AI Rate Professor

Computer Science

Cynthia Alexander

EDTECH · EDT104 · EDT103 · EDT50 · EDEL110 · EDT110 · EDT105 · EDIT105 · EDT151 · EDTPOWERPIONT · 26 lifetime ratings

AI rating
25/100
RMP rating
2.9/5
Take again
30.77%
Difficulty
2.8

The decision

unless , and blunt feedback while managing mostly easy technical work.

Best fit · Self Taught ProHarsh gradingUnclear instructionsPolarizing personalityTedious but easy workStrong older praise
  • Reviews are sharply split, but recent comments are heavily , and .
  • The coursework is often described as easy or and .
  • Some students praise her knowledge, availability, and redo opportunities, especially in older or positive reviews.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

58/100

The work is often easy, but , and harsh deductions make an A less reliable than the content difficulty suggests.

In-person reviews more often call the class easy, while and communication risk.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

70/100

The course content itself is usually basic or doable, but .

Both formats suggest manageable content, but online reviews more strongly complain about outdated or .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

, though one online review says skipping hurts and in-person access can be restricted.

Online evidence has one skip-class warning, while in-person evidence focuses more on .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

31/100

Most recent students do not recommend her because , and harsh grading.

Online reviews are especially negative, while praise.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

22/100

Many students report hard deductions, tough grading, and degrading comments, even when the underlying work is simple.

Format shift

Both formats report harsh grading, with online reviews giving especially direct examples of deductions and .

Workload

Moderate

50/100

Assignments are often doable but can be tedious, numerous, or frustrating because .

Format shift

Online reviews emphasize tedious sign-ups and unclear tasks, while but .

Teaching experience

Poor

38/100

Recent , and disrespectful teaching, despite some students praising her knowledge and availability.

Format shift

Online teaching evidence trends more negative, while .

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

15/100

Reviews , and submitted tasks rather than exams.

Format shift

Both formats describe assignment-based grading, with .

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

19 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews are polarized, mixing severe complaints about disrespect and and easy work.

Main concern

Student experience depends heavily on tolerance for and vague directions.

What students said

“ so rude like actually rude and marks you down for anything.”
EDT110
“She is one of the nicest and !”
EDT110

Remote format

Online

7 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are mostly negative, , and slow or unhelpful feedback, with one strong positive exception.

Main concern

Harsh feedback and .

What students said

“This professor is the rudest professor i ever met.”
EDEL110
“I was scared to this class but I really enjoyed it.”
EDT110

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove exam format, proctoring, .

Reviews Do Not Clearly Prove Exam Policy

Assessment risk

Varies

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

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

Online

Online reviews do not clearly prove webcam, proctoring, .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ so rude like actually rude and marks you down for anything.”

Voice snapshots generated from 26 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and recommendation risk; credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

38/100

“She is rude, unsympathetic, inefficacious, condescending, mean-spirited, unclear, TERRIBLE professor.”

⚖️

22/100

“she grades so hard that she insults students in comments of .”

👍 Recommendation Risk

31/100

“ .”

Theme 1

🧾 About Instructions and Feedback

  • She is horrible at explaining the "tasks".
  • I think the class is easy but the .
  • ; very disrespectful!

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • This class is a Super Easy A BUT this Teacher is super strict.
  • if you try :)
  • She would grade very harsh.

Theme 3

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She definitely knows her subject.
  • She talks to you like a child.
  • great teacher. and helps you out with every step as long as you meet her halfway.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

26

Recent reviews read by the AI

26

Lifetime ratings

85/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is high because 26 reviews span many years and include detailed recurring complaints, though opinions are polarized and some reviews are old.

Inside 26 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 510
4 out of 50
3 out of 52
2 out of 56
1 out of 58

Course coverage

EDT11013 reviews
EDEL1104 reviews
EDT1042 reviews
EDIT1051 review
EDT1031 review
Show 5 more courses
EDT1051 review
EDT1511 review
EDT501 review
EDTECH1 review
EDTPOWERPIONT1 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

13 reported outcomes

A range

4

A+ 2 · A 2

B range

2

B+ 1 · B- 1

C range

2

C 1 · C- 1

D range

1

D+ 1

F

1

F 1

No letter grade reported

3

Drop/Withdrawal 1 · Incomplete 1 · Not sure yet 1