AI Rate Professor

Fire Technology

Dan Coffman

FTECH101 · FT102 · FT101 · FIRE105 · 13 lifetime ratings

AI rating
12/100
RMP rating
1.8/5
Take again
20%
Difficulty
3.1

The decision

unless you can self-teach from unclear materials with very little instructor support.

Best fit · Self Taught ProAutopilot classConfusing syllabusUnhelpful feedbackHeavy readingPoor communication
  • Students repeatedly say the class feels automated with little real teaching.
  • Online reviews and poor email support.
  • Some in-person comments say the class is easy, but support and clarity remain major problems.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

48/100

The material can be easy and , but and weak support can still damage grades.

Online reviews mention easy quizzes but poor setup, while .

Is the course easy?

Beginner

62/100

The content itself often sounds manageable, but the course design makes it feel harder than it should.

Online and in-person reviews both suggest the course is not intellectually hard, but online setup problems are stronger.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

65/100

Online reviews usually list attendance as not mandatory, while as mandatory.

Online evidence supports flexibility, while and mixed.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

20/100

because communication, clarity, and teaching presence are weak.

Online reviews are especially negative, while .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

35/100

, but and unclear expectations create grade risk.

Format shift

Online reviews mention fair grading and easy quizzes, while and .

Workload

Heavy

25/100

Students mention , and time-consuming stress.

Format shift

Online reviews emphasize heavy reading and homework, while and required readers.

Teaching experience

Awful

22/100

Most comments describe , and generic feedback.

Format shift

Online reviews are worse, while but still mostly negative.

Assessment method

Balanced

45/100

, and applications rather than one dominant assessment type.

Format shift

Online reviews mention quizzes and tests, while , and projects.

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

8 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews are mostly negative but slightly more mixed, with one strong positive review and and .

Main concern

Students report minimal interaction, generic responses, and .

What students said

“The course is set up for minimal interaction with the Coffman.”
FT101
“Easy class, but the .”
FT101
“Dan Coffman is a great teacher with and well written expectations for his class.”
FT101

Remote format

Online

5 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are strongly negative, citing confusing syllabi, scattered materials, poor communication, and an autopilot course feel.

Main concern

Students may get little .

What students said

“He is not a teacher AT ALL.”
FT101
“His expectations are ridiculous, vague, and contradicting.”
FT102
“ and the ”
FT101

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews mention quizzes and tests, but do not clearly prove open-book, proctoring, webcam, or Lockdown Browser policy.

QuizzesTestsUnclear References

Assessment risk

Standard

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

policy.

Online

Online reviews mention quizzes and tests, but do not clearly prove proctoring, webcam, open-book, or Lockdown Browser policy.

QuizzesTestsUnclear References
“ are not correct.”
FT101
“ and the ”
FT101

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“He is not a teacher AT ALL.”

Voice snapshots generated from 13 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and grading. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

22/100

“I feel like I've learned nothing, even though I spent SO MUCH TIME on this class.”

📚 Workload Pressure

25/100

“Get ready to read”

👍 Recommendation Rate

20/100

“I am already regretting taking it.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • He is not a teacher AT ALL.
  • Coffman sets his class up for pretty much autopilot.
  • The course is set up for minimal interaction with the Coffman.
  • Very unhelpful.

Theme 2

📋

  • His syllabus is so confusing!
  • His expectations are ridiculous, vague, and contradicting.
  • .
  • .W. nor does he return it.

Theme 3

📈 About Grades & Assessments

  • and the
  • Had an 93% prior term paper. The instructions lacked detail. I ended the class with a C.
  • are not correct.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

13

Recent reviews read by the AI

13

Lifetime ratings

68/100

Evidence confidence

There are 13 reviews with consistent complaints and both online and in-person evidence, though many are old.

Inside 13 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 50
3 out of 51
2 out of 55
1 out of 56

Course coverage

FT1018 reviews
FT1023 reviews
FIRE1051 review
FTECH1011 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

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