AI Rate Professor

Design Technology

Jeremy Tooke

INTARC57 · INTEN40 · 2 lifetime ratings

AI rating
93/100
RMP rating
5.0/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
2.0

The decision

If you want practical interior design or Revit skill-building with a professional coach, he looks .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerHands-On Design MentorRevit Skills BuilderProfessional Project FocusAdult Learning StyleWould Take Again
  • Both available reviews rate him a 5 and say students leave with real software and project skills.
  • He frames work professionally, .
  • Sample size is only two reviews, so confidence is limited despite perfect praise.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

68/100

Reviews praise learning outcomes more than free grades; difficulty ratings range light to moderate, implying solid effort is expected.

; no online reviews available.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

70/100

Students can start with little software knowledge and still succeed, though .

; no online reviews available.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

Reviews , so flexibility cannot be confirmed.

; no online reviews available.

Is this professor recommended?

MustTake

95/100

Both reviewers strongly praise him and .

; no online reviews available.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

70/100

No grade complaints appear; focus is on professional standards rather than or harshness.

Format shift

All .

Workload

Moderate

60/100

Contest-style and , though neither review calls it overwhelming.

Format shift

All .

Teaching experience

Excellent

94/100

Students say he teaches complex tools clearly and elevates the class with real professional expectations.

Format shift

All .

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

28/100

Comments emphasize projects, contest work, and software builds rather than traditional exams.

Format shift

All .

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

2 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

and professional, with students reporting strong skill growth in Revit and contest-style projects.

Main concern

Only two reviews exist, so , and .

What students said

“I didn't know nothing about this program but at the end of the semester I could build almost anything. Great Class!!”
INTARC57
“By using the AISD contest as an .”
INTEN40

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 emphasize projects and software deliverables; .

Project BasedProfessional Contest Work

Assessment risk

Varies

60/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Assessment appears project-driven with professional contest-style work; .

Project BasedAISD Contest Assignment
“By using the AISD contest as an .”
INTEN40

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“This is one of the . I took his Revit class.”

Voice snapshots generated from 2 in-person reviews, highlighting skill building and professional projects. Credibility rating: Low.

🛠️ Real Skill Growth

94/100

“I didn't know nothing about this program but at the end of the semester I could build almost anything.”

🏆 Professional Standards

90/100

“The contest put us on a the road to a .”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Quality

  • This is one of the
  • Jeremy Tooke, as far as I am concerned, did a fine job
  • I learned a great deal in his class.

Theme 2

📐 About Course Projects

  • using the AISD contest as an assignment
  • I could build almost anything
  • am taking him again.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

2

Recent reviews read by the AI

2

Lifetime ratings

28/100

Evidence confidence

Only two positive reviews from 2009 and 2013 exist, so scores are directionally strong but statistically fragile.

Inside 2 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

INTARC571 review
INTEN401 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

0 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

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values