AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Leila Sayyadi

COSHH142 · 250B · MATH142 · 151F · 150F · MATH151F · CDR145574 · MATH20 · MATH151 · MATH140 · GEO11234 · 17 lifetime ratings

AI rating
43/100
RMP rating
2.8/5
Take again
44.44%
Difficulty
4.1

The decision

if you are strong in math, attend consistently, and can study beyond the lectures.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerTough graderTest heavyStrict attendanceExtra credit availablePolarizing lectures
  • Many students describe exams as hard, tricky, and not well matched to review work.
  • and score replacement can help, but grades still require strong independent study.
  • Students are and , and too fast.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

38/100

can rescue grades, but and an A requires strong preparation.

Online evidence is negative and exam-heavy, while but still high effort.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

32/100

Calculus and math content are made harder , and limited alignment between practice and tests.

Both formats describe difficult material, with in-person comments giving more detail about pace and .

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

18/100

, and students warn that skipping class can make passing unlikely.

, while online reviews do not clearly prove an attendance policy.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

43/100

Some strong math students recommend her, but many others warn against taking her because of and .

Online reviews do not recommend her, while and strong avoidance.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

28/100

exists, but students repeatedly call her a and describe very low class averages.

Format shift

, while online reviews focus on hard quizzes and exams.

Workload

Heavy

34/100

, and as necessary and demanding.

Format shift

Online evidence is thin but negative, while and heavy studying.

Teaching experience

Poor

42/100

Teaching is highly polarizing, with some students praising clarity and care while .

Format shift

In-person reviews contain both praise and criticism, while online reviews provide little positive teaching evidence.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

82/100

Grades , and a few opportunities.

Format shift

Both formats emphasize exams or quizzes, and and test replacement.

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

16 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person reviews are mixed but lean difficult, with , and some praise for clear explanations and .

Main concern

Students often say tests are difficult, lectures move fast, and .

What students said

“Started with 18 students, ended with five and only two passed.”
MATH140
“ .”
151F
“Register her class, you will love it!”
MATH151F

Remote format

Online

2 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are strongly negative and , and heavy written work.

Main concern

Students say online exams and and poorly supported.

What students said

“her exams and ”
GEO11234
“Worse experience”
COSHH142

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

The because students report difficult tests, no calculators, no cheat sheets, and tricky questions.

Hard ExamsNo CalculatorsNo Cheat SheetTricky TestsExtra Credit Available

Assessment risk

Strict

24/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

cheat sheets, and review problems that do not match exams.

No CalculatorsNo Cheat SheetDifficult ExamsTricky Tests
“Remember no Calculators, no cheat sheet for tests.”
MATH151F
“Review problems don't reflect exams, which feel unnecessarily tricky.”
151F

Online

Online reviews and quizzes but do not prove webcam, proctoring, Lockdown Browser, or open-book policy.

Hard ExamsHard Quizzes
“her exams and ”
GEO11234

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ .”

Voice snapshots generated from 18 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and attendance. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

42/100

“She had no personality and made all of the .”

⚖️

28/100

“only 9/39 students passed. Grades don't come free”

📘

24/100

“No calculators, no final cheat sheet, EXTREMELY high expectations”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • and gives pretty straightforward exams.
  • she goes too fast on topics in one day and her sloppy writing is all over the board.
  • She offer multiple types of example problems for new concept.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Class Avg. 50-60%
  • , but short.
  • there's a fair amount of which was the only thing that saved me

Theme 3

🚪

  • Skip class? You won't pass.
  • She expects the upmost respect from COLLEGE Students.
  • If your going to slack, not show up, or .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

18

Recent reviews read by the AI

17

Lifetime ratings

88/100

Evidence confidence

The evidence is credible because 18 reviews span many years and show consistent themes of , and mixed teaching quality.

Inside 18 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 55
4 out of 53
3 out of 51
2 out of 50
1 out of 59

Course coverage

151F3 reviews
MATH1423 reviews
MATH151F3 reviews
MATH1512 reviews
150F1 review
Show 6 more courses
250B1 review
CDR1455741 review
COSHH1421 review
GEO112341 review
MATH1401 review
MATH201 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

15 reported outcomes

A range

6

A+ 1 · A 5

B range

4

B 1 · B- 3

C range

3

C+ 1 · C 1 · C- 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

2

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Not sure yet 1