AI Rate Professor

Communication Sciences

Deanna Hays

CMST107 · JOUR106 · CMST109 · CMST106 · JOUR108 · 35 lifetime ratings

AI rating
28/100
RMP rating
2.3/5
Take again
25.71%
Difficulty
3.5

The decision

Avoid if you can; and heavy busywork make this a high-stress choice.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerAI Detector ZerosTough Nitpicky GraderHeavy Homework LoadSlow GradingHarsh Feedback
  • Many recent students say she marks authentic work as AI and gives zeros
  • Assignments feel easy but , and demotivating
  • , yet overall recommendation rate is low

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

28/100

Content and prompts can look simple, but nitpicky scoring and AI zeros make a real A require perfect compliance and luck.

Online AI zeros tank .

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Students say assignments themselves are basic self-reflection or speech work, yet volume and .

Both formats but hard under her standards.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

35/100

and participation; others online report optional or no attendance, still with hard deadlines.

In person is more mandatory; online flexibility varies but deadlines stay rigid.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

26/100

Recent majority urge others to pick anyone else because of and .

Online recommendation is very low; .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

18/100

, and AI detector zeros with little appeal path.

Format shift

Harshness is strongest online via AI detectors; in person is still picky on papers.

Workload

Heavy

26/100

Lots of , and speeches with little late-work mercy.

Format shift

Heavy workload appears in both online and in-person comments.

Teaching experience

Poor

32/100

A minority find her funny and helpful, but many say she does not teach, talks off-topic, and .

Format shift

Online teaching experience is worse; .

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

Mix of papers, discussions, speeches, midterms, and .

Format shift

; in person adds quizzes and papers.

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

20 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In person she can be funny and supportive for some speech students, but many still call her a .

Main concern

, and .

What students said

“Annoying. Grades slow. .”
CMST107
“Amazing professor! She really helps students get over their fear of public speaking.”
CMST109
“Easy assignments but easily can be .”
CMST106

Remote format

Online

16 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

Online CMST/JOUR sections are dominated by , and rigid deadlines.

Main concern

AI detectors and Turnitin-driven zeros with little chance to prove original work.

What students said

“Multiple times she has insisted that and my peers were AI.”
CMST106
“If turnitin detects any percentage, she will give you a zero.”
CMST109
“She constantly accuses students of using AI.”
CMST106

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews emphasize papers and speeches more than exotic proctoring; high-stakes midterms/finals and harsh paper checks define risk.

Midterm And Final HeavyFill-In QuizzesSpeech PresentationsAI Detector On Papers

Assessment risk

Standard

48/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In person expect lecture-heavy quizzes, papers, and speeches graded strictly, without .

Fill-In QuizzesSpeech PresentationsTough Paper Grading
“there are also several lengthy quizzes that ”
CMST109
“there is a quiz every class”
JOUR108

Online

Online risk centers on AI/Turnitin zeros for written work and webcam lockdown.

AI DetectorTurnitin ZerosZoom SpeechesRigid Deadlines
“If turnitin detects any percentage, she will give you a zero.”
CMST109
“over 70% of the grade was from a midterm and a final”
CMST106

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“PICK SOMEONE ELSE.”

Voice snapshots generated from 36 reviews (16 online, 20 in and workload strain. Credibility rating: High.

🤖 AI Accusation Risk

12/100

“My work was 100% mine and AI was still detected and she gave me a zero.”

📝

18/100

“she is very nitpicky with grading and would rather give you .5 than full for an .”

📚 Heavy Busywork

25/100

“She assigns a whole lot of work, so be ready to have no social life.”

👍 Older Speech Praise

80/100

“Amazing professor! She really helps students get over their fear of public speaking.”

Theme 1

⚖️

  • Marks everything as AI
  • Instant fails and furthermore never provided proper instructive criticism
  • Hardly ever gives full credit

Theme 2

😤 About Classroom Tone

  • She comes off as a bully
  • and unhelpful
  • She was rude to another student and made her leave the classroom.

Theme 3

📦 About Workload

  • Lots of homework
  • and you will have at least 3 papers due every week
  • Just a boring teaching style

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

36

Recent reviews read by the AI

35

Lifetime ratings

82/100

Evidence confidence

Thirty-six reviews across online and in person over several years and heavy work, giving strong consistency.

Inside 36 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 56
4 out of 54
3 out of 53
2 out of 53
1 out of 520

Course coverage

CMST10620 reviews
CMST10910 reviews
CMST1073 reviews
JOUR1082 reviews
JOUR1061 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

30 reported outcomes

A range

10

A+ 2 · A 6 · A- 2

B range

6

B+ 3 · B 1 · B- 2

C range

3

C+ 2 · C 1

D range

2

D+ 1 · D- 1

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

9

Drop/Withdrawal 3 · Incomplete 2 · Not sure yet 1 · Rather not say 3