AI Rate Professor

Art

Eric Jones

ART50 · ART40 · ART80 · 17 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
2.4/5
Take again
33.33%
Difficulty
3.7

The decision

Avoid unless you already paint confidently and can handle blunt critique and .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerInconsistent harsh gradingBelittling critiquesTalented but poor teacherBeginner unfriendlyPolarizing studio vibe
  • Many students report and demoralizing public critique in beginner painting or drawing.
  • A minority still enjoy his humor and say he grades progress fairly when the fit works.
  • Materials costs, unclear expectations, and late or .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

28/100

Multiple Fs and near-fails appear even when students say they met rubrics, so an A is not reliably earned by effort alone.

Almost ; the single online review lacks a but also rejects retaking him.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

34/100

Labeled beginner yet often taught like pro-level painting with harsh critique and high technique expectations.

In-person students emphasize beginner-hostile standards; online also notes weak teaching of painting basics.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

42/100

while others allow long absences if work is still submitted.

In-person attendance reports split mandatory versus flexible; .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

30/100

Only about one-third would take him again, and recent detailed reviews .

and ; online is negative but thin.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

18/100

Students describe personal-taste grading, zeroed paintings, and .

Format shift

Harshness is overwhelmingly documented in in-person ART50/ART40/ART80 reviews.

Workload

Moderate

52/100

, but materials prep and in-class painting still demand real time.

Format shift

; online evidence is sparse.

Teaching experience

Poor

32/100

He is widely seen as a talented painter but frequently criticized for weak instruction, late planning, and .

Format shift

A few in-person fans praise humor and ; majority in-person and the online review call teaching inadequate.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

35/100

Grades center on studio paintings and critiques more than traditional exams, with few graded categories.

Format shift

and critique grading dominates; online .

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

17 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

: some love his humor and painting love, while many report public call-outs, harsh Fs, and beginner-hostile standards.

Main concern

, and high materials costs create a high-risk experience for beginners.

What students said

“Rudest professor I've ever had. Talented artist, not a good teacher.”
ART50
“I turned my project in on time, to the standards listed on the rubric and still received an F.”
ART40
“Mr. Jones was great! I laughed a lot during class... graded my unfinished piece a 150/200 which was fair!”
ART50

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

One online ART50 review says he is a nice artist but weak teacher who .

Main concern

Silent or vague critiques leave beginners stuck without improvement guidance.

What students said

“Hes a nice guy and great artist, but not a good teacher. .”
ART50

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Assessment is mostly project and critique driven, with friendliness highly dependent on whether his standards match the student.

Studio project gradingIn-class critiquesProgress-based scoresInconsistent rubric use

Assessment risk

Varies

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and critiques, often described as harsh, late, or inconsistent with stated rubrics.

Harsh project gradesPublic call-outsRubric inconsistency
“ and harsh, and he did'nt grade based on the .”
ART40
“My first painting I tried very hard on, I've never painted before. I received 0/200.”
ART50

Online

Online evidence focuses on weak painting feedback rather than formal proctored exams.

Sparse critique feedbackParticipation matters
“He might just stare at your artwork in silence, scratching his chin without saying anything.”
ART50

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Rudest professor I've ever had. Talented artist, not a good teacher.”

Voice snapshots generated from 18 mostly in-person art reviews capturing strong polarity around critique style and grading. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

32/100

“He did not teach anything about the basics of painting. We were all working at a different pace and .”

⚖️

18/100

“I turned my project in on time, to the standards listed on the rubric and still received an F. !”

👍 Minority Positive Path

70/100

“Mr. Jones was great! I laughed a lot during class... He loves to paint and loves to teach.”

💸 Materials Frustration

25/100

“I ended up wasting about $130 on paints that I did not need... I probably spent around $250 in NECESSARY materials.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • a joke of a teacher and .
  • He treats teaching as if he doesn't need to plan lessons.
  • I sincerely enjoyed my time in Painting 1. ... as well as including humor.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • This was a BEGINNER painting class but he treated us like pros.
  • Never have I done all the work in a class, to the requirements, and nearly failed.
  • graded my unfinished piece a 150/200 which was fair!

Theme 3

⚠️ About Classroom Climate

  • he pulled me out of class in front of everyone and said I wasn't mixing the paints fast enough.
  • he insulted their work regularly.
  • I shouldn't feel afraid to ask questions or know he is going to belittle us.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

18

Recent reviews read by the AI

17

Lifetime ratings

84/100

Evidence confidence

18 recent and older reviews with repeated themes, concrete grades including multiple Fs, and .

Inside 18 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 55
4 out of 51
3 out of 51
2 out of 53
1 out of 58

Course coverage

ART5014 reviews
ART402 reviews
ART802 reviews

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

16 reported outcomes

A range

5

A+ 1 · A 4

B range

4

B+ 1 · B 3

C range

1

C- 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

4

F 4

No letter grade reported

2

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Not sure yet 1