AI Rate Professor

Engineering

Liz Rozell

COS126 · MATH22 · ENGRB19C · ENGB47 · MATHB22 · ENGR19C · ENGR36 · ENG3619C · ENGR2419 · HIST101 · ENGR24 · PROG19C · ENGI19 · 20 lifetime ratings

AI rating
67/100
RMP rating
3.8/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

if you can handle strict standards and heavy work in exchange for and strong subject knowledge.

Best fit · Effort For RewardKnowledgeable teacherStrict gradingHelpful when approached wellHeavy workloadPolarizing personality
  • Many and knows her subjects well.
  • Students also report strict rules, picky grading, heavy work, and .
  • The single online review is extremely negative and focused on .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

54/100

Some students report easy success when attending and studying, but , and heavy work raise the cost of an A.

In-person evidence is mixed but detailed, while the single online review gives no useful grade-effort detail.

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The material includes tough math and engineering topics, but many students say .

In-person reviews provide most course-difficulty evidence; the online review does not describe course content.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

18/100

, and others link success to going to class and listening.

.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

68/100

and helpful teaching, but and harsh interpersonal experiences create hesitation.

, while the single online review is strongly negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

26/100

Multiple students describe picky grading, point deductions for small issues, and strict rules.

Format shift

; the online review does not describe grading policy.

Workload

Heavy

30/100

Students mention lots of work, programs, quizzes every class, and demanding engineering expectations.

Format shift

Workload evidence .

Teaching experience

Good

74/100

Many students praise her clarity, knowledge, organization, and help, but several describe her as harsh, cranky, or intimidating.

Format shift

In-person teaching reviews are mixed but mostly positive, while the online review is sharply negative about treatment.

Assessment method

Balanced

62/100

, and class participation rather than one single method.

Format shift

Assessment evidence comes from in-person reviews, 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

19 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In-person reviews are mixed but lean positive, praising her knowledge and help while , and workload.

Main concern

and heavy expectations can frustrate students.

What students said

“ , and so that I can even understand it.”
MATHB22
“SHE IS TOO PICKY WITH .”
MATHB22
“expect to do a lot of work.”
ENG3619C

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

The only online review is extremely negative and describes a cold, hurtful student experience.

Main concern

Student treatment is the main concern in the online evidence.

What students said

“You are heartless and a very cold person.”
COS126

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews describe tests and quizzes as sometimes challenging, but they do not clearly prove open-book, webcam, Lockdown Browser, or proctoring rules.

Tests Not Bad For Prepared StudentsHard QuizzesChallenging TestsNo Clear Proctoring Evidence

Assessment risk

Standard

42/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews mention tests, hard quizzes, and , but .

TestsHard QuizzesChallenging Tests
“ .”
MATH22
“there is a quiz every class and it can hurt you pretty bad since most of the questions are hard.”
ENGR19C
“ ".”
ENG3619C

Online

The online review does not clearly prove any exam format, .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ , and so that I can even understand it.”

Voice snapshots generated from 20 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and student treatment. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

74/100

“She is a great teacher, 10X better than any math teacher at CSUB.”

⚖️

26/100

“SHE IS TOO PICKY WITH .”

📚 Workload Demand

30/100

“expect to do a lot of work.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • , and so that I can even understand it.
  • and helpful.
  • By far one of the .

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • she is .
  • , and completing your programs before leaving the .
  • ".

Theme 3

❤️ About Character & Support

  • .
  • She has a lot of knowledge on her material, but just watch how you ask your questions.
  • You are heartless and a very cold person.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

20

Recent reviews read by the AI

20

Lifetime ratings

82/100

Evidence confidence

The analysis uses 20 reviews across many years with detailed, repeated , and student treatment.

Inside 20 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 510
4 out of 55
3 out of 52
2 out of 51
1 out of 52

Course coverage

ENGR363 reviews
MATH223 reviews
MATHB223 reviews
ENGR19C2 reviews
COS1261 review
Show 8 more courses
ENG3619C1 review
ENGB471 review
ENGI191 review
ENGR241 review
ENGR24191 review
ENGRB19C1 review
HIST1011 review
PROG19C1 review

Reported outcomes

B range results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

1

B+ 1

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