AI Rate Professor

Art History

Fan Lee Warren

MODERNART · HISTART · PAINT2 · ART20 · ART4 · ARTHISTORY · ART105 · HISTOFMODART · ART7 · ART007 · ART1 · 31 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
2.0/5
Take again
16.67%
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

Avoid unless you are a thick-skinned experienced artist who thrives under harsh critique.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerTough graderUnclear expectationsRude demeanorSubjective gradingDisorganized
  • Widespread reports of rude, antagonistic interactions and
  • Beginner art students feel expectations are too high and subjective
  • A , but most advise avoiding her

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

32/100

Even strong effort can yield middling grades because , and unpredictable.

Online and ; only a few older history sections felt easy with participation.

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Content itself is not always hard, but and high beginner expectations make the experience feel harder than it should.

; studio classes online and in person felt too advanced for beginners.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

25/100

and warn that missing class hurts your chance to pass.

; several online reviews list attendance as not mandatory.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

18/100

and repeated warnings about rudeness and .

; a few older or tough-love positive outliers do not reverse the trend.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

22/100

and stories of subjective taste-based grades and .

Format shift

Online and ; little evidence of .

Workload

Moderate

45/100

some endless still-life assignments and lots of .

Format shift

Online ; some older history classes had few graded items.

Teaching experience

Poor

28/100

Students often say she is a skilled artist but a poor , and disorganized.

Format shift

Negatives appear in both formats; rare praise focuses on powerful lectures or tough-love mentoring.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

30/100

Studio work, critiques, homework, and .

Format shift

Studio courses grade drawings and critiques; a few history sections mention midterms and papers.

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

24 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person studio and art-history reviews repeatedly call her rude, disorganized, and a .

Main concern

, and antagonistic answers to questions.

What students said

“She grades based on whether or not she PERSONALLY admires your art and not based on whether youve followed the assignment instructions.”
ART20
“Asking her questions will only produce rude, antagonistic behavior.”
ART007

Remote format

Online

7 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

Online reviews are overwhelmingly negative, citing unfair cheating accusations, , and .

Main concern

and accusations of not trying or cheating destroy trust early.

What students said

“ so many words accused me of ”
ART20
“ and insults my art.”
ART20

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Assessment risk comes less from formal proctoring and and .

Subjective critique gradingUnclear instructionsOccasional midterm and paper

Assessment risk

Strict

35/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

lectures; studio grades hinge on personal critique taste.

Critique-based gradingRushed lecture tests
“Then she reads from the textbook. And , and you're screwed.”
MODERNART

Online

Online reviews do not clearly prove proctoring tools; and cheating accusations.

Subjective homework gradingCheating accusations
“she in so many words accused me of because she thought I cheated”
ART20

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“If I could give her a Zero, I would. Beware.”

Voice snapshots generated from 31 reviews spanning studio and and classroom climate. Credibility rating: High.

🚫 Recommendation Rate

18/100

“Avoid if you can!”

⚖️

22/100

“She is a and an .”

😤 Classroom Climate

25/100

“Forgetful, very offensive 'jokes', gossips.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • visibly does not care about teaching or students
  • Her instruction and

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • grades based on whether or not she PERSONALLY admires your art
  • expected way too much for beginner artists
  • and unclear

Theme 3

❤️ About Character

  • very rude and uninterested
  • Gets extremely upset if you ask questions
  • She's so mean! And confusing

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

31

Recent reviews read by the AI

31

Lifetime ratings

86/100

Evidence confidence

Thirty-one reviews across many years and courses show consistent themes of and interpersonal conflict, with enough detail to be highly credible.

Inside 31 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 53
4 out of 52
3 out of 54
2 out of 55
1 out of 517

Course coverage

ART209 reviews
ART15 reviews
ART45 reviews
ART0072 reviews
ART72 reviews
Show 6 more courses
ARTHISTORY2 reviews
PAINT22 reviews
ART1051 review
HISTART1 review
HISTOFMODART1 review
MODERNART1 review

Reported outcomes

No letter grade reported results lead the reported letter grades.

16 reported outcomes

A range

2

A 2

B range

5

B+ 1 · B 3 · B- 1

C range

3

C 1 · C- 2

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

6

Drop/Withdrawal 4 · Rather not say 2