AI Rate Professor

Accounting

Daniel De la Rosa

ACCTGFS301709 · 1 lifetime ratings

AI rating
17/100
RMP rating
1.0/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

if textbook and access-code costs are a major concern, but the evidence is too limited for a full teaching judgment.

Best fit · Budget FirstCost BurdenLow SupportOnline Only
  • The only review is strongly negative and focused on required paid materials.
  • There is course content difficulty.
  • The credibility is low because the analysis relies on one online review.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

50/100

There is , so the effort to earn an A cannot be judged beyond a neutral baseline.

The only evidence is online and does not discuss grades or A-level effort.

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The review criticizes cost and support but does not clearly describe whether the accounting content is easy or hard.

Only one online review exists, and .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

The .

The online , and there are no in-person reviews.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

10/100

The because of required paid materials and perceived lack of support.

Recommendation evidence comes from one online review and is fully negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

50/100

There is , so grading leniency cannot be confidently judged.

Format shift

The single online .

Workload

Moderate

50/100

because the complaint focuses on cost, not assignments or study time.

Format shift

Only online evidence exists, and it does not describe workload.

Teaching experience

Awful

25/100

The only review describes the instructor as unwilling to help and gives the lowest quality rating.

Format shift

Teaching evidence comes from one online review and is negative but limited.

Assessment method

Balanced

50/100

The review does not identify whether the course relies more on assignments or exams.

Format shift

The online review provides no assessment structure.

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

0 reviews

Low confidence

No stored summary is available for this format.

Main concern

No main concern is stored for this format.

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Budget First

The only online review criticizes required paid materials and describes the instructor as unhelpful.

Main concern

Students may need to pay for both a book and Cengage access code.

What students said

“He made every single student pay for the book AND pay for an access code to Cengage”
ACCTGFS301709
“He is lazy or apathetic to help others.”
ACCTGFS301709

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove the .

Exam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Online

The online review does not clearly prove any exam policy, proctoring rule, .

Exam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“He made every single student pay for the book AND pay for an access code to Cengage”

Voice snapshots generated from 1 review, highlighting the and poor support. Credibility rating: Low.

💸 Cost Concern

15/100

“He made every single student pay for the book AND pay for an access code to Cengage”

👍 Recommendation Level

10/100

“He is lazy or apathetic to help others.”

Theme 1

💸 About Course Costs

  • He made every single student pay for the book AND pay for an access code to Cengage
  • other classes I currently have understand enough to make the books free or not necessary

Theme 2

👨‍🏫 About Support

  • He is lazy or apathetic to help others.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

1

Recent reviews read by the AI

1

Lifetime ratings

20/100

Evidence confidence

Only , so the evidence is narrow and may not represent the broader course experience.

Inside 1 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

ACCTGFS3017091 review

Reported outcomes

No letter grade reported results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

0

No reported values

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Rather not say 1