AI Rate Professor

Art

Lindsay Kessner

ART23 · ART17 · 6 lifetime ratings

AI rating
54/100
RMP rating
3.0/5
Take again
50%
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

if and can handle talk-heavy instruction, participation, and material costs.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerLecture HeavyParticipation FocusedPassionate but TalkativeExpensive MaterialsReasonable Grading
  • Students see Lindsay Kessner as passionate, approachable, and reasonable, but many wanted more studio instruction and less lecture.
  • Getting an A is manageable if , and show effort.
  • The biggest complaints are long lectures, limited demonstrations, public participation pressure, and expensive materials.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

EasyA

78/100

An A seems very reachable with participation, effort, and completed assignments, though non-art majors may face tougher expectations.

because there are no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Standard

58/100

The course is not conceptually extreme, but , and material demands make it moderately challenging.

All evidence comes from in-person studio art reviews, with .

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

48/100

Participation is important and tracked, but reviews do not clearly prove a .

All evidence comes from in-person reviews, where participation pressure is a recurring theme.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

52/100

Recommendations depend on whether students want a lecture-heavy, participation-focused art class rather than a hands-on technique class.

Only in-person evidence exists, and it and critical experiences.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

68/100

and effort-based, but participation and presentation expectations can affect outcomes.

Format shift

reviews to compare.

Workload

Moderate

56/100

Assignments seem manageable, but , and expensive required materials add friction.

Format shift

All .

Teaching experience

Average

56/100

She is seen as passionate and approachable, but repeated complaints say lectures are too long and technique instruction is weak.

Format shift

All teaching evidence is in person, with several reviews specifically criticizing lost studio time.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

24/100

Assessment appears mostly project, participation, and .

Format shift

All .

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

6 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

All evidence is in person, with mixed reviews praising her passion and fairness but criticizing excessive lectures and limited hands-on studio teaching.

Main concern

Students may get less technique demonstration and studio time than expected.

What students said

“She did not really teach or demonstrate techniques, and and in my opinion poor.”
Art23
“If you participate and should have no problem getting an A.”
ART17
“Not enough studio time.”
ART17

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 a formal exam style, proctoring policy, open-book policy, midterm format, or .

Reviews Do Not Clearly Prove Exam Policy

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and public speaking grading, but they do not clearly prove an .

Final ProjectPublic Speaking Grading
“Grades you on your public speaking skills on the .”
ART17

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“If you participate and should have no problem getting an A.”

Voice snapshots generated from 6 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and materials. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

56/100

“She clearly is very passionate about art and and nice.”

👍 Recommendation Fit

52/100

“Great class for more extroverted artists but I found it very draining.”

⚖️

68/100

“Emphasis on effort and improvement. She is very reasonable and projects.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She likes to talk A LOT, but you can tell she has a passion for art.
  • Repetitive and redundant lectures that drone on forever.
  • . Good .

Theme 2

📈 About Grades and Participation

  • If you participate and should have no problem getting an A.
  • She keeps cards with students' names on them and makes dashes when you talk in class.
  • There are due dates but they don't matter a whole lot.

Theme 3

💸 About Materials and Studio Time

  • Only drawback for me was all of the materials required throughout the term are incredibly expensive when all added up.
  • Not enough studio time.
  • She did not really teach or demonstrate techniques.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

6

Recent reviews read by the AI

6

Lifetime ratings

58/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is medium because there are only 6 reviews, but they are recent enough and consistently describe the same strengths and problems.

Inside 6 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

ART175 reviews
Art231 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

5 reported outcomes

A range

4

A 3 · 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

1

Incomplete 1