AI Rate Professor

English

Richard Margolis

Courses not reported · 6 lifetime ratings

AI rating
52/100
RMP rating
3.8/5
Take again
0%
Difficulty
2.2

The decision

if you enjoy humor and , because clarity and consistency are uneven.

Best fit · Self Taught ProFunny LecturesInexperiencedLimited Writing HelpRevision FriendlyHit-or-Miss Clarity
  • Students split between finding him hilarious and .
  • One later review claims he was terminated after a semester as a new instructor.
  • Writing instruction is often and revisions help.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

66/100

Difficulty ratings are low and revisions help, but .

All evidence is in-person; no online reviews.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

68/100

Content is introductory English with moderate challenge, more about clarity than hard concepts.

All evidence is in-person.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

30/100

as mandatory, and one notes unannounced missed class days.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

42/100

Some love the humor and feedback, while and weak writing help.

and mixed.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Lenient

70/100

Essay revisions and , and difficulty scores trend low.

Format shift

In-person only.

Workload

Light

68/100

Workload is not described as crushing; participation and essays matter more than volume.

Format shift

In-person only.

Teaching experience

Average

55/100

Humor and engagement help, but inexperience, missed classes, and .

Format shift

In-person only.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

35/100

Assessment centers on essays, participation, and .

Format shift

In-person only.

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

6 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

and sometimes supportive, but , and weak on writing instruction.

Main concern

and limited writing teaching can hurt students who need structure.

What students said

“he is a really funny teacher but he doesnt make sense and he is a new teacher so i understand but ”
70178
“He liked to inject comedy into the course, but lacked experience in how to teach the course at an introductory level.”
30133
“ and he also gives very good feed back”
70178

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 describe proctored exams and focus on essays and participation.

Essay revisionsParticipation creditLimited exam detail

Assessment risk

Standard

58/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and participation rather than formal exam policy.

Essay revisionsParticipation mattersFew graded items
“ and he also gives very good feed back”
70178
“requires individual and group participation ( for participation)”
30133

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“he is a really funny teacher but he doesnt make sense and he is a new teacher so i understand but ”

Voice snapshots generated from 6 in-person reviews, highlighting humor versus clarity and writing support. Credibility rating: Medium.

😂 Humor First

70/100

“He is a very funny and interesting teacher.”

⚠️ Clarity Problems

40/100

“he is a really funny teacher but he doesnt make sense”

📝 Revision Help

70/100

“ and he also gives very good feed back”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • inject comedy into the course
  • lectures on the
  • dynamic teaching that involves going beyond subject matter

Theme 2

📉 About Weak Spots

  • lacked experience in how to teach the course
  • the actual writing course was extremely limited

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

6

Recent reviews read by the AI

6

Lifetime ratings

48/100

Evidence confidence

Six mostly older reviews with mixed tone and limited recent teaching evidence reduce reliability.

Inside 6 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 52
4 out of 52
3 out of 52
2 out of 50
1 out of 50

Course coverage

701784 reviews
301332 reviews

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

5 reported outcomes

A range

2

A+ 1 · A 1

B range

2

B 1 · B- 1

C range

1

C+ 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values