AI Rate Professor

Communication Studies

Kaitlyn Laczko

COMM301 · CMST4 · CMST2 · CMST002 · CMST004 · 9 lifetime ratings

AI rating
53/100
RMP rating
2.9/5
Take again
44.44%
Difficulty
3.3

The decision

if you are comfortable with public speaking, group work, and carefully following grading criteria despite mixed teaching reviews.

Best fit · Effort For RewardPolarized ReviewsUnclear ExpectationsStrict GradingGroup Work HeavyHelpful When Clear
  • Students strongly disagree on her teaching, with and supportive and and patronizing.
  • The course content is often described as not hard, but .
  • and group work as major grade risks.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

68/100

Many students earned A-range grades and say the class is not hard, but strict or .

Online reviews include high , while in-person reviews add group-work and attendance risks.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

72/100

The course content is generally not described as intellectually hard, especially for public speaking or communication basics.

Online comments directly say the class was not hard, and in-person comments describe it as manageable but affected by group work.

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

35/100

In-person comments say attendance, scheduling, and participation matter, while online reviews .

, while online evidence does not clearly establish an attendance policy.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

48/100

Recommendation is split because some students find her helpful and clear while others strongly warn against taking her.

Both online and and strong criticism in each format.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Strict

35/100

Grades can be good, but , and strict expectations.

Format shift

Online reviews focus on unclear grading criteria, while .

Workload

Moderate

52/100

Workload is not consistently described as heavy, but group meetings and participation can add effort.

Format shift

Online workload seems manageable, while outside meetings.

Teaching experience

Average

56/100

Teaching quality is highly polarized, with clear and helpful moments balanced by serious complaints about organization and tone.

Format shift

Online and and strong criticism, so the overall teaching signal is mixed.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

Comments emphasize grading criteria, participation, public speaking work, and group projects more than exams.

Format shift

Online evidence mentions grading criteria, while and group projects.

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

5 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

In-person reviews are also mixed, with praise for her personality and and group-work concerns.

Main concern

and group dynamics can affect grades heavily.

What students said

“ and .”
CMST2
“she's very strict about scheduling and missing class.”
CMST004
“You will have to meet with your group outside of class multiple times.”
CMST4

Remote format

Online

4 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Effort For Reward

Online reviews and complaints about unclear expectations and critical grading.

Main concern

The .

What students said

“I took it online, yet I still felt like I learned a lot and everything was straightforward.”
CMST002
“Wasn't even a hard class, but , and almost childish.”
COMM301
“Always willing to help and .”
CMST4

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews do not clearly prove exam .

Assessment risk

Standard

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, midterms, finals, or other exam requirements.

Online

Online reviews do not clearly prove webcam, proctoring, Lockdown Browser, open-book, midterm, or .

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ .”

Voice snapshots generated from 9 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and group work. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

56/100

“ and .”

⚖️

35/100

“Doesn't communicate her extremely randomly specific expectations clearly but .”

👍 Recommendation Level

48/100

“ .”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • and .
  • .
  • Always willing to help and .

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • Wasn't even a hard class, but , and almost childish.
  • I saw this coming a mile away and got an A+.
  • because of my group.

Theme 3

👥 and Group Work

  • she's very strict about scheduling and missing class.
  • You will have to meet with your group outside of class multiple times.
  • If you have a problem within your group, she encourages you to work it out on your own.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

9

Recent reviews read by the AI

9

Lifetime ratings

72/100

Evidence confidence

Credibility is medium because nine reviews across several years give useful detail, but opinions are highly polarized and .

Inside 9 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 53
4 out of 51
3 out of 50
2 out of 52
1 out of 53

Course coverage

CMST43 reviews
CMST0022 reviews
COMM3012 reviews
CMST0041 review
CMST21 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

6 reported outcomes

A range

5

A+ 2 · A 2 · A- 1

B range

0

No reported values

C range

1

C- 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values