AI Rate Professor

Fine Arts

Michael Ryan

ART204 · ART101 · ART221 · ART130 · ART205 · 25 lifetime ratings

AI rating
31/100
RMP rating
2.5/5
Take again
38.46%
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

Avoid unless you need his specific studio class and .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerUnclear InstructionsTough GraderExpensive SuppliesRude FeedbackVague Assignments
  • Majority experience is frustration over vague directions, harsh critiques, and costly supplies.
  • A minority of studio students call him inspirational and growth-focused when they invest effort.
  • , so this is a high-risk GE art pick.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

34/100

, and mid grades make an easy A unlikely.

Both online and ; rare easy-A notes appear mainly in older ART101.

Is the course easy?

Standard

40/100

Art content itself is not advanced theory, but and workload make it feel harder than it should.

Online and deep.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

38/100

Some studio notes require presence and field trips; .

Online is more flexible; .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

34/100

Take-again is under 40 percent and most recent comments warn not to enroll.

Negative tone is strong in both formats, with a few studio fans online and in person.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

26/100

and deductions students call unexplained or overly picky.

Format shift

Online is especially harsh; .

Workload

Heavy

32/100

, and field trips pile up for a GE art load.

Format shift

Online and and materials cost.

Teaching experience

Poor

34/100

Clarity and professionalism complaints dominate .

Format shift

; in-person mixes inspiration with rude classroom stories.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

35/100

Grades mainly come from paintings, drawings, research assignments, and participation more than classic exams.

Format shift

Studio formats are project-based; ART101 history sections add quizzes and 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

18 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

and mostly negative on clarity and attitude, with a smaller cluster praising inspiration and skill growth.

Main concern

Rude tone, convoluted projects, and .

What students said

“How do I get it into your thick head?”
ART130
“A very talented and inspiring teacher who is caring and encouraging to his students.”
ART204
“Basically a throw away your money class to get insulted.”
ART101

Remote format

Online

7 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online art sections frequently cite vague materials lists, , and expensive supplies.

Main concern

and harsh or .

What students said

“ . So and emails.”
ART204
“List of materials was vague, incomplete, and inaccurate.”
ART205
“ . .”
ART130

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Studio courses grade completed artworks; art history notes mention memorization quizzes and .

Project Based AssessmentIn-Class Quizzes In HistoryTake-Home QuizzesVague Final Exam Complaints

Assessment risk

Standard

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person ART101 mentions in-class and from materials; studio work is project graded.

In-Class QuizzesTake-Home QuizzesMemorize ImagesProject Critiques
“The class is easy as long as you study before the in class quizzes, and actually do the .”
ART101
“ tbooks and feels like he made it up at the last minute.”
ART101

Online

Online reviews focus on weekly art submissions and .

Weekly Art AssignmentsParticipation MattersFeedback On Paintings
“the and assignments.”
ART221
“ .”
ART204

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ .Period. He is horrible and and on about stuff...”

Voice snapshots generated from 25 fine-arts reviews across online and and grading complaints. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

34/100

“ at all!”

👎

34/100

“ . ITS NOT ART APPRECIATION, ITS HELL.”

⚖️

26/100

“ . So and emails.”

💡 Rare Praise

70/100

“A very talented and inspiring teacher who is caring and encouraging to his students.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • He rambles a lot during his lectures and cannot organize a coherent speech.
  • .
  • prof. Ryan made learning drawing techniques understandable and easy.

Theme 2

💰 About Cost & Workload

  • Makes you spend money on supplies you barley use throughout the semester
  • requires time consuming expensive field trips for assignments
  • .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

25

Recent reviews read by the AI

25

Lifetime ratings

80/100

Evidence confidence

25 reviews over and harsh tone, making the negative pattern reliable despite a few fans.

Inside 25 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 56
4 out of 52
3 out of 52
2 out of 56
1 out of 59

Course coverage

ART13011 reviews
ART2046 reviews
ART1013 reviews
ART2212 reviews
368031 review
Show 2 more courses
800451 review
ART2051 review

Reported outcomes

No letter grade reported results lead the reported letter grades.

16 reported outcomes

A range

4

A 2 · A- 2

B range

4

B 4

C range

2

C+ 1 · C 1

D range

1

D 1

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

5

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Rather not say 2 · Rather_Not_Say 2