AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Fahima Karim

MATHD · MATH8388 · MATHDMATH · MATH110 · MATHDD · 6 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
1.9/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
2.7

The decision

Avoid unless and only need a .

Best fit · Self Taught ProHard AccentUnclear TeachingGrade SoftnessLeaves Class EarlyLow Helpfulness
  • Most students struggle to understand her accent and teaching order.
  • She sometimes gives credit for trying and softens low grades.
  • Serious complaints include abandoning class near semester end and weak instruction.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

68/100

Some say a D becomes a C and , but others still fail.

.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

58/100

Material is developmental math level, but poor delivery makes it feel harder than it is.

.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

Reviews do not clearly state an .

.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

24/100

Most students say ; only a .

.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Lenient

72/100

Comments note credit for trying and grade bumps like D treated as C.

Format shift

.

Workload

Light

62/100

, but workload is not described as heavy.

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Poor

26/100

Students cite thick , and low engagement.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

38/100

and class grades are mentioned more than formal 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

6 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

due to accent and confusing demos, with uneven care for students.

Main concern

Communication barriers and reports of leaving mid-semester or not teaching actively.

What students said

“This teacher has a terrible teaching style and is hard to understand.”
MATHDD
“she never tought, instead we worked on our own while she bought lamps on ebay.”
MATHD
“this teacher gives you credit for trying. Just as long as you show .”
MATH110

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.

and final grades than on exam logistics.

Homework-Based CreditUnclear Exam Format

Assessment risk

Standard

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person evidence emphasizes homework credit more than a .

Homework-Based Credit
“Just as long as you show .”
MATH110
“If you get a D in her class, it's a C.”
MATHD

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Horrible teacher!!! !!”

Voice snapshots generated from 6 in-person reviews, highlighting weak teaching and occasional grade softness. Credibility rating: Medium.

🚫 Teaching Quality

26/100

“She can barely speak english and constantly got the answers wrong when the book was right in front of her.”

⚖️ Grade Softness

72/100

“If you get a D in her class, it's a C.”

😕 Communication

20/100

“She has a very thick accent which is distracting at the least”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She will teach the wrong way to do a problem first, and then at the end circle it and say this is how not to do the problem
  • She reads straight from the book
  • she never tought, instead we worked on our own while she bought lamps on ebay.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • I suck at math and I got a c.
  • this teacher gives you credit for trying.
  • class was full with a kid on the floor at the end 12 kids remaining and some of the 12 failed.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Reliability

  • she left the country like 3 weeks before the end of the semester
  • The first words she said to the class were that she didnt want to be there but was forced by the school.
  • because of her

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

6

Recent reviews read by the AI

6

Lifetime ratings

55/100

Evidence confidence

Six older in-person reviews (2008-2012) mostly agree on weak teaching, with one softer grade-focused outlier.

Inside 6 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 50
3 out of 50
2 out of 53
1 out of 52

Course coverage

MATHD2 reviews
MATH1101 review
MATH83881 review
MATHDD1 review
MATHDMATH1 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