Corinne Slosburg

FRENCH · 5 lifetime ratings

AI rating: 28/100
RMP rating: 2.0/5
Take again: 20%
Difficulty: 3.8

The decision

Only consider the well-structured async French section if you are fully independent; most reviews advise avoiding her for support and communication.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUneven teachingDisability support concernsStrict attendance trackingAI accusation riskAsync structure praise

Overall ratings are low with only one strongly positive asynchronous review.
Multiple students with disabilities report no accommodations or help and .
, and AI accusations appear in .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

52/100

Some students still earn A or A-minus, but drops and reliable.

Both online and , yet several students left the class instead of finishing.

Is the course easy?

Standard

42/100

French content plus homework and unguided writing can feel demanding, especially without strong teaching support.

Difficulty ratings run higher online for some students; guidance.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

28/100

as mandatory, and one student was repeatedly marked absent despite evidence.

; one online review said attendance was not mandatory.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

24/100

Four of five reviews are negative on care, support, or teaching effort, with .

The ; both in-person reviews are negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

48/100

Grades can still land at A or A-minus, but AI accusations and and stressful.

Format shift

review.

Workload

Moderate

45/100

, and course structure create a moderate load rather than a featherlight class.

Format shift

; online async load is better organized but still real.

Teaching experience

Poor

28/100

Most comments describe ignored questions, arrogance, no guidance, or no disability support, with one async exception.

Format shift

Online quality swings from 5 to 1; in-person quality is low.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

28/100

, and movie responses more than formal exams.

Format shift

Neither format clearly describes high-stakes proctored exams.

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 Self Taught Pro

one cinema course felt unguided and lazy, and another disability-related review ended in a drop.

Main concern

Little instructor guidance and no help for students needing support.

What students said

“Basically, students watch a movie and write about it with no guidance from the professor.”
french

“She didn't do anything to help me so I dropped the class and took an language learning app instead!”
french

Remote format

Online

3 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online experiences split between one excellent async design and two harsh reviews about attendance disputes, ignored questions, AI accusations, and no disability support.

Main concern

Communication failures, AI accusations, and lack of help for students needing accommodations.

What students said

“Constantly claimed i was absent, even when i provided evidence of .”
french

“The way she's structured this class is honestly great and conducive to learning.”
french

“She was so arrogant and thoughtless that she never offered to help.”
french

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove a consistent exam format, so .

Assignment-focusedLimited exam detail

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews focus on movie watching and writing with .

Movie response writing

“students watch a movie and write about it with no guidance from the professor.”
french

Online

Online reviews do not clearly prove webcam, lockdown, open-book, or .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice
“Constantly claimed i was absent, even when i provided evidence of .”
Voice snapshots generated from 5 reviews (3 online, 2 in , and one strong async success. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

28/100

“Lazy in my opinion. Class participation by students was very weak.”

👎 Recommendation

24/100

“I dropped the class, picked up an App and started learning French on my own.”

🧩 Async Exception

80/100

“ if you want to learn french”

♿ Support Concerns

15/100

“She didn't do anything to help me so I dropped the class and took an language learning app instead!”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

The way she's structured this class is honestly great and conducive to learning
no guidance from the professor
Did not acknowledge questions

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

MULTIPLE ai as short as one paragraph
Lots of homework
overall, not a great first time french class

Theme 3

❤️ About Care and Support

She was so arrogant and thoughtless that she never offered to help
She didn't do anything to help me

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

Recent reviews read by the AI

Lifetime ratings

55/100

Evidence confidence

Five recent reviews are detailed and thematically consistent on support problems, but the small sample and one strong positive outlier keep confidence only medium.

Inside 5 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51

4 out of 50

3 out of 50

2 out of 51

1 out of 53

Course coverage

french5 reviews

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

4 reported outcomes

A range

A 2 · A- 1

B range

No reported values

C range

No reported values

D range

No reported values

F

No reported values

No letter grade reported

Drop/Withdrawal 1