AI Rate Professor

Art

Stephen Klippenstein

ART · ART147148 · ART140 · ART148 · GRFX160F · 33 lifetime ratings

AI rating
73/100
RMP rating
3.9/5
Take again
66.67%
Difficulty
2.7

The decision

and portfolio growth only if you are comfortable with direct critique and a potentially intense personality.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerStrong design feedbackIndustry experiencePolarizing personalityPortfolio focusedFlexible deadlines
  • Many students praise his design expertise, critiques, portfolio focus, and real-world industry perspective.
  • A serious minority describe him as sensitive, harsh, or verbally abusive, making the student experience highly polarized.
  • Grades are often achievable with , and showing up, but the class rewards students who can handle critique and independence.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

78/100

An A is common if students show up, , and meet expectations, but it is not effortless for everyone.

The online review reports success with effort, while but some stress around critiques and expectations.

Is the course easy?

Standard

57/100

The design work is manageable but requires effort, critique participation, project development, and comfort with creative independence.

Online evidence suggests clear guidance, while demanding portfolio development.

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

60/100

Attendance appears important for critiques and feedback, but reviews also mention flexible deadlines and class work .

In-person reviews drive this judgment, while the single online .

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

70/100

and feedback, but serious negative reports make him a risky fit.

The online review is positive, while praise and serious complaints.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Lenient

76/100

Grades are often favorable, with mentions of fairness, , deadline extensions, and doing well through effort.

Format shift

, while the online review also shows an A earned through effort.

Workload

Moderate

58/100

Assignments are generally manageable but , and portfolio expectations require steady effort.

Format shift

and critiques, while the online review only states that effort is needed.

Teaching experience

Good

76/100

His design teaching and as excellent, but repeated reports of yelling and harsh behavior cap the score.

Format shift

The online review is strongly positive, while but include multiple severe interpersonal complaints.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

18/100

, and design-work based, with little evidence of traditional exams.

Format shift

and assignments rather than exams, especially the .

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

33 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

learning and feedback, but include repeated serious complaints about yelling, sensitivity, and mistreatment.

Main concern

Some students report emotionally harsh or unprofessional interactions.

What students said

“The weekly critiques to assignments are insightful and the trade.”
GRFX160F
“I was a top student but this instructor would only hear what he wanted to hear and would often resort to yelling at me, screaming at me and harassing me.”
ART
“Will always be fair in judging your work as long as ”
ART140

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

The single online review is very positive and , and support.

Main concern

Online evidence is too limited to judge consistency.

What students said

“ and feedback.”
ART140

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove traditional exams, proctoring, open-book, closed-book, midterm, or , and assessment appears mostly project-based.

Project Based AssessmentCritiquesPortfolio WorkNo Clear Exam Evidence

Assessment risk

Varies

60/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and portfolio work, but do not clearly prove exam format or exam policy.

Project Based AssessmentWeekly CritiquesPortfolio WorkAssignments
“The weekly critiques to assignments are insightful and the trade.”
GRFX160F
“Rather than focusing on giving homework or needs in terms of portfolio pieces.”
ART147148
“ , and he extends deadlines if the class is falling behind.”
GRFX160F

Online

The and effort but does not clearly prove any exam, proctoring, webcam, Lockdown Browser, open-book, or .

No Clear Exam EvidenceFeedback Based
“ and feedback.”
ART140

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“You get what you put into his class, if you show up with work and are willing to learn.”

Voice snapshots generated from 34 reviews, highlighting the split between strong design instruction and serious interpersonal concerns; credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

76/100

“ and feedback.”

🧠

76/100

“The weekly critiques to assignments are insightful and the trade.”

⚠️ Student Experience Risk

70/100

“ to hear him tear students down.”

Theme 1

🎨 About Design Learning

  • He will in inspire you, motivate you, challenge you, and ultimately teach you, and train your eye, to become a better designer.
  • He prepares you for the real world and lets you be creatively independent.
  • Excellent instructor and professional.

Theme 2

💬

  • He does multiple critiques for each project
  • Will always be fair in judging your work as long as
  • His critiques are fair.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Personality Fit

  • Very sensitive and gets offended easily where others wouldn't.
  • Belittles his students when he is stressed or angry.
  • One of the .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

34

Recent reviews read by the AI

33

Lifetime ratings

94/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is high because 34 reviews span many years and include detailed, repeated praise and repeated serious negative reports.

Inside 34 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 521
4 out of 54
3 out of 51
2 out of 52
1 out of 56

Course coverage

ART14020 reviews
ART4 reviews
GRFX160F4 reviews
ART1471483 reviews
223991 review
Show 2 more courses
227181 review
ART1481 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

26 reported outcomes

A range

20

A+ 5 · A 14 · A- 1

B range

3

B 3

C range

1

C 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

2

Rather not say 2