AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Matthew Mayock

PHIL10 · PHIL7 · 4 lifetime ratings

AI rating
30/100
RMP rating
2.8/5
Take again
25%
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

Avoid unless you specifically need the topic and .

Best fit · Self Taught ProCreepy VibeHeavy ReadingBoring LecturesMixed GradingLow Retake
  • and hostile or boring lectures.
  • Coursework can still yield an A if you complete the work.
  • and content can be demanding, especially theory-heavy topics.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

62/100

Some call him an if you do the work, while others tag him as a .

; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Standard

42/100

Reading is complicated and theory-heavy, so it is not a .

; no online reviews.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

30/100

as mandatory in multiple reviews without flexible options.

; no online reviews.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

28/100

Three of and poor classroom experience.

; no online reviews.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

and A is achievable; .

Format shift

.

Workload

Moderate

48/100

Get-ready-to-read tags and group work suggest a real but not crushing load.

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Poor

32/100

Most describe boring, disorganized, or hostile lectures despite one glowing feminism review.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

Balanced

45/100

Reading, group discussion, and unspecified assignments; exams are not clearly detailed.

Format shift

.

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

4 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person philosophy sections draw complaints about creepiness, weak engagement, and uneven organization, with one strong positive for a feminism intro.

Main concern

Students report staring, hostile tone, and unengaging lectures.

What students said

“he's boring, hostile, and creepy!”
PHIL7
“Overall, his class was easy and hes also and .”
PHIL7
“I learned so much about my own life and feminism and am really grateful that this class was available”
PHIL10

Remote format

Online

0 reviews

Low confidence

No stored summary is available for this format.

Main concern

No main concern is stored for this format.

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews ; assessment appears assignment and discussion based.

Reading HeavyGroup DiscussionAssignments Not Always Listed

Assessment risk

Standard

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

; they emphasize reading, lectures, and group discussion.

Reading HeavyGroup Discussion
“ , and he takes a long time to grade.”
PHIL7
“When we finally got to group discussion, he didn't guide us very well”
PHIL7

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“he's boring, hostile, and creepy!”

Voice snapshots generated from 4 in-person reviews with low sample size and mixed credibility. Credibility rating: Low.

😬 Classroom Comfort

25/100

“I would catch him starting at me during class.”

📚 Teaching Quality

32/100

“Not super engaging or inspiring. but sometimes seemed hostile.”

🅰️ Grade Access

62/100

“Do the work and youll pass.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • he seems to like to hear himself talk
  • They're not interesting though
  • Amazing lectures

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Get ready to read
  • his class was easy and hes also and

Theme 3

⚠️ About Comfort & Conduct

  • he would stare at students
  • Im not gonna lie, he was a bit creepy
  • hostile, and creepy

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

4

Recent reviews read by the AI

4

Lifetime ratings

38/100

Evidence confidence

Only 4 reviews with sharp split between one strong positive and three negative comfort/teaching complaints.

Inside 4 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

PHIL73 reviews
PHIL101 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

2 reported outcomes

A range

2

A 2

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

0

No reported values