AI Rate Professor

Mathematics

Quynh Nhu Lam Ha

101A · MATH186 · MATH156 · MATH101A · MATH50 · 37 lifetime ratings

AI rating
54/100
RMP rating
3.4/5
Take again
59.46%
Difficulty
3.1

The decision

Good fit if you want a and can handle an accent; avoid if .

Best fit · Beginner FriendlyVery caringAccent barrierPolarizing teaching skillExtra credit and attemptsPatient with non-math majors
  • Students , and invested in success.
  • many love her examples, many cannot follow accent or class structure.
  • , multiple attempts, and group work help grades when students persist.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

58/100

, unlimited attempts in some sections, and , but tough-grader and fail stories keep A from being automatic.

and tough-grader reports; online lacks grade detail.

Is the course easy?

Standard

48/100

Precalc and related courses are manageable for some and overcomplicated for others depending on teaching clarity.

; in-person ranges from easy to brain-melting based on the reviewer.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

28/100

and participation-focused group work.

Evidence is almost entirely in-person; .

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

58/100

Would-take-again near 60 percent: supporters rave about patience and care, critics warn against enrolling.

and strong hate; two online reviews are negative.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

56/100

Some call her an easy grader with ; others say she is strict about every step and changes criteria.

Format shift

Mixed mainly in person; .

Workload

Moderate

50/100

Homework and quizzes are common; online reports many problems and no late work, while .

Format shift

posts.

Teaching experience

Average

52/100

Kindness and , but a large bloc says accent, speed, and student-led examples block learning.

Format shift

Online teaching reviews are poor; in-person is highly polarized.

Assessment method

Balanced

55/100

Typical mix of homework, quizzes, group work, midterms, and a courses.

Format shift

In-person comments mention 2-3 exams and group work most often.

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

35 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Beginner Friendly

to worst at Ohlone, with care and extra help praised and accent or pace frequently criticized.

Main concern

, and student-run examples can block learning.

What students said

“Professor Lam Ha is easily one of the best, if not the ”
MATH186
“Although she is a .”
MATH101A
“ and struggles to teach the concepts in a simple way”
MATH101A

Remote format

Online

2 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online math sections are criticized as self-taught with author videos, , and little direct teaching.

Main concern

Students feel they teach themselves while .

What students said

“You will be teaching yourself! .”
MATH50
“she can't teach. Everything she mentions in the lectures is barely in the HW she assigns.”
MATH156

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Standard math testing with midterms and finals; strict step showing is common, but .

Midterms and finalGroup workExtra creditShow all steps

Assessment risk

Standard

52/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and strict show-your-work grading without clear Lockdown Browser claims.

2 exams and 1 finalGroup workStrict step-by-step grading
“2 exams, 1 final, and Group works.”
MATH186
“She's VERY strict with the details unnecessarily.”
MATH101A

Online

Online reviews focus on homework and .

Heavy homeworkSelf-taught modules
“ the week.”
MATH50

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“She's a an A. Though, she's not a good professor for those who don't like math.”

Voice snapshots generated from 37 reviews across precalc and related math courses, emphasizing care versus clarity. Credibility rating: High.

❤️ Care Level

88/100

“ , and genuinely cares about her students' success”

🗣️ Teaching Clarity Gap

35/100

“she cannot teach Math. because she was so .”

🅰️ Grade Support

58/100

“She gives unlimited hw/quiz attempts until the due date, which has been so helpful!”

👍 Recommendation Split

58/100

“Easily one of the .”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Her lectures are relatively easy to follow and she's an .
  • She goes very fast and is very difficult to understand
  • She lets students take up most of the time in class by letting them do examples.

Theme 2

❤️ About Character

  • She is a sweetheart.
  • , and wants every student in her class to succeed.
  • Very sweet and caring.

Theme 3

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Take her class if you want to learn in easy way.
  • This class destroyed my hard earned gpa.
  • She's both a tough and a .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

37

Recent reviews read by the AI

37

Lifetime ratings

82/100

Evidence confidence

Thirty-seven reviews with a long polarized history and recurring accent and care themes support solid confidence.

Inside 37 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 520
4 out of 52
3 out of 50
2 out of 54
1 out of 511

Course coverage

MATH101A19 reviews
MATH18613 reviews
101A2 reviews
MATH1562 reviews
MATH501 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

25 reported outcomes

A range

17

A+ 1 · A 14 · A- 2

B range

2

B 2

C range

1

C 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

5

Drop/Withdrawal 3 · Not sure yet 2