AI Rate Professor

Anthropology

Sandra Xvazquez

ANT2 · ANT1 · 5 lifetime ratings

AI rating
47/100
RMP rating
3.4/5
Take again
50%
Difficulty
2.2

The decision

if you want a workable A and and cold-calling; teaching quality is hit-or-miss.

Best fit · Easy A HunterStrict attendanceCold-callingExtra credit heavyPolarizing lecturesClear criteria mixed with tough vibe
  • Grades trend high if , and use .
  • Several students find lectures confusing, condescending, or shame-heavy.
  • Attendance and participation are strict, including cold-calling and seat policing.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

80/100

Reported grades are mostly A-range with , though effort and .

Online report of 102% with ; in person also shows many A and A+ with show-up effort.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

64/100

Content is often called simple note-taking, but some lectures feel more complicated than needed.

; in person notes can be simple yet lectures sometimes confuse students.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

18/100

and pressure about seats and leaving early.

Evidence is almost entirely in person; the one .

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

42/100

; others warn about rudeness and weak learning value.

Online review is positive; in person reviews .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

58/100

and and picky exam tricks.

Format shift

Online notes trick questions; in person notes open-note tests and occasional harshness.

Workload

Light

72/100

Hybrid note-taking and few graded items keep load manageable for most ANT-1 sections.

Format shift

In person summer hybrid is simple note work; online adds modules and .

Teaching experience

Average

48/100

Passion and clarity for some students are undercut by condescension and for others.

Format shift

In person is highly polarized; the single and caring.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

62/100

Exams and participation dominate, with boosting totals and few other graded items.

Format shift

Online highlights midterms with tricks; in and notes.

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 and complaints of confusing, condescending cold-call culture.

Main concern

, and reported shaming can ruin the classroom feel.

What students said

“in person lectures don't make sense I don't feel like I'm learning”
ANT-1
“If you show up, participate, and try, you will pass.”
ANT-1
“when someone says something wrong she just says "Mmm nooo" and basically shames you.”
ANT-2

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Easy A Hunter

One online ANT-2 review praises organized modules and huge .

Main concern

Midterms can include trick questions even when overall grade is inflated by .

What students said

“an overwhelmingly amount of as I ended with a 102.4% in the class!”
ANT-2
“the , so be careful!”
ANT-2

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

and can be straightforward or tricky; notes were allowed in at least one section.

Lecture-based examsSome open notesTrick questions onlineExtra credit buffer

Assessment risk

Standard

58/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In person exams are described as straightforward from lectures, with at least one section allowing notes.

Lecture-based examsNotes allowed on testsAttendance-linked success
“The and based on lectures.”
ANT-1
“Let .”
ANT-2

Online

Online midterms/exams may include trick questions even when modules and support a high score.

Trick questionsDetailed modulesHeavy extra credit
“the , so be careful!”
ANT-2
“As long as you answer the prompts as followed, you should be good.”
ANT-2

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“If you show up, participate, and try, you will pass.”

Voice snapshots generated from 6 reviews with and one online extra-credit story. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality Split

48/100

“in person lectures don't make sense I don't feel like I'm learning”

📈 Easy Grade Path

80/100

“an overwhelmingly amount of as I ended with a 102.4% in the class!”

🚫 Strict Classroom Control

18/100

“ but in person lectures don't make sense”

💔 Classroom Tone

30/100

“Rude overall. occasionally. .”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She teaches with passion and .
  • lectures were straightforward and easy to understand.
  • she just makes topic more complicated also has a problem with people sitting in the back

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • If you show up, participate, and try, you will pass.
  • ended with a 102.4% in the class
  • Though grader

Theme 3

🪑

  • students were sometimes called on without raising their hands
  • Strict on phones.
  • when someone says something wrong she just says "Mmm nooo"

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

6

Recent reviews read by the AI

5

Lifetime ratings

58/100

Evidence confidence

Only six reviews with strong tone conflict and one online sample limit certainty despite recent dates and grade detail.

Inside 6 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 52
3 out of 50
2 out of 52
1 out of 51

Course coverage

ANT-14 reviews
ANT-22 reviews

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

6 reported outcomes

A range

5

A+ 2 · A 2 · 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