AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Richard Wong

MATH123C · MATH245 · MATH234 · MATH140 · MATH260 · 123C · 15 lifetime ratings

AI rating
32/100
RMP rating
2.5/5
Take again
33.33%
Difficulty
3.5

The decision

Avoid if ; only consider if you can learn math mostly and textbooks.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUnclear lecturesTest heavyHeavy accentSelf-study requiredGraded by few things
  • Many students say lectures are and .
  • Grade is driven mainly by a .
  • Older reviews are strongly negative; a few newer notes say content is manageable if .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

52/100

Some call exams easy or multiple-choice, but grades hinge on a and .

; in-person notes mix easy exams with failed tests and B-range finals.

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Material ranges from manageable lower-level math .

Online summer student called it moderate; .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

while others say no, so flexibility depends on the class.

Evidence mixed across both formats with no single consistent policy.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

30/100

and many warn others to pick better math teachers.

One ; most detailed in-person comments advise against him.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

48/100

and few grade items, but little curve, limited extra work, and .

Format shift

Online and in-person both describe test-heavy, few-item grading with limited second chances.

Workload

Light

62/100

Pearson work rather than large projects.

Format shift

Online summer student reported about 30 minutes a day; homework.

Teaching experience

Poor

35/100

Students repeatedly describe unclear lectures, heavy accent barriers, and needing outside help to learn.

Format shift

In-person critiques are harsher; online is .

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

78/100

Most of the grade comes from a handful of as secondary checks.

Format shift

Both formats emphasize tests as the dominant grade driver.

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

13 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Polarized in-person experience with , and students teaching themselves, though a minority found exams straightforward.

Main concern

and limited re-explanation force heavy reliance on peers, tutors, and outside resources.

What students said

“I was on YouTube reviewing lessons because he was so terrible at his lectures.”
MATH123C
“He is always unprepared & students will need to rely on each other & the text to learn the material.”
MATH140
“RUN RUN RUN... if ”
MATH245

Remote format

Online

2 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Hands-off asynchronous , and reminders; grade is heavily test-based and students often self-teach on Pearson.

Main concern

Minimal instructor presence and if you struggle on exams.

What students said

“he basically does nothing but post the hw, lectures, and reminders. 70% of .”
MATH260
“ but gives you a if you are actually doing your work”
MATH123C

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

and are often multiple choice, but recovery options are limited if .

Test heavyMultiple choice commonHomework quizzesLittle curve

Assessment risk

Standard

58/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and unforgiving by others, with and limited makeup work.

Straight forward testsNo curveFew grade items
“ .”
MATH234
“I got As... but failed one... and got an 88... He wouldn't give me any opportunities to do extra work”
MATH234

Online

Online sections are described as test-heavy with posted materials and .

Test heavyHomework quizzesPearson homework
“70% of . I only ever did the hw (on Pearson, ~30 min a day”
MATH260
“ choices.”
MATH123C

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ !”

Voice snapshots generated from 15 reviews spanning online and in-person , and recommendation risk. Credibility rating: Medium.

📉 Teaching Clarity

35/100

“I was on YouTube reviewing lessons because he was so terrible at his lectures.”

🧪

78/100

“70% of .”

🚫 Recommendation Risk

30/100

“RUN RUN RUN... if ”

📚

40/100

“students will need to rely on each other & the text to learn the material.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • and if you dont get it he tells you to ask your neighbor!
  • his handwriting is bad, has accent
  • Can't understand his english! Very heavy accent.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • .
  • tests and
  • I got As... but failed one... and got an 88

Theme 3

⚠️ About Student Warnings

  • !! a wasted semester
  • !
  • There .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

15

Recent reviews read by the AI

15

Lifetime ratings

62/100

Evidence confidence

Fifteen reviews span many years with and lecture complaints, but older extreme negatives and sparse recent detail lower confidence.

Inside 15 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

MATH2456 reviews
MATH123C3 reviews
MATH2342 reviews
123C1 review
33861 review
Show 2 more courses
MATH1401 review
MATH2601 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

6 reported outcomes

A range

3

A+ 2 · A 1

B range

2

B+ 2

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Drop/Withdrawal 1