AI Rate Professor

Biology

LaFrance Daniels

BIOSCI201 · 20 lifetime ratings

AI rating
5/100
RMP rating
1.3/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
4.8

The decision

unless there is no other option and you are prepared to teach yourself the course.

Best fit · Self Taught ProDisorganizedSelf Teaching RequiredTest HeavyPoor GuidanceHarsh Exams
  • Students overwhelmingly say lectures are ineffective, often just reading slides, with little useful guidance.
  • , and practicals are described as , and difficult to prepare for.
  • Nearly every review recommends avoiding him because high effort often does not translate into fair results.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

MissionImpossible

8/100

Students say even heavy studying often fails because , and instruction do not align.

The in-person evidence strongly shows very poor effort-to-grade payoff, while the single online review is negative but not grade-specific.

Is the course easy?

BrainBurner

12/100

Anatomy is already difficult, and , and mismatched exams make it much harder.

structure, while online evidence only supports general disorganization.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

10/100

though students feel class time adds little value.

, and the online review does not address attendance.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

2/100

Students almost unanimously because the , and unsupported.

Both formats are negative, but the strong recommendation evidence is almost entirely in person.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

5/100

Reviews report grading errors, no , and poor alignment between study materials and exams.

Format shift

, while the online review lacks grading specifics.

Workload

Heavy

22/100

The workload is , and outside resources rather than helpful instruction.

Format shift

, while online workload evidence is limited.

Teaching experience

Awful

8/100

Students describe , and a need to teach themselves.

Format shift

In-person reviews are detailed and overwhelmingly negative, while the lone online .

Assessment method

FocusOnExams

88/100

Grades , and test performance.

Format shift

, and study guides, while online assessment evidence is unclear.

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

19 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews are overwhelmingly , and self-teaching.

Main concern

Students report needing outside resources because lectures and study materials do not prepare them well.

What students said

“Success required teaching myself, excessive study hours, and relying on other students for accurate materials.”
BIOSCI201
“Study guides were incredibly vague and NEVER matched the tests.”
BIOSCI201
“All test averages were 40-50% with .”
BIOSCI201

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

The lone online review is negative and describes the professor as disorganized and unreasonable.

Main concern

There is too little online evidence, but the only review is strongly negative.

What students said

“I have never met a and unreasonable professor in my life.”
BIOSCI201

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews describe exam-heavy grading with , and poor preparation support.

Multiple Choice ExamsLab PracticalsTest HeavyVague Study GuidesNo Clear Curve

Assessment risk

Strict

12/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews mention multiple-choice exams, quizzes, lab , and , but do not clearly prove open-book or proctoring rules.

Multiple Choice ExamsLab PracticalsQuizzesVague Study GuidesNo Curve
“ " whereas Daniels' are all multiple choice”
BIOSCI201
“Study guides were incredibly vague and NEVER matched the tests.”
BIOSCI201
“All test averages were 40-50% with .”
BIOSCI201

Online

The single online review does not clearly prove webcam, proctoring, open-book, quiz format, midterm format, or .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Success required teaching myself, excessive study hours, and relying on other students for accurate materials.”

Voice snapshots generated from 20 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and student warnings; credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

8/100

“Teaching style involved reading slides verbatim, mismatched readings and , and .”

⚖️

5/100

“All test averages were 40-50% with .”

⚠️ Recommendation Rate

2/100

“I and save yourself!”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • He basically just reads off of PowerPoints for 3 hr
  • I felt as if he had no clue what he was teaching and often was I left with more questions.
  • .

Theme 2

📈

  • Study guides are completely incompatible with the exams.
  • .
  • .

Theme 3

🚫 About Student Warnings

  • The if you have no other option.
  • RUN!!!
  • !

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

20

Recent reviews read by the AI

20

Lifetime ratings

83/100

Evidence confidence

The analysis is based on 20 reviews with highly consistent complaints across multiple semesters, though only .

Inside 20 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 50
4 out of 50
3 out of 51
2 out of 53
1 out of 516

Course coverage

BIOSCI20120 reviews

Reported outcomes

C range results lead the reported letter grades.

19 reported outcomes

A range

2

A 1 · A- 1

B range

5

B 5

C range

7

C+ 1 · C 5 · C- 1

D range

4

D+ 2 · D 1 · D- 1

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

1

Rather not say 1