AI Rate Professor

Engineering

Jo-Ann Panzardi

ENGR5ENGR25 · ENG35 · ENGR1A · ENGR25 · ENGR35 · EGNR5 · ENGR5 · 79 lifetime ratings

AI rating
30/100
RMP rating
2.6/5
Take again
32.2%
Difficulty
2.5

The decision

if you can teach yourself and mainly need to complete the requirement with a strong chance at a good grade.

Best fit · Self Taught ProOutdated curriculumPolarizing teaching styleEasy gradesCaring for some studentsDisorganized lectures
  • Many students earned A grades, but many also said they learned little or felt underprepared.
  • Reviews are sharply polarized, with a small group praising her care and accessibility while .
  • The course often appears grade-friendly, but the learning experience is risky for .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

82/100

Many students report A grades and one directly calls it an easy A, but .

Online evidence says projects are time-consuming, while .

Is the course easy?

Beginner

64/100

The course content itself often seems manageable, but unclear and outdated instruction makes learning feel harder than the material requires.

Online reviews describe easy-to-follow structure, while and outdated curriculum.

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

62/100

Reviews suggest showing up and participating helps, but they do .

In-person reviews mention participation and going to class, while online reviews .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

32/100

Most recommendation signals are weak because many students say well.

Online reviews recommend her strongly, but the .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Lenient

72/100

because A grades are common even in many negative reviews.

Format shift

Both formats include A grades, but .

Workload

Moderate

55/100

Workload is mixed, with some reasonable homework reports and some complaints about lots of .

Format shift

Online reviews say assignments are not hard but time-consuming, while of homework.

Teaching experience

Poor

32/100

Teaching quality is pulled down by repeated complaints , and impatience.

Format shift

Online reviews praise organization and care, but .

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

28/100

, and final projects rather than exams.

Format shift

Both formats emphasize assignments and .

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

48 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

repeated complaints about outdated material, poor organization, impatience, and weak preparation.

Main concern

, and an abrasive classroom tone.

What students said

“i received an A in this class, but my net gain knowledge wise was a 3 out of what should have been a 10.”
ENGR35
“You really just need to go to class and turn in your hw on time to get an easy A.”
EGNR5

Remote format

Online

2 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

Online reviews are strongly , and supportive feedback.

Main concern

when they are not hard.

What students said

“JoAnn is an amazing teacher with well defined easy to follow curriculum.”
ENG35
“The assignments and , but they do require a lot of time to finish.”
ENGR25

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove the exam structure.

Exam policy not clearly proven

Assessment risk

Standard

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, proctoring rules, quiz format, midterm format, or final format.

Online

Online reviews do not clearly prove webcam and final format.

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“i received an A in this class, but my net gain knowledge wise was a 3 out of what should have been a 10.”

Voice snapshots generated from 50 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and support; credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

32/100

“Joann seems to know the material, but she catastrophically fails to translate it into a teachable format.”

📈 Easy Grades

82/100

“You really just need to go to class and turn in your hw on time to get an easy A.”

👍 Recommendation Risk

32/100

“ ”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Her presentations were very hard to grasp.
  • She was not an engaging teacher at all and was basically going though the motions.
  • I found her way of conveying the as she laid out a step by step process that personally helped me

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • You really just need to go to class and turn in your hw on time to get an easy A.
  • The assignments and , but they do require a lot of time to finish.
  • I knew what was expected of me and knew where to get help when I needed it.

Theme 3

❤️ About Support and Personality

  • Jo-Ann is a caring and supportive teacher.
  • She's extremely impatient.
  • She is the .
  • This instructor uses intimidation as her approach to teaching and relating to students.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

50

Recent reviews read by the AI

79

Lifetime ratings

88/100

Evidence confidence

The analysis is based on 50 reviews across many years, with consistent themes despite strong polarization.

Inside 50 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 523
4 out of 59
3 out of 54
2 out of 51
1 out of 543

Course coverage

ENGR2524 reviews
EGNR59 reviews
ENG357 reviews
ENGR354 reviews
ENGR54 reviews
Show 2 more courses
ENGR1A1 review
ENGR5ENGR251 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

47 reported outcomes

A range

40

A+ 3 · A 37

B range

4

B 4

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

3

Not sure yet 3