AI Rate Professor

Humanities

Natalie Latteri

HUM9 · HUMN07H · HUMN5 · HUMN3 · HUMN2 · 17 lifetime ratings

AI rating
86/100
RMP rating
4.4/5
Take again
77.78%
Difficulty
2.8

The decision

if you want an engaging humanities class and can stay on top of weekly deadlines.

Best fit · Beginner FriendlyEngaging humanities lecturesCaring but inconsistentReading and writing heavyAchievable ADeadline risk online
  • Most students praise Latteri as engaging, funny, caring, and .
  • Grades are usually very achievable, but the , and participation.
  • A few serious negative online reviews describe strict drop or .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

82/100

A grades are common and students call the work doable, but you must keep up with , and deadlines.

Online evidence strongly supports achievable A grades with steady work, while but includes one inconsistency warning.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

69/100

The and engaging, though reading and writing volume can make it feel heavier.

Online classes are often described as doable, while .

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

42/100

Participation and deadlines matter, and online reviews show missed assignments can lead to strict consequences.

Online evidence shows strict deadline enforcement, while and engagement.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

80/100

Most students recommend her for engaging lectures and , but strict missed-assignment handling lowers confidence.

Both formats are mostly recommended, but .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Lenient

76/100

Most students earned high grades and describe A-level work as achievable, but grading and deadline enforcement are not always forgiving.

Format shift

Online reviews show both easy A outcomes and strict drops, while concern.

Workload

Moderate

58/100

The workload usually includes weekly discussions, reading, reflections, and a , but many students call it manageable.

Format shift

Online reviews give the clearest workload details, while and a .

Teaching experience

Good

84/100

Most students describe her as engaging, funny, caring, and clear, though a few reviews report uncaring or inconsistent experiences.

Format shift

, while online reviews are positive overall but include the harshest negative experiences.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

Assessment is driven mainly , and occasional quizzes rather than exams.

Format shift

Online evidence clearly centers on weekly assignments and , while and papers.

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

5 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Beginner Friendly

and caring presence, though one review says difficulty and methods shifted unpredictably.

Main concern

One in-person review reports inconsistent difficulty and a .

What students said

“Her class was engaging and informative.”
HUMN2
“her methods shift a lot between really easy and extremely difficult out of nowhere”
HUMN3

Remote format

Online

13 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

Online reviews are mostly positive about engaging written lectures, accessibility, and achievable grades, but missed deadlines can carry serious risk.

Main concern

Some students report being .

What students said

“An A is very achievable with some effort and putting time aside for it!”
HUMN07H
“I was dropped a mere hour and a half after the deadline.”
HUMN2

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews describe papers, presentations, discussions, and occasional quizzes rather than traditional proctored exams, making assessment generally student-friendly.

Final PaperPresentationWeekly DiscussionsOccasional Quizzes

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

78/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews mention participation, weekly discussion posts on Canvas, and a , but do not clearly prove a .

ParticipationWeekly Discussion PostsFinal Paper
“There are , but they are not too difficult.”
HUMN07H
“ had.”
HUMN3

Online

Online reviews mention final research papers, presentations, weekly discussions, reflections, and occasional quizzes, but do not clearly .

Final Research PaperPresentationWeekly DiscussionsOccasional Quizzes
“ and a presentation based on a topic of choice”
HUMN5
“Each week has a and a 2-page paper/video reflection.”
HUMN07H

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“AMAZING PROFESSOR. .”

Voice snapshots generated from 18 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching, workload, deadline policy, and grading; credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

84/100

“Her class was engaging and informative.”

📚 Workload Reality

58/100

“It's just a lot of reading, writing, and sometimes watching a few viewings.”

⚠️ Deadline Risk

42/100

“I was dropped a mere hour and a half after the deadline.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Her lectures are great and easy to digest.
  • Very thorough with all lectures.
  • She always keeps you participating and laughing.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty And Grades

  • An A is very achievable with some effort and putting time aside for it!
  • There is work but it was not difficult.
  • Very text heavy but no required book so it saves you money.

Theme 3

❤️ About Support And Concerns

  • She genuinely wants the and is so supportive!
  • and accommodating to my outside emergency, which I appreciated a lot.
  • My disability accommodations were never approved by her.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

18

Recent reviews read by the AI

17

Lifetime ratings

87/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is high because 18 reviews span 2018 to 2026, include both online and in-person formats, and .

Inside 18 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 512
4 out of 53
3 out of 50
2 out of 51
1 out of 52

Course coverage

HUMN57 reviews
HUMN25 reviews
HUMN07H4 reviews
HUM91 review
HUMN31 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

18 reported outcomes

A range

14

A+ 5 · A 6 · A- 3

B range

1

B+ 1

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

3

Drop/Withdrawal 2 · Not sure yet 1