AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Lindsay Wylie

MATH030 · MATH30 · 3 lifetime ratings

AI rating
22/100
RMP rating
2.3/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
4.0

The decision

unless you can teach yourself the material completely.

Best fit · Self Taught ProUnhelpfulDoesn't explainMeanAvoid if possibleSelf-teach required
  • Two detailed reviews call her one of the : , and mean.
  • Students say she does not teach and cannot answer questions, so learning falls on you.
  • One short glowing review exists but is contradicted by the stronger negative majority.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

28/100

High difficulty ratings, a reported D, and claims you will not learn make an A feel costly and unlikely.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

22/100

Two reviews rate difficulty at 5 and describe no real teaching support for the math content.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

22/100

Two of three reviews mark attendance mandatory with no flexibility mentioned.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

18/100

Students , and that you will not learn anything; one thin positive does not outweigh that.

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

22/100

A D is reported and students frame success as unlikely without teaching support.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Workload

Heavy

32/100

Content feels hard and unsupported, which turns ordinary math work into an .

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Teaching experience

Poor

24/100

Majority say she , and is unhelpful or mean; one unexplained positive is the outlier.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Assessment method

Balanced

50/100

Reviews do not clearly and grades suffer.

Format shift

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

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

3 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

unhelpful teaching, high difficulty, and a D-level outcome reported.

Main concern

Students report she does not teach or explain, so .

What students said

“one of the . i asked for help so many times with her, she doesnt teach she wants you to do her job.”
MATH030
“not helpful and mean, ”
MATH30

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 as open-book, proctoring, or closed-book policy.

Assessment risk

Standard

40/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

logistics beyond overall hard, unsupported math.

“you wont learn anything with her. . BEWARE”
MATH030

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“one of the . i asked for help so many times with her, she doesnt teach she wants you to do her job.”

Voice snapshots generated from 3 in-person reviews, highlighting unhelpful teaching versus one short positive. Credibility rating: Medium.

🚫 Teaching Quality

24/100

“she doesnt teach she wants you to do her job.”

👎 Recommendation

18/100

“ . BEWARE”

📉 Helpfulness

20/100

“not helpful and mean, ”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • she doesnt teach she wants you to do her job.
  • shes unhelpful and doesnt know how to answer questions.

Theme 2

⚠️ About Overall Warning

  • one of the .
  • you wont learn anything with her. . BEWARE
  • i dont know how she became a teacher

Theme 3

💚 Outlier Praise

  • THIS TEACHER IS AMAZING

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

3

Recent reviews read by the AI

3

Lifetime ratings

48/100

Evidence confidence

Three reviews from 2015-2016 with consistent negative themes from two detailed posts; one short positive reduces but does not erase the pattern.

Inside 3 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 50
3 out of 50
2 out of 50
1 out of 52

Course coverage

74051 review
MATH0301 review
MATH301 review

Reported outcomes

D range results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

0

No reported values

C range

0

No reported values

D range

1

D 1

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values