AI Rate Professor

Culinary Arts

Jill Nussinow

CULIN200 · CUL250 · CULVEG · 4 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
1.9/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

Avoid unless and can never miss class; most students say pick someone else.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUnfriendlyBoring lecturesStrict attendance dropsBland recipesAvoid if possible
  • Most reviews are harshly negative on personality, teaching energy, and culinary quality.
  • One mixed review says an A is possible with attendance and short assignments.
  • classes is a major risk.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

55/100

and a , but others dropped due to poor experience.

; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

65/100

, and cooking demos rather than hard theory, though engagement is low.

; no online reviews.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

15/100

; missing two of .

.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

22/100

Three of four reviews strongly urge students to try another professor and call her unfriendly or useless.

; no online reviews.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

Assignments and a if completed, but the overall classroom experience is poor.

Format shift

Based only on in-person comments.

Workload

Light

70/100

, and one group presentation with limited book use.

Format shift

Based only on in-person comments.

Teaching experience

Poor

28/100

Students describe boring, unhelpful, condescending teaching and weak culinary guidance.

Format shift

Based only on in-person comments.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

35/100

Short assignments, quizzes, and a group presentation drive the .

Format shift

Based only on in-person comments.

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 Self Taught Pro

In-person culinary sections often feel unfriendly and uninspiring, with one exception that .

Main concern

Unfriendly tone and absences.

What students said

“One of the most useless and unfriendly professors out there.”
CUL250
“Boring. No recommendation from me.”
CULIN200
“Miss 2 classes your automatically dropped.”
2501

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.

Final is a group presentation with short quizzes; .

Assessment risk

Standard

60/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and quizzes; book rarely needed.

Group presentation finalShort quizzesShort assignments
“ grade is made up of short assignments and a .”
2501
“If you do all the assignments and the .”
2501

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“One of the most useless and unfriendly professors out there. She doesn't even enjoy being a professor of culinary arts.”

Voice snapshots generated from 4 in-person reviews, highlighting unfriendly teaching and . Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

28/100

“She is extremely unfriendly to the the class”

👎 Recommendation Rate

22/100

“Try another professor”

📅

15/100

“Miss 2 classes your automatically dropped.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • useless and unfriendly
  • droooonnnned on and on
  • No help. Boring.

Theme 2

🍲 About Course Content

  • Her recipes were awful
  • I make way better tasting vegetarian food on my own
  • Never opened the book.

Theme 3

📅

  • Show up for class, there's only 8 classes, each one matters
  • Miss 2 classes your automatically dropped

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

4

Recent reviews read by the AI

4

Lifetime ratings

48/100

Evidence confidence

Four older in-person reviews are mostly aligned on negative teaching tone, with enough detail for a cautious read.

Inside 4 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 50
4 out of 51
3 out of 50
2 out of 51
1 out of 52

Course coverage

25011 review
CUL2501 review
CULIN2001 review
CULVEG1 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