AI Rate Professor

English

Sarah Hancock

ENGWR101 · ENGWR302 · ENG20 · ENGLISH2 · ENGLC1000 · ENG301 · ENGWR301 · ENWR300 · ENGL20 · ENGW300 · ENGWR300 · 63 lifetime ratings

AI rating
10/100
RMP rating
1.6/5
Take again
14.06%
Difficulty
4.4

The decision

unless you can handle heavy , and limited emotional support.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerHarsh graderHeavy writing loadUnclear instructionsCondescending communicationHigh drop risk
  • Most students strongly warn against taking Hancock because of , and rude or dismissive communication.
  • The workload is repeatedly described as heavy, with , and short deadlines.
  • A few students learned a lot or , but those reviews are overwhelmed by severe negative experiences.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

MissionImpossible

8/100

An A appears very difficult because students report , and low grades despite effort.

Both formats show poor grade value, with and in-person reviews emphasizing strict participation and .

Is the course easy?

Challenging

22/100

The writing content may be basic for some students, but , and many papers make the course feel challenging.

Online sections often feel confusing and unsupported, while and .

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

5/100

Attendance and participation are repeatedly described as required, graded, and unforgiving.

Online reviews explicitly mention camera and speaking requirements, while , and participation penalties.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

12/100

Students overwhelmingly do not recommend her because they , and excessive workload.

Both online and few isolated positive or mixed experiences.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

5/100

Students repeatedly call her a and , and low essay scores.

Format shift

Both formats show harsh grading, with and participation score complaints.

Workload

Overwhelming

8/100

Reviews consistently , and workload that causes drops or serious stress.

Format shift

Online workload is described as mentally draining, while in-person workload includes readings, essays, writing center expectations, and participation.

Teaching experience

Awful

12/100

Most students describe her as , and damaging to their learning experience.

Format shift

Online students emphasize hostile communication and , while in-person students emphasize rude classroom interactions and .

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

, and written assignments rather than exams.

Format shift

Both formats are writing-heavy, 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

29 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

complaints about harsh essay grading, mandatory participation, lots of homework, and condescending responses.

Main concern

Attendance, participation, and work hard.

What students said

“ but you're allowed 3 tardies.”
ENGL20
“participation and and don't be .”
ENGWR301
“Most of my classmates dropped out”
ENGW300

Remote format

Online

21 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

Online reviews are overwhelmingly negative, citing unclear directions, harsh grading, rude communication, heavy work, and mental health strain.

Main concern

Students report poor support and extreme stress in online sections.

What students said

“ !”
ENGWR302
“This course was damaging and unacceptable.”
ENG301
“ camera and say something in her class.”
ENGWR300

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove a consistent exam format, so the main risk comes from essays, readings, and .

No Clear Exam PolicyEssay-Heavy AssessmentParticipation-Based Grading

Assessment risk

Varies

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews do not clearly prove a , but and mandatory participation.

Essay-Heavy AssessmentMandatory AttendanceParticipation Grading
“5-6 essays assigned and she's a .”
ENGL20
“Participation counts for 10% of .”
ENGL20
“participation and and don't be .”
ENGWR301

Online

Online reviews do not clearly prove , though one review explicitly describes a camera and speaking attendance policy.

Camera Participation RequirementNo Clear Exam PolicyEssay-Heavy Assessment
“ camera and say something in her class.”
ENGWR300
“her instructions ”
ENGWR302
“ ”
ENG301

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ ! If !”

Voice snapshots generated from 50 reviews, highlighting repeated themes in , and attendance. Credibility rating: High.

🚫 Recommendation Risk

12/100

“ .”

⚖️

5/100

“ .”

🧠 Teaching Experience

12/100

“She has taught me nothing because I learned through a website and a book.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She is very rude to students in her class
  • She is toxic and abusive towards her students.
  • and .

Theme 2

📚 About Workload

  • Expects you to go to the writing center almost daily and states in her syllabus that you should be doing at least 12 hours of work a week.
  • There is , and due dates are so soon.
  • 5-6 essays assigned and she's a .

Theme 3

⚖️ About Grades and Participation

  • camera and say something in her class.
  • At the end of the year she still gave me a 0/40 in participation.
  • Dropped my grade from B to a C in the last week of class...

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

50

Recent reviews read by the AI

63

Lifetime ratings

96/100

Evidence confidence

Fifty reviews across many years and both formats show unusually consistent complaints about grading, workload, communication, and .

Inside 50 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 57
3 out of 53
2 out of 55
1 out of 548

Course coverage

ENGW30011 reviews
ENGWR30011 reviews
ENGWR30211 reviews
ENGWR3015 reviews
ENG3013 reviews
Show 6 more courses
ENG202 reviews
ENGL202 reviews
ENWR3002 reviews
ENGLC10001 review
ENGLISH21 review
ENGWR1011 review

Reported outcomes

No letter grade reported results lead the reported letter grades.

44 reported outcomes

A range

4

A+ 1 · A 2 · A- 1

B range

5

B+ 1 · B 2 · B- 2

C range

8

C+ 4 · C 2 · C- 2

D range

4

D+ 1 · D 2 · D- 1

F

5

F 5

No letter grade reported

18

Drop/Withdrawal 10 · Not sure yet 8