AI Rate Professor

Physical Sciences

Gene Nelson

PHYS205A · 1 lifetime ratings

AI rating
18/100
RMP rating
1.5/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

Avoid if .

Best fit · Self Taught ProPoor clarityChanging expectationsDismissive toneLab confusion
  • The only review reports poor lab clarity and shifting instructions.
  • The student felt corrected inconsistently within minutes.
  • The tone toward students was described as condescending.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

35/100

There is no grade evidence, and than the raw difficulty suggests.

Evidence comes .

Is the course easy?

Standard

45/100

The review does not call the physics lab content extreme, but .

Evidence .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

The .

Evidence and .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

20/100

The student describes poor clarity, shifting expectations, and a condescending tone.

Evidence comes .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

35/100

, but changing expectations suggests a low-confidence risk of strict or .

Format shift

.

Workload

Moderate

50/100

The .

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Awful

20/100

The only review says clarity was poor and the instructor spoke to students as if they were incompetent.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

20/100

The evidence is from a lab course, so .

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

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

The and a dismissive teaching style.

Main concern

Poor clarity and .

What students said

“I had Nelson for lab and the clarity was poor.”
PHYS205A
“He changed what he wanted half way through the lab.”
PHYS205A

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 .

Exam policy not clearly proven

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

The policy.

Exam policy not clearly proven

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“I had Nelson for lab and the clarity was poor.”

Voice snapshots generated from 1 review, highlighting key themes in teaching and expectations. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

20/100

“I had Nelson for lab and the clarity was poor.”

⚠️ Consistency Risk

35/100

“He changed what he wanted half way through the lab.”

💬 Student Treatment

20/100

“He tends to talk to students as if they are incompetent.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • I had Nelson for lab and the clarity was poor.
  • He tends to talk to students as if they are incompetent.

Theme 2

⚠️ About Course Expectations

  • He changed what he wanted half way through the lab.
  • He also will tell you one thing then tell you that you're doing the wrong thing 2 minutes later.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

1

Recent reviews read by the AI

1

Lifetime ratings

20/100

Evidence confidence

Only , so confidence is limited even though the complaint is specific.

Inside 1 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

PHYS205A1 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

0 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

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

0

No reported values