AI Rate Professor

Ethnic Studies

Isidoro Guzman

MCGS036 · ETHS10 · N7613 · ETHS30 · MCGS32 · 30 lifetime ratings

AI rating
67/100
RMP rating
3.3/5
Take again
58.06%
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

Take him if , and strict AI rules, but if you need a low-risk writing class.

Best fit · Effort For RewardPolarizing Teaching StyleHeavy ReadingStrict AI PolicyEssay Based GradingCaring When Engaged
  • Grades are often high, but AI and writing policy complaints create real risk.
  • Students consistently describe heavy reading and .
  • , while online reviews are sharply split.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

74/100

Most students earn high grades through weekly writing, late-work flexibility, and , but AI flags and .

Online evidence is easier on workload but riskier because of AI enforcement, while and keep up.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

63/100

The course is manageable for many students, but and sensitive, theory-heavy topics keep it from being a simple class.

Online reviews call the work structured and sometimes easy, while but warn about above-average reading.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

67/100

, but late work and absence handling appear flexible for students who keep up.

, while in-person comments repeatedly say showing up and participating make the class easier.

Is this professor recommended?

WorthIt

61/100

Students recommend him when they value passion, organization, and feedback, but and AI policy.

, while online reviews are divided between perfect online class and do not take his class.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

57/100

High grades, , and late-work flexibility suggest fairness, but AI-related zeros and .

Format shift

Online grading feels more volatile because of AI checks, while as clearer and more forgiving.

Workload

Moderate

55/100

The , and analysis essays, which many call doable but reading-heavy.

Format shift

Online work is structured around weekly posts and papers, while and group activities.

Teaching experience

Good

68/100

He is often described as passionate, caring, and clear, but a sizable group finds him rigid, biased, or hard to learn from.

Format shift

and classroom care, while online reviews show more frustration with interaction and policies.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

18/100

Assessment , and analysis essays rather than traditional exams.

Format shift

Both formats rely mainly on assignments, with online reviews giving the clearest descriptions of , and .

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

12 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Beginner Friendly

In-person reviews are generally warmer, praising passion and care while , and participation.

Main concern

The class depends on reading, writing, participation, and comfort with .

What students said

“Professor Guzman is a wonderful teacher and very knowledgeable about the topics.”
ETHS10
“ .”
MCGS036
“Showing up makes the class very easy.”
ETHS10

Remote format

Online

19 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online and severe complaints about AI accusations, grading, and limited interaction.

Main concern

Strict AI enforcement and uncomfortable video or .

What students said

“The work is easy but do not use AI.”
ETHS10
“He gave me a zero on it even though the only form of AI used on it was grammarly”
N7613
“Only 1 assignment a week either short discussion of 425-500 word critical analysis of the weeks readings.”
MCGS036

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

The clearest evidence shows little traditional testing and of proctoring rules.

No TestsEssay MidtermEssay FinalWeekly DiscussionsReviews Do Not Clearly Prove Proctoring

Assessment risk

StudentFriendly

82/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

work, and no presentations, but they do not clearly prove traditional exam format or proctoring rules.

Few AssignmentsWeekly PapersNo PresentationsReviews Do Not Clearly Prove Exam Format
“Only a .”
ETHS-30
“weekly 2-4 .”
MCGS036

Online

Online reviews describe no tests, weekly discussions or papers, and midterm and , but they do not clearly prove webcam, Lockdown Browser, or open-book rules.

No TestsEssay MidtermEssay FinalWeekly Discussions
“Final and or movie”
MCGS036
“Great class. to do”
MCGS036

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Take him if , and strict AI rules, but if you need a low-risk writing class.”

Voice snapshots generated from 31 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and AI policy. Credibility rating: High.

🎯 Teaching Quality

68/100

“He is a passionate/engaging instructor who sets clear expectations from the start & makes it clear that he doesn't tolerate the misuse of AI.”

⚖️

57/100

“He gave me a zero on it even though the only form of AI used on it was grammarly but he refused to change the grade.”

📚 Workload Pattern

55/100

“There are a lot of and articles.”

👍 Recommendation Split

61/100

“This is the perfect online class and he even offered .”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Amazing teacher!! Great with the material teaching. He makes things relatable.
  • He is highly communicative and passionate.
  • his teaching style was hard for me to learn from.

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Just show up to class and read the articles and ur good.
  • The work is easy but do not use AI.
  • The essays are also the main part of your grade so if .

Theme 3

⚠️ About AI Policy

  • He's really quick to confront students about using AI, even if you didn't
  • he did consider Grammarly ai, so be aware of that.
  • You're not allowed to use Grammarly even for vocab and grammar.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

31

Recent reviews read by the AI

30

Lifetime ratings

88/100

Evidence confidence

The analysis uses 31 recent reviews across online and in-person formats with detailed, consistent themes despite strong polarization.

Inside 31 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 515
4 out of 53
3 out of 51
2 out of 53
1 out of 59

Course coverage

MCGS03611 reviews
ETHS1010 reviews
ETHS-306 reviews
N76132 reviews
68531 review
Show 1 more courses
MCGS321 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

31 reported outcomes

A range

20

A+ 6 · A 14

B range

2

B 2

C range

2

C 2

D range

1

D 1

F

1

F 1

No letter grade reported

5

Drop/Withdrawal 2 · Incomplete 1 · Not sure yet 2