AI Rate Professor

English

Ericka Kent

ENGLISH101 · ENG204 · ENGL103 · ENG101 · ENGL101 · ENGLC1001 · ENG103 · 25 lifetime ratings

AI rating
43/100
RMP rating
2.8/5
Take again
50%
Difficulty
3.4

The decision

Consider her in person if you want writing practice, but if and fast feedback.

Best fit · Effort For RewardVery format-dependentHeavy writing workloadVague feedback onlineFairer in personTough essay grading
  • In-person reviews are mixed to positive, with , and class energy.
  • Online reviews are strongly negative, often , and heavy writing.
  • Grades can still be high, but the effort and stress vary sharply by format.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

65/100

High grades are common, but students often describe lots of , and effort needed to secure the A.

, while online reviews make the A feel stressful and unclear.

Is the course easy?

Standard

50/100

The content is usually not conceptually impossible, but the writing volume, vague prompts, and .

and more guided, while online sections feel much harder because .

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

45/100

Participation and in-class work matter in several reviews, but the reviews do not prove a .

In-person reviews mention daily writing and participation, while online and discussion boards.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

48/100

Recommendation depends heavily on format because in-person students are divided but online students repeatedly warn against taking her.

, while online recommendation is strongly negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

50/100

Grades are often high and some students mention or generous grading, but .

Format shift

, while online grading is often described as harsh, vague, or slow.

Workload

Heavy

28/100

Students repeatedly mention lots of essays, discussion boards, reading, journals, and weekly writing.

Format shift

Online workload is often described as very heavy, while but sometimes seen as useful.

Teaching experience

Poor

42/100

Teaching quality is sharply split, with strong in-person praise but and .

Format shift

, while online reviews repeatedly describe poor clarity and low engagement.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

20/100

Assessment , and written assignments rather than exams.

Format shift

Both formats rely heavily on writing assignments, with online sections especially paper-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 Effort For Reward

In-person reviews are split but often better, with some students , and useful writing practice.

Main concern

The class can still require lots of writing, strict late-work standards, and .

What students said

“ and felt like the .”
ENG101
“ . .”
ENG204

Remote format

Online

10 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online students report vague directions, poor feedback, harsh or , and many papers.

Main concern

Students may need to figure out expectations with .

What students said

“Directions are extremely broad and vague.”
ENG204
“Avoid if you can!”
ENG101

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Exam pressure appears low overall because reviews emphasize papers over exams and .

Open-Note MCQsFew Quizzes or TestsExams Based on Slides

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

82/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

In-person reviews mention open-note MCQs, a basic reflection final, and only a .

Open-Note MCQsBasic Reflection FinalFew Quizzes or Tests
“MCQs are extremely easy and open-note.”
ENGL-C1001
“The course.”
ENG101
“ .”
ENGL103

Online

, but do not clearly prove proctoring, open-book rules, webcam use, or Lockdown Browser.

Exams Based on Slides
“The .”
ENGL103

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Directions are extremely broad and vague.”

Voice snapshots generated from 26 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and format differences. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

42/100

“ .”

👍 Recommendation Risk

48/100

“ if you don't need to.”

📝 Workload Pressure

28/100

“You will also write A LOT, I'm talking 5 page papers every week.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Amazing teacher, exactly what i needed to start off my college experience and keep me moving forward.
  • She was not active during the class.
  • Makes class fun and interactive and reverts back to past lectures to make sure we understand a topic.

Theme 2

📝 About Writing and Workload

  • and lot of discussions.
  • There's a lot of papers to write every week like 6-8 pages.
  • Lots of writing useless nonsense 3 page papers and memos.

Theme 3

⚖️ and Grading

  • and felt like the .
  • , and confusing.
  • Provided it difficult to pinpoint exactly what she was looking for

Theme 4

💻 About Online Sections

  • Instructions were so vague, it felt like I was gambling every time I submitted an assignment.
  • She accused half the class of ai use because
  • .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

26

Recent reviews read by the AI

25

Lifetime ratings

94/100

Evidence confidence

The rating is highly credible because 26 reviews across many years show a consistent format split and , and grading.

Inside 26 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 56
4 out of 56
3 out of 51
2 out of 54
1 out of 59

Course coverage

ENG10110 reviews
ENGL1015 reviews
ENG2044 reviews
ENGL1033 reviews
ENG1032 reviews
Show 2 more courses
ENGL-C10011 review
ENGLISH1011 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

23 reported outcomes

A range

13

A+ 2 · A 8 · A- 3

B range

5

B+ 3 · B 2

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

5

Drop/Withdrawal 2 · Not sure yet 3