AI Rate Professor

Accounting

Julie Hansen

ACCT116B · ACC116A · ACCOUNTING116B · ACC116B · ACCT116 · ACCT116A · MIS180 · 15 lifetime ratings

AI rating
34/100
RMP rating
3.3/5
Take again
25%
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

Avoid unless , and can handle uneven teaching clarity.

Best fit · Self Taught ProPolarizing online historyLecture heavyTest heavyHands-on team workInconsistent organization
  • Recent in-person reviews , and .
  • Older comments about her online-style and uninvolved chaos.
  • Students who like energetic team collaboration are the minority who still enjoy her.
  • Overall recommendation rate is low and .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

40/100

Some older structured sections looked passable with homework retries, but and .

; several older comments discuss online-style weekly quizzes.

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Accounting content difficulty is moderate to hard depending on section, with collaboration and case studies adding load.

Only in-person-coded reviews available; difficulty comments range from easy .

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

18/100

Recent reviews repeatedly mark attendance mandatory with long class sessions.

; older reviews often omit attendance.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

28/100

and multiple students .

Recommendation is weak across the in-person-coded sample, including many historical online-style comments.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

35/100

Tough grader and some call harder than peers.

Format shift

All from in-person-coded reviews; older comments also note picky written work.

Workload

Moderate

48/100

, and textbooks create steady work without always being overwhelming.

Format shift

In-person-coded sample includes both light weekly online-style structures and heavy group/test loads.

Teaching experience

Poor

38/100

Energy and kindness appear, but many say she does not teach clearly or manage class time well.

Format shift

Recent in-person reviews are especially negative on teaching effectiveness.

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

68/100

Tests, quizzes, case studies, and ; cheat sheets and textbooks matter for exams.

Format shift

Some older comments describe weekly quiz/homework with ; recent classes are test heavy.

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

16 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

All analyzed reviews are coded in person; students describe long , and highly mixed organization and support.

Main concern

Lectures often fail to prepare for tests while .

What students said

“Her lectures go on for 2-3 hours and .”
ACC116B
“If you like hands on work and team collaborations then you will like her class.”
ACCOUNTING116B
“she had poor time management, much harder tests than any other teacher doing this subject in our school.”
MIS180

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.

some weekly low-stakes quizzes, other sections with .

Test heavyWeekly quizzes in some sectionsCheat sheet helpfulHarder tests than peersCase studies

Assessment risk

Standard

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person-coded reviews describe , and some older weekly quiz/homework exam patterns.

Hard testsWeekly quizzes/homework patternsGroup case studiesCheat sheets for tests
“Homework and the and fill up your cheat sheet to pass the class.”
ACC116B
“ in our school.”
MIS180
“Have a and .”
ACCT116A

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ ”

Voice snapshots generated from 16 in-person-coded reviews (0 online), highlighting polarized organization and low recommendation. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

38/100

“Proff Hansen is a nice person but does not know how to teach.”

⏱️ Class Management

30/100

“she had poor ”

🤝 Collaboration Fit

55/100

“If you like hands on work and team collaborations then you will like her class.”

👎 Recommendation

28/100

“ !!!!”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Lectures go on for 2-3 hours and aren't helpful
  • Brings a lot of energy to a 3 hour class
  • Doesn't teach much doesn't help solving problems
  • Uninvolved and not flexible

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • If you do the work and stay on schedule you will no doubt get an A
  • though

Theme 3

⚠️ About Organization

  • Never had her due dates straight
  • Cannot get her due dates straght
  • Posted the wrong sillabus twice
  • I pretty much had to

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

16

Recent reviews read by the AI

15

Lifetime ratings

62/100

Evidence confidence

16 reviews exist but many are very old with sparse grades and conflicting eras, so modern experience is less certain than the sample size suggests.

Inside 16 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 58
4 out of 50
3 out of 52
2 out of 51
1 out of 55

Course coverage

ACCT116A4 reviews
ACCT116B4 reviews
ACC116B2 reviews
ACCOUNTING116B2 reviews
MIS1802 reviews
Show 2 more courses
ACC116A1 review
ACCT1161 review

Reported outcomes

C range results lead the reported letter grades.

4 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

1

B 1

C range

2

C+ 1 · C 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Not sure yet 1