AI Rate Professor

Computer Science

Ryan Melvin

CSCI40 · CSCI115 · 7 lifetime ratings

AI rating
13/100
RMP rating
1.9/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.7

The decision

unless you can teach yourself programming and tolerate long lectures with limited support.

Best fit · Self Taught ProBoring LecturesLittle HelpHard LabsMandatory AttendanceAvoid If Possible
  • Most students describe long, boring lectures and .
  • and help is often slow or limited.
  • , but the overall pattern is strongly negative.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

35/100

An A is possible, but students describe difficult labs, heavy coding, strict documentation demands, and limited help.

All evidence comes from in-person reviews, with .

Is the course easy?

Challenging

30/100

The programming material becomes difficult because , and not well .

All course difficulty evidence comes from in-person computer science reviews.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

8/100

, and no review suggests flexibility.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

18/100

Most students advise against taking him because lectures are boring, help is limited, and the class feels poorly taught.

Recommendation .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

24/100

Students describe difficult labs and grade penalties tied to documentation, suggesting strict or .

Format shift

.

Workload

Heavy

24/100

Reviews describe massive coding work, difficult labs, and .

Format shift

.

Teaching experience

Poor

22/100

Most comments describe boring lectures, unclear instruction, poor support, and little intellectual benefit.

Format shift

.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

28/100

Grades appear driven mainly by coding labs and documentation work, while .

Format shift

.

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

7 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

and frustrating computer science experience with , and limited help.

Main concern

Students may struggle because and .

What students said

“Very long lectures, and then a massive amount of coding to do with very little help from him.”
CSCI40
“I would advise against taking Melvin.”
CSCI40
“ ”
CSCI115

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 do not clearly prove exam .

No Clear Exam Evidence

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews focus on labs and .

No Clear Exam Evidence

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ . Very hard to understand and lectures are boring.”

Voice snapshots generated from 7 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching and grading. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

22/100

“ . Very hard to understand and lectures are boring.”

📚 Workload Pressure

24/100

“Very long lectures, and then a massive amount of coding to do with very little help from him.”

🚦

8/100

“attendance was mandatory to work on a anyways.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • I did not like his teaching style.
  • He was boring though.
  • Mr. Melvin is an extremely boring instructor.
  • Very hard to understand and lectures are boring.

Theme 2

💻

  • a massive amount of coding to do with very little help from him.
  • that are very difficult if you don't pay attention in class.
  • His excessive demand for "comment lines" hinders our ability to perform well in his class.

Theme 3

👍 Mixed Positives

  • Guy's really got potential.
  • .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

7

Recent reviews read by the AI

7

Lifetime ratings

74/100

Evidence confidence

and strongly consistent, but the sample is limited and mostly from one period.

Inside 7 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 50
3 out of 50
2 out of 53
1 out of 53

Course coverage

CSCI406 reviews
CSCI1151 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

2 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

1

Not sure yet 1