AI Rate Professor

Art

Katherine Sheehan

ART110 · ART130 · 10 lifetime ratings

AI rating
42/100
RMP rating
2.5/5
Take again
37.5%
Difficulty
4.0

The decision

She is risky online but more workable in person for students willing to practice heavily and accept tough critique.

Best fit · Effort For RewardTough graderUnclear online instructionsHeavy art workloadBetter in personHarsh feedback
  • Online reviews are consistently negative, saying she assumes students already know how to draw and .
  • In-person reviews are much stronger, with , and skill improvement.
  • An A is difficult because , and strong execution.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

35/100

Getting an A is difficult because students , and a need for polished work.

Online reviews make the A feel especially hard due to unclear teaching, while grade but not easily an A.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

34/100

The course is demanding for beginners because students say she expects prior drawing ability and assigns time-intensive projects.

Online students find the content harder due to missing demos and , while and improvement.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

22/100

In-person reviews mention strict absence limits and participation expectations, while .

Attendance pressure is supported by in-person reviews only; and .

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

45/100

She is not recommended online, but handle strict grading and critiques.

Online sentiment is strongly negative, while about workload and grading.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

25/100

Students repeatedly call her a and say she expects clean, high-effort projects, especially for A-level work.

Format shift

Online comments describe harsh grading without enough instruction, while in-person comments describe tough but .

Workload

Heavy

30/100

Reviews mention lots of , and several hours of drawing outside class.

Format shift

Both formats show meaningful workload, but online reviews frame it as harder because .

Teaching experience

Average

48/100

Teaching quality is split sharply by format, with poor online instruction but and skill development.

Format shift

Online reviews are consistently poor, while , and visible improvement.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

18/100

Assessment centers on , and weekly vocabulary quizzes rather than traditional exams.

Format shift

Both online and in-person evidence points to project-based grading, with and quizzes.

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 Effort For Reward

In-person reviews are mostly positive but , and limited attendance flexibility.

Main concern

, and .

What students said

“Everyones drawing skills improved.”
ART110
“ so you have to be perfect to receive an A”
ART130
“you are only allowed 3 absences”
ART110

Remote format

Online

5 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online students report unclear project instructions, little technique teaching, harsh feedback, and .

Main concern

The online course may leave beginners without .

What students said

“Absolutely terrible, she basically expects you to be an artist.”
ART110
“Never gave any lessons or live demos on how to actually draw”
ART110
“Instructions for and copy-pasted from another course”
ART130

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do , and assessment appears mostly project, portfolio, critique, and quiz based.

Portfolio SubmissionWeekly Vocabulary QuizzesProject-Based Assessment

Assessment risk

Standard

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and portfolio submissions instead of written tests, but do not clearly prove proctoring or final exam policy.

Portfolio SubmissionWeekly Vocabulary QuizzesNo Written Tests Mentioned
“Instead of .”
ART110
“ .”
ART130

Online

Online reviews discuss projects and grading but do not clearly prove webcam, proctoring, open-book, midterm, or .

Project-Based Assessment
“ and unclear as to what she is asking for.”
ART110

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Her online course was terrible.”

Voice snapshots generated from 10 reviews, highlighting the major split between online and in-person experiences. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

48/100

“Never gave any lessons or live demos on how to actually draw”

⚖️

25/100

“She says she's an , but she is not.”

📚 Format Split

45/100

“Everyones drawing skills improved.”

Theme 1

💻 About Online Class

  • Her lessons and lectures don't teach you anything.
  • Automatically assumes everyone knows how to draw in an intro class & grades accordingly.
  • Constructive criticism was rarely received from the professor.

Theme 2

🏫 About In-Person Class

  • Sheehan will be able to work with you to improve you drawing skills.
  • She clearly explained the assignments and .
  • Lots of critiques but even as a shy person myself, they weren't too bad.

Theme 3

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • so you have to be perfect to receive an A
  • A lot of people come into Art 110 not prepared for the amount of work you will be doing.
  • Homework is about 3 hours per week.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

10

Recent reviews read by the AI

10

Lifetime ratings

70/100

Evidence confidence

The analysis uses 10 reviews split evenly by format, with strong consistency online but a smaller and .

Inside 10 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 53
3 out of 51
2 out of 50
1 out of 55

Course coverage

ART1107 reviews
ART1303 reviews

Reported outcomes

B range results lead the reported letter grades.

4 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

B range

3

B 2 · 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