AI Rate Professor

Music

Mary Knudson

MUSCB22 · MUSCB15 · 15 lifetime ratings

AI rating
19/100
RMP rating
2.1/5
Take again
33.33%
Difficulty
3.7

The decision

Avoid Knudson unless you can , and last-minute feedback.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerTough graderUnclear expectationsLast-minute gradingConfusing communicationSome caring moments
  • Most , and harsh or inconsistent standards.
  • Online reviews are especially negative, with repeated accusations-related concerns and poor question support.
  • A minority of students praise her personality, caring, , and interesting lectures.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

32/100

exists in some sections, but most , and grades that come too late to improve.

Online evidence is strongly negative, while and supportive comments.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

35/100

The material is not always the main problem, but reading load, vague instructions, and .

Online students focus on grading and confusion, while and strict class rules.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

15/100

as mandatory or describe strict in-class participation expectations.

Online attendance evidence is mixed, while as mandatory.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

30/100

Most students do not recommend her because of , and harsh standards.

Online reviews are almost uniformly avoid, while .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

20/100

Students repeatedly call her a tough or harsh grader and .

Format shift

Online reviews are harsher, but and .

Workload

Moderate

45/100

Workload is described as manageable by some students but reading-heavy and stressful when paired with .

Format shift

Online reviews mention lots of homework and reading, while , and participation.

Teaching experience

Poor

38/100

Some students praise her caring style, but the dominant pattern , and weak question support.

Format shift

Online teaching evidence is poor, while but still contains repeated clarity complaints.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

72/100

Reviews repeatedly mention , and grades based on few unclear standards.

Format shift

Both formats mention tests or strict grading, with .

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

11 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person reviews are mixed but lean negative, with some strong praise offset , and strict standards.

Main concern

, and grades may arrive too late to adjust.

What students said

“ ”
MUSCB22
“She gives you a bad grade when it's not up to her standards”
MUSCB22
“Professor Knudson was great ! She was super flexible and .”
MUSCB22

Remote format

Online

4 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are consistently negative, with students citing , and cheating accusations.

Main concern

Students report poor support and little clarity before grades arrive.

What students said

“ ”
MUSCB22
“she does not grade a single thing until the last minute”
MUSCB22
“Accuses of cheating and doesn't grade until the last minute.”
MUSCB22

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews support a test-heavy and strict assessment style, but they do not clearly .

Test HeavyReading-Based QuestionsStrict ExpectationsNo Clear Proctoring Evidence

Assessment risk

Strict

30/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and reading-based class questions, but do not clearly prove closed-book exams or proctoring rules.

Test HeavyReading-Based QuestionsStrict Class Rules
“Test heavy”
MUSCB22
“Be ready to read all the materials because she will ask questions during the class.”
MUSCB22
“abstaining from mobile phone usage, and refraining from engaging in verbal communication.”
MUSCB22

Online

Online reviews mention tough grading and cheating accusations, but do not clearly prove webcam, Lockdown .

Tough GradingCheating AccusationsNo Clear Proctoring Evidence
“She accuses people of cheating.”
MUSCB22
“she is a ”
MUSCB22

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ if possible.”

Voice snapshots generated from 15 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and format differences. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

38/100

“ and many of her announcements are vague.”

⚖️

20/100

“ ”

👍 Recommendation Rate

30/100

“If you .”

Theme 1

⚖️

  • she does not grade a single thing until the last minute.
  • grades were always there at the last minute.
  • but isn't a .

Theme 2

❓ About Clarity

  • because the instructions kept changing
  • her announcements were a ?
  • and many of her announcements are vague.

Theme 3

❤️ About Positive Outliers

  • she always finds a way to make the lectures interesting.
  • she gives so many opportunity's for
  • She was super flexible and .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

15

Recent reviews read by the AI

15

Lifetime ratings

82/100

Evidence confidence

The 15 reviews are recent enough and show repeated, specific complaints, though a few positive outliers create mixed evidence.

Inside 15 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 53
4 out of 50
3 out of 52
2 out of 51
1 out of 59

Course coverage

MUSCB2214 reviews
MUSCB151 review

Reported outcomes

No letter grade reported results lead the reported letter grades.

14 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

3

B+ 1 · B 2

C range

2

C 2

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

9

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Incomplete 1 · Not sure yet 4 · Rather not say 3