AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

J.L. Anderson

CALCULUS · MATH190 · MATH · MATH104 · 4 lifetime ratings

AI rating
14/100
RMP rating
1.6/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
4.5

The decision

unless you can learn mathematics independently and tolerate little support.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUnclear TeachingUnhelpful SupportVery DifficultPoor Student Experience
  • Students describe the teaching as unclear and unhelpful.
  • Difficulty ratings are consistently very high with no positive grade evidence.
  • The review set is old and small, but the negative tone is consistent.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

MissionImpossible

18/100

Getting an A appears hard because reviews report very high difficulty and no evidence of .

All evidence comes from in-person reviews, with .

Is the course easy?

Challenging

24/100

The course experience appears difficult mainly because students say the and help is ineffective.

Only in-person evidence exists, so no format comparison is possible.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

Reviews do not clearly describe .

Only in-person reviews exist, and they do not clearly prove an .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

20/100

Students advise taking another teacher because they describe poor teaching and poor help.

All recommendation evidence is from in-person reviews, with no online comparison.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

20/100

Very high difficulty ratings and no positive grading comments suggest grading does not feel forgiving.

Format shift

Only in-person reviews mention the experience, and .

Workload

Heavy

28/100

The workload is not described in detail, but the consistently high difficulty ratings point to a heavy course experience.

Format shift

data.

Teaching experience

Awful

22/100

Students repeatedly describe the teaching as , and strongly negative.

Format shift

All .

Assessment method

Balanced

50/100

Reviews do not clearly identify whether .

Format shift

Only in-person reviews exist, but they do not clearly describe assessment weighting.

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

and weak help when students ask questions.

Main concern

Students may need to teach themselves because comments report poor clarity and little useful help.

What students said

“He's not a good teacher, not clear, when you ask for help he doesn't really help.”
MATH190
“Horrible math teacher.”
MATH104

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 do not clearly prove the .

Exam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

format, proctoring, or book policy.

Exam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“He's not a good teacher, not clear, when you ask for help he doesn't really help.”

Voice snapshots generated from 4 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and recommendation risk. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

22/100

“He's not a good teacher, not clear, when you ask for help he doesn't really help.”

⚠️ Recommendation Risk

20/100

“I advise any other teacher”

📉 Student Experience

28/100

“Horrible math teacher.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • He's not a good teacher, not clear, when you ask for help he doesn't really help.
  • Horrible math teacher.

Theme 2

📌 About Course Identity

  • There are 2 Mr. Andersons who both teach math at Citrus.
  • This Mr. Anderson only teaches calculus.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

4

Recent reviews read by the AI

4

Lifetime ratings

38/100

Evidence confidence

, and one contains no substantive comment.

Inside 4 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

CALCULUS1 review
MATH1 review
MATH1041 review
MATH1901 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