AI Rate Professor

Computer Science

Tuhin Ghosh

CSCI108 · CSCI114 · CSCI112 · CSCI110 · CSCI105 · CSWB130 · 19 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
2.9/5
Take again
33.33%
Difficulty
3.4

The decision

unless you already know how to teach yourself C and debug alone.

Best fit · Self Taught ProSelf Teach RequiredUseless LecturesHeavy LabsResponsive EmailOnline Heavy
  • Many students say lectures are textbook PowerPoints or YouTube and do not prepare them for labs.
  • Success depends on outside videos, peers, and heavy self-debugging of programming labs.
  • Older or lighter survey-style comments are kinder; modern online .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

38/100

As are possible with grinding labs and , but and lectures rarely make the path easy.

Online programming reviews stress hard-earned grades; older in-person and survey comments report easier As.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

32/100

CSCI programming content is dense and lab-heavy; difficulty mostly comes from sparse teaching rather than pure theory.

Online CSCI112 and CSCI114 drive the hard rating; CSCI108 survey comments call the class very easy.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

58/100

and others not; online work can proceed asynchronously but participation sometimes counts.

Online comments mix mandatory and optional attendance; .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

33/100

Roughly one in three would retake him, with many first-programming students warning others off.

; sparse in-person favorites do not outweigh current online complaints.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

48/100

and working-code labs; others call him a and heavy finals.

Format shift

Online is mixed-to-harsh; if code works.

Workload

Heavy

28/100

Weekly modules, labs, readings, and students.

Format shift

Online labs dominate workload; lighter survey classes in the in-person sample are the exception.

Teaching experience

Poor

34/100

Responsive email and modules help some, but many say lectures are unengaging PowerPoints that do not teach the labs.

Format shift

Online programming quality is the weak spot; .

Assessment method

Balanced

48/100

Mix of , and sometimes participation or discussion posts.

Format shift

Online emphasizes labs and a ; one older in-person breakdown listed labs 40 percent plus quizzes and exams.

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

Low confidence · Best fit for Beginner Friendly

Smaller older in-person and survey-class sample is more positive: , and .

Main concern

Sample is small and older, so it may not reflect current programming courses.

What students said

“The professor is really understanding, and if clarification.”
CSCI112
“ and clarifies any ambiguity in .”
CSCI110
“ , and very good at using Blackboard to run to class.”
CSCI108

Remote format

Online

14 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online programming sections dominate the sample: long or , and frequent self-teaching via books and YouTube, with .

Main concern

Labs and , so beginners feel abandoned.

What students said

“You likely won't be ready for .”
CSCI112
“the lectures are useless and you need to watch online videos to understand the material.”
CSCI114
“ . Professor makes no effort to work with students”
CSCI110
“He assigns a lab and gives you no understanding of how to get to the solution, just read the book and figure it out yourself.”
CSCI112

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Quizzes and a ; reviews do not clearly prove webcam or Lockdown Browser proctoring.

Heavy FinalTimed Online Final WindowQuizzesLab HeavyExtra Credit Sometimes

Assessment risk

Standard

48/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Older in-person comments mention , and working labs; .

LabsQuizzesMidtermFinal
“Grading was 40% lab, 15% Midterm, 15% Final, 10% participation (posting on the discussion board), and 20% quizzes.”
CSCI110
“ .”
CSCI108

Online

Online finals can be multi-day and heavily weighted; quizzes and . Reviews do not clearly prove camera proctoring.

Final Weighed HeavilyMulti-Day Final WindowWeekly LabsQuizzes
“ and he gives you 4 days to complete it during finals season.”
CSCI114
“ or powerpoints provided.”
CSCI105

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ . Professor makes no effort to work with students and does not seem to understand the material as much as he will try to lead you to believe.”

Voice snapshots generated from 18 reviews (14 online, 4 in and weak lecture prep. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

34/100

“His lectures are long and not very insightful.”

👎 Recommendation Rate

33/100

“Sadly I do not think I will be taking this professor again.”

💻 Self-Teaching Load

28/100

“Basically, expect to figure out almost everything on your own.”

📧

60/100

“If you need help or . !”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • mostly just sends out a 1-2 hr lecture a week of
  • He didn't provide any lectures of his own and only provided videos from youtube
  • I really liked this prof. I had no previous knowledge of programming

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty And Grades

  • I have never struggled so
  • Class was not impossible, but it wasn't a walk in the park either
  • For the labs, as long as your code works and has comments, you will probably get an A

Theme 3

🧰 About Resources

  • he provides a lot of material like video tutorials and pre-written functions
  • the book he uses for the lectures lacks good examples
  • textbook is useless and unpublished/ not edited

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

18

Recent reviews read by the AI

19

Lifetime ratings

62/100

Evidence confidence

Eighteen reviews with rich online detail help, but and older dates pull confidence down from High.

Inside 18 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 55
4 out of 53
3 out of 53
2 out of 52
1 out of 55

Course coverage

CSCI1128 reviews
CSCI1143 reviews
CSCI1052 reviews
CSCI1082 reviews
CSCI1102 reviews
Show 1 more courses
CSWB1301 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

12 reported outcomes

A range

5

A+ 1 · A 4

B range

4

B+ 2 · B 1 · B- 1

C range

1

C 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

2

Not sure yet 2