AI Rate Professor

Design

Zara Feeney

ARTM43 · ARTM34 · ARTM30 · ARTM20 · ARTM300 · M20 · ART30 · 17 lifetime ratings

AI rating
62/100
RMP rating
3.5/5
Take again
64.71%
Difficulty
3.2

The decision

if you want an inspiring art mentor; and unengaging.

Best fit · Effort For RewardInspirational In PersonVague Online FeedbackTough GraderGood Studio FeedbackPolarized by Format
  • In-person studio classes often feel inspiring with and growth.
  • Online sections draw heavy complaints about recycled YouTube content and little original teaching.
  • and comments sometimes vague even when grades land high.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

55/100

Many earn As with effort, but and .

; in-person students more often report earned As with work.

Is the course easy?

Standard

52/100

Studio fundamentals are manageable with practice, though projects and volume can feel heavy.

Online work feels boring and repetitive; in-person pace and rigor vary by course.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

as optional; others enforce strict limits and participation.

and phone rules.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

68/100

, but format choice matters a lot.

; online reviews are largely negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

38/100

Tough grader tags appear often; perfect.

Format shift

Online and .

Workload

Heavy

35/100

Lots of homework and .

Format shift

Online students stress repetitive volume; .

Teaching experience

Good

68/100

In person she is often inspirational and helpful; online teaching feels low-effort.

Format shift

Online reviews pull the score down versus strong studio mentoring in person.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

, and online submissions with written comments.

Format shift

.

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

14 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Beginner Friendly

, and excellent at helping all skill levels grow.

Main concern

Some report tough grading, strict rules, or vague written comments.

What students said

“This class was hands down the , and Mrs. Feeney is such a great teacher who really cares about her students.”
ART30
“This class changed my life. Zaras the best”
ARTM20
“ unless you .”
ARTM30

Remote format

Online

3 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online students report recycled assignments, heavy YouTube reliance, and weak instructor engagement.

Main concern

Little original content and repetitive uninspiring work.

What students said

“1/100 of the class is content from the professor and the rest from YouTube. , and uninspiring.”
ARTM30
“All of these online assignments are recycled from the past several semesters online.”
ARTM34
“Think the instructor would be better in an in-class setting so feedback and guidance could be provided.”
ARTM43

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Assessment is project and .

Project-based gradingStudio critiquesOnline assignment comments

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

78/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and participation rather than formal exams.

Studio projectsIn-class feedbackParticipation matters
“She'll help you if you apply yourself, is very inspirational, and unlike others, she really tries.”
ARTM300
“ unless you .”
ARTM30

Online

Online grading focuses on recycled assignments and vague written comments with .

Recycled online assignmentsVague written feedback
“She always writes comments on what you turn in online, but they are very vague, almost like copy and pasted for everyone.”
ARTM43
“ , and uninspiring.”
ARTM30

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“This class was hands down the , and Mrs. Feeney is such a great teacher who really cares about her students.”

Voice snapshots generated from 17 reviews (3 online, 14 in person), highlighting format-driven teaching quality gaps. Credibility rating: High.

🎨 Inspirational Studio Mentor

88/100

“This class changed my life. Zaras the best”

💻 Weak Online Delivery

20/100

“1/100 of the class is content from the professor and the rest from YouTube.”

📝

38/100

“ , but would always tell me they were perfect???”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Her teaching style effortlessly balances technical precision with a genuine enthusiasm for fostering creativity.
  • She is truly inspiring and makes your love of art grow.
  • I've never had a more unengaging, and frankly, boring class.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • While I ended with an A, it was difficult.
  • Loads of work. Almost unrealistic.
  • unless you .

Theme 3

💻 About Online Classes

  • All of these online assignments are recycled from the past several semesters online.
  • most of the videos for lecture are short online videos that is made by others
  • I am very surprised how little effort she put into the class.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

17

Recent reviews read by the AI

17

Lifetime ratings

78/100

Evidence confidence

Seventeen reviews across online and and consistent format-based patterns.

Inside 17 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 58
4 out of 52
3 out of 51
2 out of 52
1 out of 54

Course coverage

ARTM205 reviews
ARTM305 reviews
ART302 reviews
ARTM432 reviews
ARTM3001 review
Show 2 more courses
ARTM341 review
M201 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

13 reported outcomes

A range

8

A 8

B range

3

B+ 1 · B 2

C range

1

C+ 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Not sure yet 1