AI Rate Professor

Art

Justin Cram

ART156 · 2 lifetime ratings

AI rating
48/100
RMP rating
4.5/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
1.0

The decision

Expect an easy A, but weigh conflicting reviews and the recent serious integrity concern before enrolling.

Best fit · Easy A HunterEasy gradesMixed teaching reviewsIndustry experienceNurturing resourcesAttendance noted mandatory
  • Older reviews praise industry insight and .
  • A recent review harshly criticizes his handling of plagiarism.
  • All reported grades are A with very low difficulty.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

88/100

All three reviewers reported A grades with difficulty rated 1, indicating low effort needed for top marks.

; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Introductory

90/100

Consistently rated difficulty 1 with no comments describing hard concepts.

; no online reviews.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

22/100

; others do not contradict a flexible policy.

; no online reviews.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

42/100

Early reviews are positive, but a recent quality-1 review and 0% would-take-again signal real hesitation.

; no online reviews.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Generous

85/100

Every reported grade is A with very low difficulty ratings.

Format shift

.

Workload

Featherlight

88/100

; students describe easy courses.

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Average

52/100

Older students praise creativity and help; a recent review raises a serious competence concern.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

30/100

Art software course comments focus on projects and resources rather than formal exams.

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

3 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Easy A Hunter

In-person ART156 reviews split between early praise for nurturing industry-based teaching and a recent low score over plagiarism handling, with uniformly easy As.

Main concern

A recent review alleges he did not understand plagiarism when challenged by a visiting professor.

What students said

“He didn't know what plagiarism was and could not handle it when a visiting professor explained he supported plagiarism.”
ART156
“He's committed to providing resources for the students and being as nurturing as possible. Great guy”
ART156
“extremely helpful and knowledgeable on After Effects and Photoshop.”
ART156

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 do not .

No clear exam format described

Assessment risk

Varies

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

or formats.

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“He was quite awesome. He works at KCET so he has professional insight and not the type that's snobby.”

Voice snapshots generated from 3 in-person reviews with mixed old praise and a recent integrity critique. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

52/100

“extremely helpful and knowledgeable on After Effects and Photoshop. Very creative, committed, and helpful.”

⚠️ Integrity Concern

20/100

“He didn't know what plagiarism was and could not handle it when a visiting professor explained he supported plagiarism.”

🅰️ Easy A Pattern

88/100

“A”

👍 Recommendation Rate

42/100

“He's committed to providing resources for the students and being as nurturing as possible. Great guy”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • professional insight and not the type that's snobby
  • extremely helpful and knowledgeable on After Effects and Photoshop
  • being as nurturing as possible

Theme 2

⚠️ About Concerns

  • He didn't know what plagiarism was
  • could not handle it when a visiting professor explained he supported plagiarism.

Theme 3

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • Course DIFFICULTY rating: 1
  • A

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

3

Recent reviews read by the AI

2

Lifetime ratings

35/100

Evidence confidence

Only three reviews spanning 2013 to 2026 with conflicting tone and limited detail reduce reliability.

Inside 3 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 51
3 out of 50
2 out of 50
1 out of 51

Course coverage

ART1563 reviews

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

3 reported outcomes

A range

3

A 3

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