AI Rate Professor

Chemistry

Spencer Schultz

Courses not reported · 2 lifetime ratings

AI rating
8/100
RMP rating
1.0/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
5.0

The decision

Avoid this professor unless and .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerDry LecturesHarsh GradingExam Averages Below 60Unorganized Teaching
  • Students describe long, dry, lecture-heavy classes with weak concept support.
  • Grades and .
  • Both reviews strongly advise avoiding Chem 200 with Schultz.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

MissionImpossible

10/100

Getting an A appears very difficult because exams average below 60%, grading is harsh, and only a .

All evidence comes from in-person reviews, with .

Is the course easy?

BrainBurner

15/100

The course feels intellectually difficult because concepts are rushed and students describe lecture-heavy chemistry with weak organization.

Only in-person comments describe the course challenge.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

10/100

because one review says he does not forgive time off.

Only in-person reviews mention attendance or time-off expectations.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

5/100

Students directly recommend taking someone else because , and support is weak.

The recommendation .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

10/100

Students repeatedly tag him as a and cite exam averages below 60% despite a .

Format shift

.

Workload

Heavy

25/100

The workload is dominated by long lectures, many quizzes, and high-stakes exams.

Format shift

Only in-person reviews describe workload.

Teaching experience

Awful

15/100

Students describe dry lectures, rushed concepts, poor organization, and little engagement with student success.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

85/100

Reviews emphasize exams and .

Format shift

Only in-person comments mention assessment structure.

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

2 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person reviews are consistently negative, , and very low exam averages.

Main concern

Students report harsh exams and .

What students said

“Lectures are very long and dry.”
34694
“Class averages on exams were below 60% multiple times.”
34694
“ and not in order.”
34694

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.

and quizzes, but they do not clearly prove book rules or .

Low Exam AveragesMany QuizzesHarsh Grading

Assessment risk

Strict

10/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and many quizzes, but do not clearly prove closed-book rules or proctoring.

Low Exam AveragesMany QuizzesHarsh Grading
“Class averages on exams were below 60% multiple times.”
34694
“Many quizzes.”
34694

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ .”

Voice snapshots generated from 2 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and grading. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

15/100

“Lectures are very long and dry.”

⚖️

10/100

“Class averages on exams were below 60% multiple times.”

👍 Recommendation Level

5/100

“I would still not recommend taking Chem 200 with Schultz.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Lectures are very long and dry.
  • He is a very auditory teacher.
  • and not in order.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Class averages on exams were below 60% multiple times.
  • Although he did curve the Chem 200 with Schultz.
  • Very harsh.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

2

Recent reviews read by the AI

2

Lifetime ratings

35/100

Evidence confidence

, but both are detailed, recent relative to each other, and strongly consistent.

Inside 2 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

346942 reviews

Reported outcomes

B range results lead the reported letter grades.

2 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

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Rather not say 1