.”

📉 Grade Risk

12/100

“I turned in every assignment and still got an F.”

🎯 Impossible Standards

22/100

“waste money on film to fit her impossible to pinpoint standards”

Theme 1

🧨

  • vague, harsh public criticism
  • blunt with your work

Theme 2

📸 About Course Demands

  • Lots of homework
  • Photo 2 is like Intro to Street Photograpghy

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

3

Recent reviews read by the AI

3

Lifetime ratings

35/100

Evidence confidence

Only three recent in-person reviews with strong negative tilt limit confidence.

Inside 3 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 50
4 out of 51
3 out of 50
2 out of 50
1 out of 52

Course coverage

PHOTO22 reviews
PHOTO0021 review

Reported outcomes

F results lead the reported letter grades.

2 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

0

No reported values

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

1

F 1

No letter grade reported

1

Drop/Withdrawal 1