AI Rate Professor

Horticulture

Megan Allison

HORT115 · HORT127 · HORT101 · HORT230 · HORT116 · HORT126 · HORT110 · HORT128 · 24 lifetime ratings

AI rating
56/100
RMP rating
3.7/5
Take again
50%
Difficulty
2.6

The decision

Fine for motivated hort students who like hands-on labs, but recent classroom tone complaints make her a depends-not-a-must.

Best fit · Beginner FriendlyField-experienced hort proReading-heavy weeksLab points matterPolarized recent reviewsLaid-back delivery
  • Older reviews call her knowledgeable, chill, and great for horticulture/soil/landscape design.
  • Recent reviews accuse low-effort lecturing, phone use in lab, condescension, and lost paperwork.
  • Workload is reading and ; grades can be fine if you show up and complete work.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

60/100

Students can earn and finishing chapter work, but some call her tough and .

Nearly all grade evidence is in person; the online review does not report a .

Is the course easy?

Beginner

64/100

Entry hort/soil classes are approachable for non-science students, though plant science terms and .

In-person students call some classes remedial or easy; one online review frames it as busywork reading.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

32/100

Many courses mark attendance mandatory and .

Evidence is almost entirely in person; .

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

50/100

; glowing field expertise reviews collide with recent disrespect and low-effort teaching claims.

Recommendation evidence is almost all in person; the sole online review is not recommendable.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

55/100

Several say she tries to award points and offers , while and lost work issues.

Format shift

; online has little grade-process detail.

Workload

Moderate

45/100

Weekly chapters, quizzes, essays/crosswords, podcasts, and labs add up; .

Format shift

Workload detail is mainly from in-person HORT115/116 reviews.

Teaching experience

Average

55/100

Strong subject knowledge and inspiration for many, undercut by later complaints about disengagement and condescension.

Format shift

Older in-person praise is high; recent in-person and the online review pull the average down.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

35/100

Homework, reading quizzes, labs, and projects carry most of the .

Format shift

and ; online evidence is too thin for exam claims.

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

23 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Beginner Friendly

In-person history is mostly positive on expertise and engagement, but , and some harsh interpersonal moments.

Main concern

Inconsistent professionalism and .

What students said

“Megan is one of the most knowledgeable people I have ever met.”
HORT115
“Shows up to lab spacy, snaps at students who ask questions.”
HORT126
“Not a unless youre really just not trying.”
HORT116

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

The single online review is strongly negative, citing textbook reading with little connection and a .

Main concern

Minimal teaching value for the money in that online experience.

What students said

“ it while your in class”
HORT115

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Assessment leans toward labs, projects, and weekly chapter work; .

Lab projectsWeekly quizzesReading-based homeworkExtra credit options

Assessment risk

Standard

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and projects; final-project clarity issues appear in at least one recent review.

Weekly labsChapter quizzesFinal projectsExtra credit
“ but not difficult: 1 chapter a week, 6 essay questions, 30 q. quiz, & crossword.”
HORT115
“Never went over parts of to gaslight the entire class”
HORT126

Online

The single online review and a weak lab experience.

Reading-heavyLab present
“kinda funny we had a lab and she sat on her phone for two hours.”
HORT115

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Megan is one of the most knowledgeable people I have ever met. She is a wonderful teacher who really cares about her students and wants them to learn.”

Voice snapshots generated from 24 reviews, mostly in-person horticulture courses with one online outlier. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Subject Expertise

70/100

“She is also not just a teacher, but a professional in the field, so hearing her speak from experience is an added bonus”

📚 Workload Reality

45/100

“Second half of . 2x chapters a week w/all assoc. chptr work.”

⚠️ Recent Tone Issues

30/100

“Shows up to lab spacy, snaps at students who ask questions.”

👍

50/100

“I would highly recommend Megan for any Horticulture class that . She is AWESOME!”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • she's funny and interesting,excellent speaker;she knows her stuff
  • she gets straight to the point while at the same Time including a few jokes
  • She uses youtube to teach you and I, which I personally think this is bad.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • It's an easy A if you go to class and listen to her lectures
  • Not a unless youre really just not trying.
  • Understand principles and get an A.

Theme 3

🧪

  • Every class there is a . Miss one day and you could wind up 20-40 points in the hole.
  • fun classes and fun labs
  • Soil rejuvenates toxic dumps, Soil sequesters carbon

Theme 4

⚠️ About Classroom Tone

  • Okay teacher but condescending.
  • Likes to talk about her personal life for a half hour every class.
  • Expect a lot of sarcasm and opinions on religion and politics.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

24

Recent reviews read by the AI

24

Lifetime ratings

68/100

Evidence confidence

Twenty-four reviews give decent coverage, but opinions polarize by era and only one online review limits format comparison.

Inside 24 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 512
4 out of 54
3 out of 53
2 out of 52
1 out of 53

Course coverage

HORT1159 reviews
HORT1164 reviews
HORT1274 reviews
HORT1102 reviews
1271 review
Show 4 more courses
HORT1011 review
HORT1261 review
HORT1281 review
HORT2301 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

8 reported outcomes

A range

3

A+ 2 · A 1

B range

2

B 1 · B- 1

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

3

Not sure yet 2 · Not_Sure_Yet 1