AI Rate Professor

Engineering

Yung Feng

ENGR24 · 3 lifetime ratings

AI rating
63/100
RMP rating
3.7/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
2.7

The decision

Consider him if you want a knowledgeable engineering instructor, but be ready for uneven classroom support.

Best fit · Effort For RewardVery knowledgeableClear explanationsPractice packetsMixed student supportPolarized feedback
  • Two strong reviews praise deep knowledge and helpful practice packets.
  • One harsh review says he expects too much and shuts down questions.
  • Small and older sample makes the overall picture uncertain.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

55/100

; success seems to depend on practice packets and self-work.

All evidence comes from three in-person ENGR24 reviews.

Is the course easy?

Standard

52/100

Difficulty ratings and comments suggest moderate challenge rather than intro fluff or extreme rigor.

.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

comments.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

58/100

Positive reviews are strong, but the negative experience is sharp enough to make the choice conditional.

Recommendation tone .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

; packets and problem practice are the main support mentioned.

Format shift

Based only on in-person reviews.

Workload

Moderate

55/100

Practice packets and problem sets are highlighted, without claims of crushing workload.

Format shift

Based only on in-person reviews.

Teaching experience

Good

66/100

Strong praise for knowledge and clarity is offset by one review calling him dismissive and unhelpful.

Format shift

Based only on in-person reviews.

Assessment method

Balanced

50/100

Comments emphasize practice packets and .

Format shift

Based only on in-person reviews.

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

3 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In-person ENGR24 and a report of dismissive, high-expectation instruction.

Main concern

One student felt shut down when asking questions and underprepared by lectures.

What students said

“He knows the material really really well, and can do it in his sleep.”
ENGR24
“Bad teacher. expects you to know more than he teaches in class.”
ENGR24
“Makes you feel stupid for asking questions.”
ENGR24

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 .

Practice packetsLimited exam detail

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Students mention practice packets for self-testing, but not a .

Practice packets
“he always and confront problems which is excellent”
ENGR24

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Dr. Yung Feng is a , and knowledgeable instructor.”

Voice snapshots generated from 3 reviews, highlighting key themes in knowledge, practice packets, and mixed support. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

66/100

“Excellent Professor, very knowledgeable”

🧠 Content Mastery

80/100

“He knows the material really really well, and can do it in his sleep.”

⚠️ Classroom Climate

25/100

“Makes you feel stupid for asking questions.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Excellent Professor, very knowledgeable
  • Bad teacher.

Theme 2

📦 About Practice Support

  • always and confront problems

Theme 3

😟 About Student Support

  • expects you to know more than he teaches in class
  • Makes you feel stupid for asking questions.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

3

Recent reviews read by the AI

3

Lifetime ratings

34/100

Evidence confidence

Only three old reviews on one course create a thin and polarized evidence base.

Inside 3 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 52
4 out of 50
3 out of 50
2 out of 50
1 out of 51

Course coverage

ENGR243 reviews

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