AI Rate Professor

Philosophy

Christina Goff

PHIL122 · PHIL2 · 2 lifetime ratings

AI rating
71/100
RMP rating
4.0/5
Take again
100%
Difficulty
2.5

The decision

if you want a real writing challenge and will show up; skip if .

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerSo many papersGives good feedbackCaring and funnySkip class you won't passHonors challenge
  • and strong feedback.
  • Honors students praise deep learning, care, and humor; non-honors notes call her a top resource.
  • Both reported grades are A, but the workload is writing-intensive rather than an easy cruise.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

62/100

Both students earned A grades, but and honors-level work mean the A still costs real writing effort.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Honors students sought a challenge and felt college-level rigor with lots of writing and reading.

All evidence is in-person.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

15/100

as mandatory and tags warn that skipping means you will not pass.

.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

82/100

; one calls her the best and a defining LMC professor.

.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

58/100

Students earned As with strong feedback, but no one describes or .

Format shift

In-person only; limited grade detail beyond two As.

Workload

Heavy

28/100

Tags and comments emphasize many papers, reading, and participation-driven work.

Format shift

In-person only; .

Teaching experience

Good

78/100

and mentoring, though one review rates her only average quality.

Format shift

In-person only; honors review is glowing, partner-teacher review is solid but quieter.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

20/100

Assessment centers on papers and source-based writing rather than exams.

Format shift

; exams are not described.

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 honors and standard philosophy with , and strong mentoring energy.

Main concern

and skipping class is risky.

What students said

“ !!! It's professor like Goff that make LMC the BEST!”
PHIL122
“If you're looking at Honors Phil 2 she's the . She's a great resource especially for sources and and willing to help.”
PHIL2

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 emphasize many papers and .

Paper heavyNo clear exam policy stated

Assessment risk

Varies

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and feedback but do not clearly prove exam format or proctoring.

So many papersGood feedback
“ !!!”
PHIL122

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Professor Goff is the BEST! I took her for Honors Phil-122, and I wanted a challenge and actually learn and I am so happy she was my professor.”

Voice snapshots generated from 2 in-person reviews, highlighting papers, care, and honors rigor. Credibility rating: Low.

🎯 Teaching Quality

78/100

“ and funny! !!!”

📝 Paper Load

28/100

“ !!!”

👍 Recommendation

82/100

“It's professor like Goff that make LMC the BEST!”

📚 Mentorship

80/100

“She's a great resource especially for sources and and willing to help.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • and funny
  • readily available and willing to help

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • I wanted a challenge and actually learn
  • I felt like I was college level work
  • A

Theme 3

📝 About Workload

  • So many papers
  • Get ready to read
  • Participation matters

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

2

Recent reviews read by the AI

2

Lifetime ratings

38/100

Evidence confidence

and papers, so confidence stays limited.

Inside 2 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

PHIL1221 review
PHIL21 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

2 reported outcomes

A range

2

A 2

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