AI Rate Professor

Aeronautics

David Todd

AEROFAR · 1 lifetime ratings

AI rating
22/100
RMP rating
2.0/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.0

The decision

Avoid unless and .

Best fit · Self Taught ProPoor ExplainerNot RecommendedUnclear Teaching
  • Only one old review calls teaching terrible and .
  • .
  • Students should treat this as a .

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

45/100

No grade outcomes or effort details appear, so A difficulty stays neutral.

Evidence .

Is the course easy?

Standard

50/100

Difficulty is rated moderate with no comment on content pace or complexity.

Evidence .

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

50/100

.

Evidence .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

18/100

The only review calls him terrible and a bad teacher.

Evidence .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

50/100

.

Format shift

Evidence .

Workload

Moderate

50/100

Workload is not described in the available review.

Format shift

Evidence .

Teaching experience

Poor

25/100

The only student and is not a good teacher.

Format shift

Evidence .

Assessment method

Balanced

50/100

.

Format shift

Evidence .

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

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

and is not a good teacher.

Main concern

and poor teaching quality with almost no supporting detail.

What students said

“ and is not a good teacher.”
AEROFAR

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 .

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Reviews do not clearly prove exam format or .

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ and is not a good teacher.”

Voice snapshots generated from 1 review, highlighting weak teaching clarity. Credibility rating: Low.

📉 Teaching Quality

25/100

“ and is not a good teacher.”

🚫 Recommendation

18/100

“not a good teacher.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • not a good teacher

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

1

Recent reviews read by the AI

1

Lifetime ratings

18/100

Evidence confidence

Only one sparse 2012 review with no grade data, tags, or .

Inside 1 stored ratings

Quality ratings

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

Course coverage

AEROFAR1 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