AI Rate Professor

Engineering

Zahra Noroozi

ENGR30ENGR80 · ENG20 · ENGR54 · ENGR20 · ENGR80 · ENGR30ENGR54ENG · ENGR83 · ENGR30 · ENRG20 · 55 lifetime ratings

AI rating
43/100
RMP rating
3.2/5
Take again
60.71%
Difficulty
3.7

The decision

if you can self-teach engineering material and ; otherwise shop for another section.

Best fit · Self Taught ProSelf-Study RequiredTest HeavyTough GraderPre-Recorded LecturesExam-Weighted Grades
  • Many students say lectures are weak or just problem demos, so textbook and .
  • and finals, often around 65-70% combined, with tough scoring.
  • Some praise her care and accessibility, especially in MATLAB, but recent engineering reviews are often harsh.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

47/100

As are common for prepared students, but 65-70% exam weight and .

Online and ; MATLAB summer can be easier with coding background.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

34/100

Statics, dynamics, MATLAB, and materials are dense, and weak lectures force harder independent learning.

; online dynamics and SolidWorks add video-only difficulty.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

48/100

Some sections require attendance for worksheets or points, while if you keep up online.

as important; .

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

58/100

Roughly three in , but many warn beginners and first-time coders to avoid.

Older online MATLAB praise is warmer; .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

36/100

, and As hard without strong performance.

Format shift

Some materials and worksheet classes feel more lenient; SolidWorks and statics often feel strict.

Workload

Heavy

40/100

Weekly quizzes, homework systems, projects, and .

Format shift

Online and and .

Teaching experience

Average

44/100

She can be caring and knowledgeable, yet , and fails to teach concepts clearly.

Format shift

Online complaints center on old recordings; .

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

82/100

Midterms and , with projects and quizzes secondary.

Format shift

; some courses add group coding or shoebox projects.

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 Effort For Reward

; exams dominate grades and teaching quality is frequently called mid or poor.

Main concern

Exam-heavy structure and instruction.

What students said

“I did not learn anything from her. and peers.”
ENGR30
“You won't actually learn in class, so start self-studying early.”
ENGR20
“Bad at teaching but, everything is taught through pre-recorded lectures then in-class worksheets... Weirdly lenient with grades”
ENGR54

Remote format

Online

15 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online sections use , and self-study; outcomes vary from caring support to frustrating monotone videos.

Main concern

Weak live teaching and beginners.

What students said

“Ms. Noroozi doesn't seem to understand anything that she's teaching, and is very condescending.”
ENGR20
“She makes you watch prerecorded lecture videos (reads off slides in monotone voice, numerous errors), in the actual ”
ENGR83
“Noroozi helped me to enjoy programming again! .”
ENGR20

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Exams dominate the course and , so risk is high.

High exam weightTwo midterms and finalsTough MCQCSWA riskSelf-study prep

Assessment risk

Strict

38/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and finals that many say exceed class examples.

70% examsHarder than practiceFinal curve sometimesProject poorly explained
“Her exams account for 70% of the grade. NOT QUIZZES. 35% for the midterm and 35% for the final.”
ENGR30
“This is not an introductory class to matlab... take the other Engr 20 teacher his exams are 10x easier.”
ENGR20
“Her exams are unnecessarily hard but so as you will.”
ENGR83

Online

Online reviews describe hard midterms and , with little helpful live teaching.

Multiple finalsMCQ midtermsExam heavyLate grades
“THREE finals. You are forced to listen to her unbearable voice to study, as she does not post study guides”
ENGR83
“nothing will prepare u for the and so expect that to tank ur grade.”
ENGR83
“Grading is rough 30% for 2 midterms spaced a few days apart and again 35% for 2 finals.”
Engr80

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“You won't actually learn in class, so start self-studying early.”

Voice snapshots generated from 50 engineering reviews across online and and . Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

44/100

“Despite being a teacher for over 20 years Professor Noroozi absolutely fails at teaching in a comprehensive manner.”

📚

40/100

“I did not learn anything from her. and peers.”

🧪

38/100

“Her exams account for 70% of the grade. NOT QUIZZES. 35% for the midterm and 35% for the final.”

👍 When It Works

70/100

“Noroozi helped me to enjoy programming again! .”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Lectures are just her doing problems for you, not teaching how to solve them.
  • Uses 6 year old recorded lectures.
  • She is very knowledgeable of SolidWorks and she does a great job of demonstrating it.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • , but still challenging.
  • don't bomb one or else your grade is cooked
  • Weirdly lenient with grades, not a difficult class, just kinda painfully boring.

Theme 3

❤️ About Support

  • She answers emails pretty fast and never gives up before making sure that you get your answers.
  • go to her office hours for help.
  • She is a lovely person.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

50

Recent reviews read by the AI

55

Lifetime ratings

84/100

Evidence confidence

Fifty reviews across many engineering courses and both formats form a .

Inside 50 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 511
4 out of 516
3 out of 511
2 out of 57
1 out of 511

Course coverage

ENGR2023 reviews
ENGR839 reviews
ENGR308 reviews
ENGR545 reviews
ENG201 review
Show 4 more courses
ENGR30ENGR54ENG1 review
ENGR30ENGR801 review
Engr801 review
ENRG201 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

47 reported outcomes

A range

27

A+ 4 · A 22 · A- 1

B range

10

B+ 4 · B 6

C range

3

C+ 1 · C 2

D range

1

D+ 1

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

6

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Not sure yet 5