AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

N Gavryshova

MATH · MATH200 · UMMM · MATH222 · MATH125 · MATH252 · MATH123 · MATH811 · MATH242 · MATH120 · MATH241 · STATS200 · BASICMATH · MATH110 · ABAB · MATH130 · MATH111 · MATH270 · 39 lifetime ratings

AI rating
30/100
RMP rating
2.8/5
Take again
28.57%
Difficulty
2.6

The decision

if you can teach yourself math and want a potentially manageable grade despite weak instruction.

Best fit · Self Taught ProConfusing lecturesLenient gradingLecture heavySelf-study requiredInconsistent organization
  • Many students say , and .
  • Grades can be manageable because , and leniency are mentioned.
  • Students who succeed often rely on homework, the textbook, or .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

58/100

An A is possible through homework and lenient policies, but confusing teaching and .

Most Easy A , while online evidence is too mixed and limited.

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The math content is not always described as hard, but and mistakes make it feel harder than it should.

because they repeatedly mention ; online evidence is sparse and mixed.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

policy in some in-person classes to heavily weighted and strict in one online review.

Online evidence includes strict attendance, while .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

32/100

Most detailed recent reviews warn students away because and organization is weak.

, while the two online reviews conflict strongly.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

58/100

Several students mention lenient grading, dropped scores, retakes, or , but others report weird or .

Format shift

In-person reviews provide most leniency evidence, while .

Workload

Moderate

48/100

Homework and lecture-heavy work appear common, but some students say A.

Format shift

and test-heavy classes, while online evidence is too limited to generalize.

Teaching experience

Poor

35/100

Students repeatedly describe confusing explanations, frequent mistakes, disorganization, and .

Format shift

, while online reviews are split between strict confusion and patience.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

72/100

Reviews often mention tests, quizzes, finals, and support role.

Format shift

and quizzes often, while online comments only vaguely mention tests.

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

37 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews repeatedly describe , frequent mistakes, and self-study, but and personal kindness.

Main concern

Students often feel they do not learn clearly in class.

What students said

“ ”
MATH200
“She's not a good professor, but she's not a ”
MATH252
“If .”
MATH252

Remote format

Online

2 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

Online reviews are sharply mixed, with and changing deadlines while another praises her patience.

Main concern

Online expectations may feel unstable because due dates, weights, and .

What students said

“2 day .”
MATH242
“Patient and kind.”
MATH120

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Exam evidence is mixed, with , and homework-based questions while others say tests are harder or unlike practice.

Test HeavyShort Exams MentionedRetakes MentionedUnclear Test Similarity

Assessment risk

Standard

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, but do not clearly prove closed-book rules, proctoring, or final format.

Test HeavyRetakes MentionedHomework-Based Questions
“Most of the test and .”
MATH252
“ !”
STATS200

Online

Online reviews mention tests and short notice, but do not clearly prove .

Short Test Notice
“2 day .”
MATH242

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“She's not a good professor, but she's not a , so that's one good thing from her.”

Voice snapshots generated from 39 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and format differences. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Clarity

35/100

“ ”

⚖️

58/100

“If .”

👍 Recommendation Level

32/100

“ if possible, as you'll struggle in her class.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • and confuses other.
  • Not good at explaining and assumes we will understand the first time she says something.
  • and .

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • She's not a good professor, but she's not a
  • If .
  • She extends due dates and , and .

Theme 3

🧭 About Student Fit

  • Learning is mostly self study and .
  • you could be fine just get ready to teach yourself.
  • Not hard, just dont expect to learn anything from her.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

39

Recent reviews read by the AI

39

Lifetime ratings

88/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is high because 39 reviews span many years and show consistent themes about , leniency, and self-study.

Inside 39 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 512
4 out of 56
3 out of 51
2 out of 58
1 out of 512

Course coverage

MATH2526 reviews
MATH1205 reviews
MATH2004 reviews
MATH1103 reviews
MATH8113 reviews
Show 14 more courses
MATH1232 reviews
MATH1302 reviews
MATH2422 reviews
MATH2702 reviews
826741 review
ABAB1 review
BASICMATH1 review
MATH1 review
MATH1111 review
MATH1251 review
MATH2221 review
MATH2411 review
STATS2001 review
UMMM1 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

11 reported outcomes

A range

6

A+ 1 · A 4 · A- 1

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

4

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Not sure yet 2 · Not_Sure_Yet 1