AI Rate Professor

Psychology

Anne Benvenuti

PHIL205 · PHIL101 · PSYCHOLOGY · PCHY101 · PSYC205 · PHIL · PHILOSOPHY · PHILO161 · PHILC205 · PSYC101 · PSYCHOLOGY101 · PSYCH101 · 16 lifetime ratings

AI rating
58/100
RMP rating
3.5/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.4

The decision

if you want a and can support your arguments carefully.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerThought-provokingHeavy readingOpinion-sensitive gradingHelpful when engaged
  • Students often find her classes intellectually meaningful but demanding.
  • Workload is consistently heavy, with substantial reading, listening, and essays.
  • Opinions on grading split sharply, especially around whether differing views are treated fairly.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

HardWork

35/100

Getting an A , and carefully supported arguments.

All authoritative evidence is in person, so .

Is the course easy?

Challenging

32/100

The course , and often asks students to think deeply.

All authoritative evidence is in person, even though a few comments describe experiences as online.

Is attendance flexible?

Recommended

45/100

Attendance and participation appear expected, but strict penalties are not clearly proven.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Depends

58/100

and depth, but others dislike the workload and .

The recommendation .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

48/100

Some students call grading fair, while others say opinions can affect scores.

Format shift

.

Workload

Heavy

25/100

Multiple reviews describe lots of reading, lectures, essays, and unnecessary work.

Format shift

All .

Teaching experience

Average

64/100

She is often described as moving, helpful, and challenging, but some students found her unhelpful or agenda-driven.

Format shift

Teaching evidence is entirely in person.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

25/100

, and participation rather than exams.

Format shift

Assessment .

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

16 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

In-person evidence shows a polarizing but often impactful professor , and careful argument support.

Main concern

The main concern is heavy workload and perceived bias in .

What students said

“Be prepared to do lots of reading and listening to the lectures.”
PHILC205
“ ”
PHIL205
“Answers any and all questions you ask, expects you to show up and participate, and challenges you to think!”
PHILC205

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 prove the .

Exam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

or proctoring rules.

Exam Policy Not Clearly Proven

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Answers any and all questions you ask, expects you to show up and participate, and challenges you to think!”

Voice snapshots generated from 16 reviews, highlighting key themes in teaching, workload, and grading. Credibility rating: Medium.

🎯 Teaching Quality

64/100

“Hands down the .”

📚 Workload Reality

25/100

“Interesting class but a lot of work.”

⚖️

48/100

“She is a fair professor.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • The most moving and affecting professor I've ever imagined.
  • Learned a lot. she was always willing to help.
  • very interesting--never boring

Theme 2

📈 About Difficulty & Grades

  • Very hard class, but can be rewarding.
  • You work, you learn a whole lot.
  • The but .

Theme 3

⚠️ About Concerns

  • A lot of .
  • If your critical thinking conclusions differ from hers, your grade WILL be lowered.
  • Gave and .

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

16

Recent reviews read by the AI

16

Lifetime ratings

70/100

Evidence confidence

There are 16 reviews across several years with consistent workload themes, but many are old and lack grade details.

Inside 16 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 56
4 out of 55
3 out of 51
2 out of 52
1 out of 52

Course coverage

PHIL2053 reviews
PHILC2052 reviews
PSYC1012 reviews
PCHY1011 review
PHIL1 review
Show 7 more courses
PHIL1011 review
PHILO1611 review
PHILOSOPHY1 review
PSYC2051 review
PSYCH1011 review
PSYCHOLOGY1 review
PSYCHOLOGY1011 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

0 reported outcomes

A range

0

No reported values

B range

0

No reported values

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values