AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

William Rogers

PHYS120 · MATH · MATH102 · 5 lifetime ratings

AI rating
82/100
RMP rating
4.3/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
2.8

The decision

if you want a clear and fair instructor, but expect .

Best fit · Effort For RewardHelpful TeacherEasy To UnderstandFair TestingModerate HomeworkEngaging Style
  • Students consistently describe him as , and fair.
  • The course is usually manageable, with tests described as not too hard.
  • that feels time-consuming.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

70/100

An A seems reachable with normal effort because , but .

.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

68/100

Students say he makes math understandable and often easy, though one review still found the class boring and moderately difficult.

.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

The reviews do .

Evidence comes only from in-person reviews, with .

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

82/100

Students recommend him because , and easy to understand.

.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

68/100

Students describe him as fair and , but there is no strong proof of .

Format shift

.

Workload

Moderate

60/100

Most reviews suggest the workload is manageable, but .

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Good

82/100

Students consistently describe him as , and able to make class more interesting.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

Reviews mention both tests and the course.

Format shift

.

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

5 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In-person reviews are consistently positive about clarity, fairness, and helpfulness, with homework as the main weakness.

Main concern

and frustrating.

What students said

“Made sure that you understood everything. No accent-easy to understand.”
MATH102
“ and .”
MATH102
“ because the program has many errors and is time consuming.”
MATH102

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 full exam format, but .

Tests Not Too Hard

Assessment risk

Standard

65/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

The , not whether they were open-book or proctored.

Tests Not Too Hard
“ and .”
MATH102

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Made sure that you understood everything. No accent-easy to understand. and .”

Voice snapshots generated from 5 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and grading; credibility rating: Medium.

Teaching Quality

82/100

“Great guy, very helpful, very obvious that he enjoyed the subject.”

Recommendation Level

82/100

“ because he is does not have a accent so he is easy to understand.”

Workload Balance

60/100

“ because the program has many errors and is time consuming.”

Theme 1

Teaching Style

  • Great guy, very helpful, very obvious that he enjoyed the subject.
  • He's a great teacher. he made the class easy and interesting..brought humor into the class.
  • Made sure that you understood everything. No accent-easy to understand.

Theme 2

Difficulty And Grades

  • and .
  • He was a pretty good and fair teacher.
  • Class a really boring because it was math and was taught during three hour classes in intersession

Theme 3

  • Liked the teacher- but hated the homework.
  • because the program has many errors and is time consuming.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

5

Recent reviews read by the AI

5

Lifetime ratings

58/100

Evidence confidence

There are five consistent but very old reviews, with useful detail about teaching and workload.

Inside 5 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 52
4 out of 53
3 out of 50
2 out of 50
1 out of 50

Course coverage

MATH1023 reviews
MATH1 review
PHYS1201 review

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