AI Rate Professor

Child Development

Linda Eberhart

C205 · C105 · CHDV104 · CHDV121 · 10 lifetime ratings

AI rating
10/100
RMP rating
1.9/5
Take again
20%
Difficulty
3.7

The decision

unless , and very little instructor support.

Best fit · Self Taught ProSlow gradingPoor communicationHarsh gradingUnclear directionsReading heavy
  • , and little communication.
  • Several reviews say expectations and .
  • The course content may not be intellectually hard, but the experience is frustrating and poorly supported.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

32/100

The material can be easy, but harsh grading, unclear expectations, and .

, while online reviews more strongly describe feeling unsupported and unsure.

Is the course easy?

Beginner

65/100

The course , and assignments, so the subject matter itself is not the main difficulty.

In-person-labeled reviews more often say the class itself is not hard, while online reviews , and expectations.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

Reviews , though participation and weekly work seem important.

, so flexibility cannot be clearly judged by format.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

18/100

Most students do not recommend her because , and clarity are persistent problems.

Both formats are negative, with online reviews especially warning against taking her online classes.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

18/100

Multiple students say she grades , and rarely awards full credit.

Format shift

Online reviews explicitly mention harsh grading, while and difficulty getting full credit.

Workload

Heavy

28/100

The workload is reading and discussion heavy, with some students saying discussions or .

Format shift

Online reviews mention lots of homework and high expectations, while , and projects.

Teaching experience

Awful

22/100

The dominant experience , and limited instructional support.

Format shift

Both formats show weak teaching presence, with online students most clearly describing isolation.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

18/100

Reviews point , and quizzes rather than major exams.

Format shift

Both formats emphasize assignments and discussions, while online .

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

In-person-labeled reviews , and a mostly textbook-driven structure.

Main concern

The main concern is low teaching presence and .

What students said

“Directions and .”
C105
“Slow grades, error in grades... No communication.”
CHDV121
“The class itself was not hard, but and there .”
C205

Remote format

Online

4 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

Online reviews are mostly negative, with students describing , and isolation.

Main concern

Students feel alone because , and .

What students said

“She was very hard to get a hold of.”
CHDV121
“Slow grades, that make think unsure if you are doing good or not, never answer, you feel alone.”
CHDV121
“Not enough clarity on assignments, slow on grading, expectations are a little too high and she grades harshly.”
CHDV121

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews mention quizzes and assignments, but they do not clearly prove webcam, Lockdown Browser, open-book, take-home, midterm, final, or proctoring policies.

Quizzes MentionedAssignment HeavyExam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Assessment risk

Varies

45/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

, and projects, and do not clearly prove exam format or proctoring rules.

Discussion WorkLarge Project
“No actual direction from her, read a and .”
C205
“ time than described.”
CHDV104

Online

Online reviews mention quizzes but do not clearly prove webcam, Lockdown Browser, open-book, take-home, or proctoring rules.

Quizzes Mentioned
“The material in the textbook is completely irrelevant to what was on the quizzes.”
CHDV121

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Easy class I guess, but awful experience. Really did not feel like I learned anything new.”

Voice snapshots generated from 10 reviews, highlighting key themes in , and course structure. Credibility rating: Medium.

📉 Teaching Quality

22/100

“There's no supplemental materials, no varied assignment for different learning styles.”

🚫 Recommendation Risk

18/100

“ .”

⚖️

18/100

“she deducts whole letter grades instead of points”

Theme 1

📬 About Communication

  • Takes forever to grade and .
  • She was very hard to get a hold of.
  • No communication. Not a fan at all.

Theme 2

⚖️

  • Never got full credit on anything.
  • Errors in grades happened regularly and it took her forever to fixe them.
  • Not enough clarity on assignments, slow on grading, expectations are a little too high and she grades harshly.

Theme 3

📚 About Course Structure

  • The whole class, she just asks you to read a textbook and answer question.
  • No actual direction from her, read a and .
  • time than described.

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

10

Recent reviews read by the AI

10

Lifetime ratings

72/100

Evidence confidence

The evidence is credible because 10 reviews over many years consistently report the same problems, but some older reviews and format-label ambiguity reduce certainty.

Inside 10 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 51
4 out of 50
3 out of 51
2 out of 54
1 out of 54

Course coverage

CHDV1214 reviews
C1052 reviews
C2052 reviews
CHDV1042 reviews

Reported outcomes

B range results lead the reported letter grades.

7 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

B range

3

B+ 1 · B 2

C range

1

C 1

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

2

Not_Sure_Yet 2