AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Joellen Green

MATH22 · MATHB · MATHB22 · STATSB22 · MATH50 · 10 lifetime ratings

AI rating
43/100
RMP rating
2.9/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
2.9

The decision

Take her only if you , and the book when lectures or .

Best fit · Self Taught ProPolarizing teacherOpen-note testsPatient helperConfusing lecturesGrading mistakes
  • Reviews are sharply split between students who found her patient and helpful and .
  • Tests are more student-friendly because notes and , but and changing rules are common concerns.
  • Students who can self-study and ask for help may do better than .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

56/100

Open-note and , but , and grading mistakes make the A path unreliable.

; there are no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The math content itself seems standard, but and inconsistent rules make it feel harder for many students.

Only in-person reviews discuss course difficulty.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

25/100

One review says , so attendance appears strict when enforced.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

43/100

Recommendation depends heavily on learning style because praise for patience is balanced and grading.

All .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

48/100

Open-note tests and dropped quizzes help, but repeated grading mistakes and .

Format shift

.

Workload

Moderate

55/100

Workload appears manageable with , and handouts, but students still need steady self-study.

Format shift

Only in-person reviews describe workload.

Teaching experience

Average

45/100

Teaching quality is inconsistent, with some students praising her patience and .

Format shift

Teaching .

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

78/100

Several comments emphasize quizzes, tests, and a and fifteen labs.

Format shift

All .

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

10 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews are mixed, with some students praising her patience and , and grading errors.

Main concern

Lecture clarity and .

What students said

“honestly one of the .”
MATH22
“Goes into detail. Answers all questions and shows several examples on the board.”
MATH50
“ the whole class”
MATH50

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.

Exam policy is student-friendly because multiple comments explicitly say notes or , though .

Open NotesHomework Allowed On TestsDropped Lowest Quizzes

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

82/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews explicitly support open-note or Browser, or strict proctoring.

Open NotesHomework Allowed On Tests
“she does allow open notes/hw on the .”
MATH22
“You can use notes/Hw for Test.”
MATHB
“Test and ”
STATSB22

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“she does allow open notes/hw on the .”

Voice snapshots generated from 10 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching, assessment, and . Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

45/100

“Her teaching methods were different so I taught myself from the book.”

📝

82/100

“You can use notes/Hw for Test.”

⚖️

48/100

“ the whole class”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • .
  • she doesn't teach.
  • Goes into detail. Answers all questions and shows several examples on the board.

Theme 2

🧪

  • Her grades are based on 5 Tests and 15 Labs.
  • .
  • she does allow open notes/hw on the .

Theme 3

⚠️ About Student Risk

  • shes changes rules constantly.
  • I learned more from the book than her.
  • .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

10

Recent reviews read by the AI

10

Lifetime ratings

68/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is medium because 10 detailed reviews show a real split in experience across years, but the sample is limited and older.

Inside 10 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

MATH505 reviews
MATH222 reviews
MATHB1 review
MATHB221 review
STATSB221 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