AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Joel Rudinow

PHIL9 · PHIL1490 · CRITICALTHINK · INDIS2 · INTDI6472 · INTDIS26472 · PHIL5515 · PHIL · PHIL6 · PHIL3ONLINE · PHIL7 · INTDI2 · INTDIS2 · PHIL5510 · PHIL3 · PHIL5470 · CRITICALTHINKI · PHIL5 · PHILOSOPHY · PHILPHIL · 49 lifetime ratings

AI rating
32/100
RMP rating
2.3/5
Take again
100%
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

Avoid unless you already love philosophy, thrive on dense reading, and .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerUnclear ExpectationsLong-Winded LecturesHeavy ReadingCondescending ToneEssay-Heavy
  • Many , and .
  • Grading and assignment expectations are frequently described as .
  • A minority praise his intelligence and one-on-one help if you already want to engage deeply.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

32/100

An A , and decoding vague expectations rather than light effort.

; no online reviews were analyzed.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

28/100

Philosophy and critical-thinking content plus dense reading and .

; no online reviews were analyzed.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

25/100

At least and many imply showing up is expected.

; no online reviews were analyzed.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

28/100

Most reviews urge , and poor class control.

; no online reviews were analyzed.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

30/100

Students call him a tough or .

Format shift

.

Workload

Heavy

28/100

Frequent complaints of tons of , and long papers.

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Poor

30/100

Common themes are rambling lectures, disorganization, and .

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

, and reading rather than traditional exams.

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

49 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person reviews dominate and are mostly negative: and , and a condescending style, with a few fans who value critical thinking.

Main concern

and long, unfocused lectures make grades hard to predict.

What students said

“ and is very condescending in his class.”
INTDIS2
“ .”
PHIL5
“He loves to hear himself talk for hours on end, and will be quick to shoot down your ideas.”
INDIS2

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.

Assessment is mainly writing-based with ; friendliness is mixed.

Essay and paper focusedFew or no midtermsPortfolio reviewQuiz retakes in some sections

Assessment risk

Standard

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Reviews describe essays and portfolios more than timed proctored exams; .

No midterms just essaysPortfolio appointmentsWeekly quizzes in some terms
“ ”
PHIL5
“if and the unit quizzes so that's simple.”
PHIL5

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ and is very condescending in his class.”

Voice snapshots generated from 49 in-person reviews, highlighting clarity, workload, and . Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Clarity

30/100

“He loves to hear himself talk for hours on end, and will be quick to shoot down your ideas.”

📚 Workload Intensity

28/100

“There is a TON of homework. . Class is boring as hell.”

⚖️

30/100

“He's extremely hard to please. Need to be specific to what .”

👎 Recommendation

28/100

“ !!!”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • He loves to hear himself talk for hours on end
  • rambled incomprehensible
  • goes on and on talking about something that could have been said in five seconds

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

Theme 3

❤️ About Character

  • very condescending in his class
  • Real cool, open-minded guy
  • narcissistic personality

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

49

Recent reviews read by the AI

49

Lifetime ratings

82/100

Evidence confidence

Forty-nine detailed reviews span many years with consistent themes on clarity, workload, and lecture style.

Inside 49 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 57
4 out of 53
3 out of 58
2 out of 519
1 out of 512

Course coverage

PHIL518 reviews
PHIL36 reviews
PHIL74 reviews
PHIL93 reviews
PHIL3ONLINE2 reviews
Show 15 more courses
PHIL62 reviews
CRITICALTHINK1 review
CRITICALTHINKI1 review
INDIS21 review
INTDI21 review
INTDI64721 review
INTDIS21 review
INTDIS264721 review
PHIL1 review
PHIL14901 review
PHIL54701 review
PHIL55101 review
PHIL55151 review
PHILOSOPHY1 review
PHILPHIL1 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

0 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

0

No reported values