AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

dennis gagnon

PHIL111 · PHIL101 · PHIL207 · PHIL207A · PHIL204 · 37 lifetime ratings

AI rating
58/100
RMP rating
3.8/5
Take again
70%
Difficulty
3.4

The decision

Take Gagnon if and ; skip if you need a low-effort requirement.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerDraft Feedback for AsMandatory ParticipationTough but Fair PathLecture Heavy LogicReading Intensive
  • He , and redo options that can make an A achievable with steady effort.
  • Attendance and , and several recent reviews warn of and attrition.
  • Content is reading-heavy philosophy or logic, not a breezy elective for requirement hunters.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

58/100

, and study guides make As reachable, but only if you submit work early and revise carefully.

Online and in-person both reward draft loops; all.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

36/100

Abstract philosophy and categorical logic with and critical writing keep content demanding.

In-person PHIL111 logic draws the hardest difficulty comments.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

22/100

Daily quizzes, cold-calling, and .

Nearly ; but rare.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

64/100

Many call him fair, knowledgeable, and helpful with drafts, while a .

Older and mid-range reviews lean positive; several 2025-2026 in-person notes are strongly negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

48/100

, and draft-feedback policies that reward persistence.

Format shift

; recent in-person comments dispute fairness.

Workload

Moderate

42/100

, and but not always crushing load.

Format shift

Logic sections and .

Teaching experience

Good

66/100

Passionate, knowledgeable lectures and personal stories engage many students, though some find him dull or condescending.

Format shift

; online sample is too small to reverse the overall read.

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

, and and papers all matter.

Format shift

Both formats emphasize .

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

35 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

and required speaking; motivated students thrive on feedback, others call it dull or unfairly hard.

Main concern

, and recent reports of and dropouts.

What students said

“pretty much impossible to not get an A unless you don't put any effort in.”
PHIL101
“ .”
PHIL101
“This class is unnecessarily hard and he grades things based on how much he likes you.”
PHIL111

Remote format

Online

3 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

one student earned a high A via draft loops, .

Main concern

Clarity and .

What students said

“I would email him 5 drafts and get 100% . It takes time”
PHIL101
“ . .”
PHIL111
“Gagnon was quick to set up a meeting with .”
PHIL111

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Exams and , and quizzes are often retakeable, lowering pure test panic.

Draft feedback on examsQuiz retakesTake-home essay examsStudy guides provided

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

76/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and retakeable; exams often allow draft review and lowest-score replacement.

Open-notes quizzesDraft exam reviewReplace lowest exam
“ and also replaces the lowest exam grade with the highest”
PHIL101
“He also lets you send in rough drafts of the midterms and final.”
PHIL101

Online

Online students highlight emailing multiple exam drafts for .

Multiple draft feedbackWork-for-100 path
“Mr. and final exams, multiple times, and he gives you feedback on them before you turn them in.”
PHIL101

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“He allows you to and , so pretty much impossible to not get an A unless you don't put any effort in.”

Voice snapshots generated from 38 philosophy reviews with limited online sample. Credibility rating: Medium.

📝 Draft Path to A

76/100

“I would email him 5 drafts and get 100% . It takes time”

🎙️ Participation Pressure

22/100

“If you don't like being called because he makes sure every student speaks.”

⚠️ Polarized Recent Tone

40/100

“We started with a full class and ended with 12 of us if that says anything.”

🧠 Teaching Depth

66/100

“His personal stories that he connects to the topics we learn in class is really interesting and inspiring.”

Theme 1

📖 About Workload and Reading

  • This course requires a lot of critical thinking.
  • Phil 101 did require more reading than expected
  • Get ready to read

Theme 2

🧪

  • Allows you to redo/send in for .
  • He also lets you send in rough drafts of the midterms and final.
  • as many times as you want.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Red Flags

  • .
  • Not a easy A at all.
  • One of the most boring professor ever.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

38

Recent reviews read by the AI

37

Lifetime ratings

72/100

Evidence confidence

Thirty-eight reviews show a long positive draft-feedback pattern, but .

Inside 38 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 514
4 out of 515
3 out of 51
2 out of 53
1 out of 55

Course coverage

PHIL10116 reviews
PHIL11115 reviews
PHIL2043 reviews
PHIL207A3 reviews
PHIL2071 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

35 reported outcomes

A range

16

A+ 7 · A 7 · A- 2

B range

12

B+ 6 · B 5 · B- 1

C range

1

C- 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

6

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Not sure yet 4 · Rather not say 1