AI Rate Professor

Computer Science

C. Chandavarkar

CISM28 · CISSECT · EXCEL · HTMLSECT · CIS21 · WEBDESIGN · COMPSCI · CIS26 · CIS28 · 13 lifetime ratings

AI rating
18/100
RMP rating
1.4/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
2.5

The decision

Avoid unless you only need easy units and can teach yourself from the textbook.

Best fit · Self Taught ProHard to UnderstandThick AccentTextbook DependentUnclear CriteriaBoring Lectures
  • Heavy accent and and
  • Classes often reduce to reading the book with little original teaching
  • Criteria can change without notice, creating confusion even in easy courses

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

78/100

Several students call it a breeze or easy A for computer-literate students despite poor teaching.

.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

72/100

Content is often basic HTML or intro CIS, but .

.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

55/100

; one review mainly says just try to show up.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

12/100

Nearly all reviews and teaching problems.

.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

, but shifting criteria make standards feel unpredictable.

Format shift

.

Workload

Light

74/100

Workload is generally light when students mainly follow the textbook.

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Awful

16/100

Students repeatedly call her the , and textbook-bound.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

42/100

Comments emphasize vague assignment criteria and book-based work more than formal exams.

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

13 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Consistently poor in-person experience , and textbook-only instruction.

Main concern

Thick accent and vague criteria make success depend on self-teaching.

What students said

“Just trying to understand what the .”
CIS26
“By far the ”
HTMLSECT
“Very easy class, but very boring teacher. if you want an easy 3 units.”
CISM28

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.

Reviews do not clearly prove a and .

Little Exam DetailAssignment FocusedUnclear Criteria

Assessment risk

Standard

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and instead stress unclear assignment criteria.

Unclear CriteriaTextbook Dependent
“ . Be careful, she may change the criteria at any time without notice.”
WEBDESIGN

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“By far the ... I could have just read the book because that is the only thing she taught from...”

Voice snapshots generated from 13 in-person reviews with strongly consistent negative themes on communication and teaching. Credibility rating: Medium.

🚫 Teaching Disaster

16/100

“By far the ”

🗣️ Communication Barrier

15/100

“Canta understand a word she is saying and very unhelpful and boring!!!!”

📘 Textbook Only

20/100

“I could have just read the book because that is the only thing she taught from...”

🟢 Easy Units Option

78/100

“Easy A+++ if you are a nerd ;)”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Uses the book a lot because she doesn't have the html codes memorized.
  • Not one original idea ever sprung up from her in class...
  • and

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Very easy class, but very boring teacher.
  • Easy A+++ if you are a nerd ;)
  • This class is very informal, yet it isn't easy.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Clarity Issues

  • English is clearly not this teacher's primary language.
  • Thick accent. Doesn't seem to know what she's talking about half the time.
  • Also hard to keep in contact with when you need something

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

13

Recent reviews read by the AI

13

Lifetime ratings

68/100

Evidence confidence

13 consistently negative in-person reviews across courses provide a , though all are older (2004-2010).

Inside 13 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 50
4 out of 50
3 out of 52
2 out of 54
1 out of 57

Course coverage

WEBDESIGN4 reviews
EXCEL2 reviews
CIS211 review
CIS261 review
CIS281 review
Show 4 more courses
CISM281 review
CISSECT1 review
COMPSCI1 review
HTMLSECT1 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