AI Rate Professor

Psychology

Linda De Villers

SOCSC17 · SOCSCI17 · PSY5 · HUMSEX · SSCI17 · SOC17 · SEXUALITY · PSYCH5 · SS17 · HUMANSEXU · HUMANSEX · SCSCI17 · SCSC17 · PSYCH25 · HMSX · HUMANSEXUALITY · SEX · PSYCH5ONL · 48 lifetime ratings

AI rating
22/100
RMP rating
2.7/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

unless you and accept grading risk.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUnorganized Online CourseHarsh GradingPoor CommunicationRude FeedbackMixed Older Reviews
  • Recent online reviews are strongly negative about organization, communication, and grading.
  • Older reviews sometimes describe easy grades, but and .
  • Students repeatedly report rude or delayed communication.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

36/100

Some older students call it an easy A, but , and heavy work that make the A unreliable.

Online evidence is much harsher, while .

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The subject can be easy, but , and disorganized materials add avoidable difficulty.

Online reviews emphasize administrative difficulty, while and .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

55/100

Reviews do not consistently prove a , though participation is mentioned in some in-person classes.

Online reviews focus on assignments and communication, while .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

25/100

Students often because of rude communication, poor organization, and .

Online reviews are overwhelmingly avoidant, while and era.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

28/100

Many comments mention , and tests that do not match class material.

Format shift

Online reviews repeatedly call grading harsh, while and strict-test complaints.

Workload

Heavy

30/100

Students report lots of reading, papers, discussion rules, and frequent tests, especially online.

Format shift

Online reviews describe heavy and messy workloads, while .

Teaching experience

Poor

34/100

The strongest pattern is , and lectures that many students found unhelpful.

Format shift

Online teaching is reviewed especially poorly, while and discussions.

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

, and web assignments depending on the course.

Format shift

Online reviews mention papers, discussions, and tests, while , and participation.

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

42 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

because many describe older online sections, with both easy-A reports and serious complaints.

Main concern

The , and rude communication.

What students said

“ , and only 2 papers to be written as homework”
PSYCH5
“Her lectures have nothing to do with what is on the test.”
HUMANSEX

Remote format

Online

6 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are mostly , and poor communication.

Main concern

Students say the , and difficult to get help in.

What students said

“Her entire and ”
SCSCI17
“ and then grades harshly for students not meeting up to whatever it is that she expects.”
SOC17

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Exam evidence is inconsistent, with some student-friendly features but many complaints that .

Frequent TestsMultiple Attempts MentionedNo Final Mentioned For One CourseUnclear Test Alignment

Assessment risk

Varies

38/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and one no-final course, but do not clearly prove closed-book, webcam, or proctoring policies.

No Final MentionedTests May Not Match LecturesFinal Exam Mentioned
“NO TEST AND !”
PSYCH5
“The .”
HUMANSEX

Online

Online reviews mention tests and frequent quizzes but do not clearly prove proctoring, webcam, Lockdown Browser, or open-book rules.

Frequent TestsMultiple Attempts MentionedNo Clear Proctoring Evidence
“we had a ”
SS17
“ if you want to improve score”
SOCSC17

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ and then grades harshly for students not meeting up to whatever it is that she expects.”

Voice snapshots generated from 48 reviews, highlighting recurring themes in , and communication. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

34/100

“Her lectures have nothing to do with what is on the test.”

⚖️

28/100

“She also grades so harshly for no reason”

👍 Recommendation Level

25/100

“ ! ”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She is unreachable through any form of communication.
  • She was SO .
  • Her lectures were boring and halfway through the semester more than half the class just stopped showing up.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • I thought this class was an easy A with .
  • If you miss one or when it comes to the .
  • The class average on tests was 50%

Theme 3

🧭 About Organization

  • have to look in 5 areas to make sure you did all the assignments.
  • however she does make mistakes on it.
  • Her entire

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

48

Recent reviews read by the AI

48

Lifetime ratings

88/100

Evidence confidence

The dataset has 48 reviews across many years with repeated themes, though older reviews sometimes conflict with recent ones.

Inside 48 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 512
4 out of 57
3 out of 53
2 out of 59
1 out of 517

Course coverage

HUMANSEX8 reviews
HUMANSEXUALITY7 reviews
PSYCH57 reviews
SCSCI175 reviews
SOCSCI173 reviews
Show 13 more courses
SS173 reviews
SCSC172 reviews
SOC172 reviews
SSCI172 reviews
HMSX1 review
HUMANSEXU1 review
HUMSEX1 review
PSY51 review
PSYCH251 review
PSYCH5ONL1 review
SEX1 review
SEXUALITY1 review
SOCSC171 review

Reported outcomes

B range results lead the reported letter grades.

7 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

B range

3

B 2 · B- 1

C range

0

No reported values

D range

1

D 1

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

2

Drop/Withdrawal 2