AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Flora Feldman

MATH120 · MATH101 · MATH115 · 7 lifetime ratings

AI rating
25/100
RMP rating
1.9/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

unless you are comfortable teaching yourself and using practice exams to survive the class.

Best fit · Self Taught ProFast PacedHard To FollowSelf Teaching NeededUnhelpfulRetake Opportunity
  • Most reviews describe lectures as fast, unclear, boring, or .
  • Students repeatedly say they needed to self-teach or study at home to keep up.
  • There is , but it does not offset the weak teaching experience.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

32/100

Getting a strong grade , though retaking up to two tests can help.

All grade-effort evidence comes from in-person reviews, with .

Is the course easy?

Challenging

28/100

The math content feels harder because lectures move fast and .

Only in-person evidence exists, so no online comparison is possible.

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

55/100

, but and lectures appear important for keeping up.

In-person reviews mention class and lab behavior but .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

24/100

Most students warn against taking her because she is , unhelpful, and .

Recommendation .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

45/100

, but low grades and negative comments keep grading from looking lenient overall.

Format shift

The .

Workload

Heavy

30/100

Students , and substantial self-study to manage the course.

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Poor

30/100

Reviews repeatedly describe her as , and difficult to understand.

Format shift

Teaching .

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

72/100

Comments emphasize tests, practice exams, and .

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

7 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews are mostly negative, , and a need to self-teach.

Main concern

The main concern is poor clarity and limited .

What students said

“She moves very fast!”
MATH120
“Overall great professor but be ready to self teach.”
MATH120
“ and when explaining problems.”
MATH115

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 mention practice exams and retaking up to two tests, but do not .

Practice ExamsTest Retakes

Assessment risk

Standard

52/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and but do not clearly prove exam policy beyond that.

Practice ExamsTest Retakes
“She allows you to re .”
MATH120
“if you do the .”
MATH120

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Overall great professor but be ready to self teach.”

Voice snapshots generated from 7 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and grading. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

30/100

“Her lectures are so boring, she goes ”

📈 Difficulty & Grades

32/100

“She moves very fast!”

👍 Recommendation Rate

24/100

“ if my life depended on it”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She moves very fast!
  • Her lectures are so boring, she goes
  • She was really .

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • She allows you to re .
  • if you do the .
  • Overall great professor but be ready to self teach.

Theme 3

⚠️ About Support & Clarity

  • if you are in need of help with work
  • and .
  • and when explaining problems.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

7

Recent reviews read by the AI

7

Lifetime ratings

68/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is medium because seven reviews across several years show consistent criticism, though the data is old and grade reporting is limited.

Inside 7 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 50
4 out of 50
3 out of 52
2 out of 54
1 out of 51

Course coverage

MATH1204 reviews
MATH1012 reviews
MATH1151 review

Reported outcomes

F results lead the reported letter grades.

3 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

1

B 1

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

2

F 2

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values