AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Mark Johnson

PHIL1 · PHIL23 · PHILO1 · PHILOS4 · PHILOSOPHY1 · PHIL0 · PHILO4 · 12 lifetime ratings

AI rating
34/100
RMP rating
2.8/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.5

The decision

Avoid unless you already love philosophy and .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerUnorganizedBoring LecturesHard GraderNote Card AllowedMixed Fairness
  • Many students call him disorganized, boring, or uninterested in teaching.
  • As, , and subjective tests.
  • A minority find the material interesting if they engage and .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

32/100

Students say few As are given, tests are subjective and hard-graded, and .

.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

28/100

Comments cite dense philosophy content, lots of reading, weekly responses, and material beyond intro level.

.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

; engagement is praised when present, but .

.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

30/100

Most reviews urge avoidance due to boredom, disorganization, and little perceived benefit.

.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

28/100

Students report few As, , and and essays.

Format shift

.

Workload

Heavy

35/100

Weekly reading responses, multiple books, essays, and .

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Poor

36/100

Frequent claims of , and lack of teaching care dominate.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

, and finals rather than one single mode.

Format shift

.

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

12 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

interesting content for engaged students, but frequent complaints of , and low teaching energy.

Main concern

, and boring delivery frustrate many students.

What students said

“ .E. CANCELS CLASS WITHOUT NOTICE)...THE !!!AVOID IF POSSIBLE.”
PHIL1
“ . it will not benefit u.”
PHIL1
“Not an easy prof but very fair. Material covered is extremely interesting even for an non-major.”
PHILOS4

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.

and in-class tests with note cards, but as hard and subjective.

Take-home examsNote card allowedSubjective gradingFinal paper

Assessment risk

Standard

48/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

tests, and a final paper with tough subjective grading.

Take-home examsNote card allowedSubjective gradingFinal paper
“u're even allowed a note card on the stuff if u try to fit in.”
PHIL1
“grades based on , and a final paper (only 5 pages).”
PHILO4
“THe and he grades hard. He gives study guides and allows you to bring a .”
PHILOSOPHY1

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“... .E. CANCELS CLASS WITHOUT NOTICE)...THE !!!AVOID IF POSSIBLE.”

Voice snapshots generated from 12 in-person , and split interest in philosophy content. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

36/100

“Horrible teacher!!! !!!”

📉 Recommendation Risk

30/100

“ . it will not benefit u.”

⚖️

28/100

“He only gives out a couple of As and he makes it really chalenging.”

📚 Workload Pressure

35/100

“The course involves tons of reading and a . Tedious.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • WRITES NOTES ON BOARD 90% OF WHICH DOES NOT MAKE SENSE
  • this class is easy, but the only problem is that
  • Professor Johnson actually TRIES to teach.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • very hard class!
  • Not an easy course. He only gives out a couple of As
  • i never once did the readings, but showed up for class, took notes and got an A.

Theme 3

📚 About Course Content

  • The subject material is quite interesting.
  • Material covered is extremely interesting even for an non-major.
  • subject matter was well beyond what an intro class should entail.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

12

Recent reviews read by the AI

12

Lifetime ratings

58/100

Evidence confidence

Twelve reviews from 2006-2010 show a consistent negative lean with some defenders, but comments are older and somewhat uneven in detail.

Inside 12 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 52
4 out of 51
3 out of 56
2 out of 51
1 out of 52

Course coverage

PHIL14 reviews
PHILO13 reviews
PHIL01 review
PHIL231 review
PHILO41 review
Show 2 more courses
PHILOS41 review
PHILOSOPHY11 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