AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Naeemah Payne

MATH · MATH124B · MATH236 · MATH124 · MATH113 · MATHEMATICS113 · MATH115 · ALGEBRA · MATH261 · MATH124A · MATH227 · MATH125 · MATH114 · 143 lifetime ratings

AI rating
48/100
RMP rating
3.5/5
Take again
59.46%
Difficulty
3.4

The decision

if you want a strict concept-first math coach and and mandatory participation.

Best fit · Effort For RewardTough GraderConcept-Focused MathUnconventional StylePolarizing PresenceStrict Notes Rules
  • Polarizing coach-style math teacher who rewards concept mastery and proper notation over shortcuts.
  • Strict on notes, steps, and attendance; and tests time-pressured.
  • Students who stay on top of homework and office hours often feel prepared for later math; others report rudeness and chaos.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

38/100

As and high grades happen, but only with constant homework, correct notation, and .

Online comments stress unfair online calc difficulty; .

Is the course easy?

Challenging

32/100

Content is standard-to-hard college algebra and calculus with concept proofs and unconventional methods.

Both formats describe hard math; online students more often call methods unhelpful.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

22/100

and warn that skipping tanks the grade.

Both online and in-person frequently report mandatory attendance or participation.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

52/100

About half praise her as a caring prep coach; the other half say run because of attitude and .

; .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

28/100

Tough grader tags dominate; , and note format.

Format shift

Strictness appears in both formats; online adds proctor frustration.

Workload

Heavy

35/100

Homework, projects, notes, and fast.

Format shift

Online and in-person both report heavy testing and .

Teaching experience

Average

55/100

Strong concept coaching and care for some students, rude or .

Format shift

In-person fans emphasize office-hour help; online critics emphasize condescension and chaos.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

72/100

Tests, timed quizzes, and .

Format shift

Both formats are test-heavy; some mention projects replacing exams.

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

39 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In-person reviews split between students who love her caring concept focus and , and lectures inconsistent.

Main concern

and .

What students said

“This class is tough but fair and it's definitely unconventional. The .”
MATH261
“ and pasting is considered not your work.”
MATH261
“She grades tests by the correct steps of the problem and if something in your work or answer is not correct.”
MATH125

Remote format

Online

11 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

, and claims that unique methods hurt online calculus students.

Main concern

Glitchy proctor tools, micromanaging notes, and poor online support for hard calc courses.

What students said

“ pretty much says you are cheating for everything you do.”
ALGEBRA
“Not considerate about the difficulty someone may have with the online version of calculus classes.”
MATH261
“If you try to ask questions in class you will be hushed and accuses everyone of cheating.”
math236

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Exams reward exact methods and notation under time pressure, with online proctor complaints.

Timed TestsStep-Perfect GradingConcept Explanations on ExamsOnline Proctor Software

Assessment risk

Strict

32/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and unforgiving on notation, though some call them fair.

Short Timed TestsStep GradingConcept Proof QuestionsPop Quizzes
“test lasts 25 minutes max so not enough time to work”
MATH261
“Coach Payne grades tests by the correct steps of the problem and if something in your work or answer is not correct.”
MATH125

Online

Online students report glitchy proctor software and .

Glitchy Proctor ProgramTest HeavyHarsh Online Grading
“ pretty much says you are cheating for everything you do.”
ALGEBRA
“ . Teaching method is entirely different and .”
MATH261

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Read all directions and prepare to work. This class is tough but fair and it's definitely unconventional.”

Voice snapshots generated from 50 reviews, highlighting polarized themes in , and . Credibility rating: High.

⚖️ Tough but Fair for Some

55/100

“This class is tough but fair and it's definitely unconventional. The .”

📉

28/100

“ .”

🚫

35/100

“Run if you don't want your GPA to hurt.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • The focus is on understanding the material, which is rare for math profs.
  • strange way of teaching
  • Her monotone, low-energy teaching makes the class feel unengaging and discouraging.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • Just stay on top of assignments because it is easy for you grade to tank in her class.
  • so if you miss a single mark on your final answer be prepared
  • She's a bit strict but you will learn in her class.

Theme 3

❤️ About Care vs Attitude

  • Anyone saying she doesn't care about her students is way off.
  • Apathetic and dismissive toward students.
  • She is a terrible teacher who does not care about her students.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

50

Recent reviews read by the AI

143

Lifetime ratings

86/100

Evidence confidence

Fifty detailed reviews spanning years show a and teaching style.

Inside 50 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 566
4 out of 522
3 out of 512
2 out of 514
1 out of 529

Course coverage

MATH12518 reviews
MATH26113 reviews
MATH1155 reviews
MATH3 reviews
ALGEBRA2 reviews
Show 8 more courses
math2362 reviews
MATH1131 review
MATH1141 review
MATH1241 review
MATH124A1 review
MATH124B1 review
MATH2271 review
MATHEMATICS1131 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

41 reported outcomes

A range

14

A+ 2 · A 11 · A- 1

B range

12

B+ 2 · B 10

C range

2

C+ 1 · C 1

D range

2

D 2

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

11

Audit/No Grade 2 · Drop/Withdrawal 2 · Not sure yet 6 · Rather not say 1