AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Mike Monge

PHIL1 · PHIL357 · PHILOSOPHY3 · ETH2 · LOGIC1 · PHILPHIL · PHIL3 · PHIL4 · PHILOSPHY · SOSCI110 · 20 lifetime ratings

AI rating
58/100
RMP rating
3.9/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
2.5

The decision

if and will do the reading; skip if you want a light GE.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerPassionate DebaterPolarizing StyleWork Determines GradeBook-Heavy LogicConservative Controversies
  • Many older reviews praise clear, humorous, two-sided philosophy teaching.
  • Others call him rude, boring, or biased and hard to learn from.
  • Effort-based grades with frequent tests; .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

52/100

if you read; others need maximum study and say effort determines A or B.

Almost ; the one online review frames grades as hard without being a philosophy geek or using AI carefully.

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Philosophy and logic range from pretty easy for some to tough and book-heavy for others.

In-person comments dominate; online sample is too small to redefine difficulty.

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

55/100

Comments stress showing up, reading, and participating for .

; in-person participation is repeatedly emphasized.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

55/100

Strong fans and strong detractors; recent online vibe is negative and .

In-person historical split is mixed-positive; .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

Students say and rewards effort, but others call him tough or rude when wrong.

Format shift

Online reviewer tags tough grader; .

Workload

Moderate

50/100

Regular tests, reading, participation, and occasional papers; not a no-work class.

Format shift

Online mentions lots of homework; and multiple tests.

Teaching experience

Average

62/100

Passionate, humorous, and ; boring, condescending, or biased for others.

Format shift

; the online review is sharply critical.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

72/100

, and discussion participation.

Format shift

; online details are sparse beyond homework load.

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

19 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

Mostly 2003-2010 in-person reviews split between entertaining, fair philosophy teaching and boring, rude, or biased experiences.

Main concern

Polarizing personality and .

What students said

“LOVED his class... because it was so entertaining.”
ETH2
“ so many other better teachers at IVC.”
LOGIC1
“His class is tough, but very fair. Your effort determines your grade.”
PHIL3

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Recent online PHIL1 review is strongly negative, citing self-absorbed style, AI traps, and .

Main concern

Hidden anti-AI traps and need to be a philosophy geek for a good grade.

What students said

“He is likely one of the most self-absorbed professors I have ever had.”
PHIL1

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

doable with reading and notes for some, very hard without heavy study for others.

Multiple testsReading-based examsNotes sometimes allowedHard tests without study

Assessment risk

Standard

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

; easier when students do the reading and attend.

Multiple tests including finalDifficult without studyEasier with reading
“ .Maximum study time required for this class.”
PHIL3
“Easy tests if you do the reading and the material's pretty interesting, for the most part.”
PHIL1

Online

Only one online review; .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“If you do the work and study for the . His class is tough, but very fair.”

Voice snapshots generated from 20 mostly old in-person reviews plus one recent online critique; credibility Medium due to age and thin recent sample.

🎯 Teaching Quality

62/100

“He is an awesome teacher! He is truly a teacher because .”

⚖️ Polarizing Fit

40/100

“ if you want an if you want propaganda.”

📚 Effort Reward

55/100

“Your effort determines your grade. I learned the most from this class than any other class at IVC”

🔥 Online Warning

25/100

“Only way to get a good grade is either be a philosophy geek or know how to use AI and humanize it”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • nice and very humorous. he'll definitely have you understand the stuff.
  • very animated teaching style. very knowlegable in his subject.
  • Class discussions occur daily and he's very involved and funny.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • pretty easy, and got a B.......
  • .
  • The if you do the reading and go to class.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Controversies

  • Very conservative and close minded philosophy course.
  • can be condescending, make fun of challenging or incorrect comments.
  • when you get an answer wrong, he comments you back rudely

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

20

Recent reviews read by the AI

20

Lifetime ratings

48/100

Evidence confidence

20 reviews but almost all pre-2011 with only one recent online comment and almost no grade or .

Inside 20 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 513
4 out of 52
3 out of 50
2 out of 53
1 out of 52

Course coverage

PHIL37 reviews
PHIL14 reviews
LOGIC12 reviews
ETH21 review
PHIL3571 review
Show 5 more courses
PHIL41 review
PHILOSOPHY31 review
PHILOSPHY1 review
PHILPHIL1 review
SOSCI1101 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

2 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

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

0

No reported values