AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Andrew Rehfeld

PHIL101 · PHIL1 · PHIL103 · PHIL293 · PHIL105 · PHIL203 · PHIL100 · 17 lifetime ratings

AI rating
79/100
RMP rating
4.4/5
Take again
60%
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

if you will read and participate, but .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerClear LecturesDiscussion HeavyReading RequiredHelpful FeedbackPhilosophy Made Easier
  • Most in-person students praise Rehfeld as , and helpful.
  • Success depends heavily on doing the readings and participating in class.
  • The single online review is negative and reports weak instructor presence and .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

66/100

A grades are common, but students , and writing matter.

In-person evidence supports fair effort for strong grades, while the .

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Philosophy concepts are often hard, but Rehfeld usually makes them clearer through strong lectures.

In-person reviews describe difficult but understandable material, while the online review gives little evidence about content clarity.

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

45/100

, but participation is repeatedly presented as important to success.

In-person reviews emphasize participation, while the online review only mentions discussion nonparticipation by the instructor.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

78/100

and engaging teaching, but the online review and reading burden create real caveats.

, while the only online review is negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

Grades appear achievable, but , and .

Format shift

In-person comments support fair but , while the online .

Workload

Moderate

47/100

The , and participation, with no strong evidence of excessive volume.

Format shift

In-person reviews stress steady preparation, while the online review highlights a multipart capstone.

Teaching experience

Excellent

88/100

Most students call , and effective at explaining abstract concepts.

Format shift

In-person teaching is highly praised, while the single .

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

Reviews mention readings, quizzes, papers, participation, and a capstone rather than a .

Format shift

, and participation, while the online review mentions a multipart capstone.

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

16 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

lectures and strong help balanced by reading-heavy expectations.

Main concern

Students who skip readings or .

What students said

“as long as and participate in class you will do great.”
PHIL103
“If you don't read you will find passing very hard.”
PHIL100
“Drew makes complicated topics much easier to understand”
PHIL203

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

The online review is negative and says the instructor did not participate in discussions and graded the capstone too late.

Main concern

Delayed grading and .

What students said

“Does not participate in discussions.”
PHIL105
“you will not be able to gauge yourself.”
PHIL105

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews mention quizzes and a capstone but .

Reviews Do Not Clearly Prove Exam PolicyReading-Based QuizzesMultipart Capstone

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and papers but do not clearly prove exam format or .

Reading-Based QuizzesWriting EmphasisReviews Do Not Clearly Prove In-Person Exam Policy
“Most of the ”
PHIL103
“Do the online quizzes and get 3s and just do the ”
PHIL100

Online

The online review mentions a multipart capstone but .

Multipart CapstoneReviews Do Not Clearly Prove Online Exam Policy
“An capstone consisting of multiple parts will be graded altogether after the class has ended”
PHIL105

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Drew makes complicated topics much easier to understand, is passionate about his work, and tries to make life easier for his students.”

Voice snapshots generated from 17 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and grading. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

88/100

“Drew makes complicated topics much easier to understand, is passionate about his work, and tries to make life easier for his students.”

📚 Reading Requirement

47/100

“If you don't read you will find passing very hard.”

👍 Recommendation Rate

78/100

“Rehfeld is the man!! TAKE HIS CLASS”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • really good instructor. he is VERY young and entertaining and nice and helpful.
  • the and to the point.
  • Rehfeld is a good phil teacher who helps you understand the more abstract concepts

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty And Grades

  • if you don't read you won't pass.
  • be prepared to be graded as if though you were in one.
  • Don't be intimidated by the writing, it's not that bad.

Theme 3

💻 About Online Format

  • Does not participate in discussions.
  • you will not be able to gauge yourself.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

17

Recent reviews read by the AI

17

Lifetime ratings

84/100

Evidence confidence

Seventeen reviews across multiple courses show a consistent in-person pattern, though most are older and only one is online.

Inside 17 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 513
4 out of 52
3 out of 50
2 out of 52
1 out of 50

Course coverage

PHIL1007 reviews
PHIL1033 reviews
PHIL2033 reviews
PHIL11 review
PHIL1011 review
Show 2 more courses
PHIL1051 review
PHIL2931 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

12 reported outcomes

A range

7

A+ 1 · A 6

B range

4

B+ 2 · B 2

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Not sure yet 1