AI Rate Professor

Agriculture

Clare Taylor

HORT2 · 1 lifetime ratings

AI rating
32/100
RMP rating
2.0/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
2.0

The decision

unless , and self-teaching.

Best fit · Self Taught ProPoor CommunicationConfusing LabsTime-Consuming WorkInteresting ContentLecture Heavy
  • The content is interesting, but .
  • Communication is poor, especially around field trips and expectations.
  • The A grade suggests the course is not grade-impossible, but the experience is frustrating.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

62/100

The reported grade is an A, but the review describes confusing, time-consuming labs that require extra self-teaching.

All evidence comes from one in-person review, with no online evidence.

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The content is interesting, but and often lack needed information.

All course-difficulty .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

Field trips appear poorly communicated, but the review does not clearly prove a .

The .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

25/100

The , and low accessibility despite interesting content.

Recommendation evidence .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

65/100

The student earned an A, but there is .

Format shift

and review are available.

Workload

Heavy

30/100

Labs are described as , and missing needed information.

Format shift

Workload evidence comes only from the in-person review.

Teaching experience

Poor

35/100

Poor communication, low accessibility, and .

Format shift

Teaching .

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

The , and terms rather than exams.

Format shift

Assessment evidence comes only from the in-person review.

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

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

The in-person review says the content is interesting but , and poorly communicated.

Main concern

Students may need to outsource missing equations and terms because .

What students said

“content is interesting, but and ”
HORT-2
“communication is very poor, and .”
HORT-2

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 do not clearly prove the .

Assessment risk

Standard

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

The format, proctoring, or .

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“content is interesting, but and ”

Voice snapshots generated from 1 review, highlighting key themes in teaching, labs, and workload. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

35/100

“communication is very poor, and .”

📚 Course Structure

45/100

“content is interesting, but and ”

⚖️ Effort For Grade

62/100

“you have to outsource equations and terms.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • communication is very poor, and .
  • RARELY lets you know when you are taking field trips until like the night before

Theme 2

🧪

  • and
  • often don't have all the required knowledge, and you have to outsource equations and terms.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

1

Recent reviews read by the AI

1

Lifetime ratings

35/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is low because there is only one review, though it is recent and detailed.

Inside 1 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

HORT-21 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

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