AI Rate Professor

Fine Arts

Evelyn Glaubman

ART20 · ART25 · ART24T · ART26 · ART020 · 13 lifetime ratings

AI rating
18/100
RMP rating
2.1/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
4.1

The decision

Avoid unless you have thick skin and want old-school drawing drills; most students call the environment toxic.

Best fit · Hardcore LearnerHarsh criticYells at studentsUnorganized studioMakes people cryAvoid if thin-skinned
  • Most students describe rude, demeaning critiques that drive dropouts and tears.
  • A minority praise traditional drawing drills and skill growth if you endure the atmosphere.
  • Getting a high grade is repeatedly called nearly impossible against her standards.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

MissionImpossible

15/100

Students say she grades against expert-level work and that an A is nearly unattainable.

.

Is the course easy?

Challenging

25/100

Drawing courses feel intense, with high difficulty ratings and heavy critique pressure.

.

Is attendance flexible?

Varies

45/100

.

.

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

18/100

Most because of disrespect and poor teaching climate.

.

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Harsh

15/100

Students report put-downs and grades set to her expertise level, making high marks feel impossible.

Format shift

Only in-person evidence exists.

Workload

Moderate

42/100

Studio drawing and critiques are demanding, but volume of .

Format shift

Only in-person evidence exists.

Teaching experience

Poor

22/100

Repeated reports of yelling, disorganization, and demotivating critiques outweigh a few skill-growth praises.

Format shift

Only in-person evidence exists.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

28/100

Assessment centers on in-class drawing, critiques, and studio work rather than formal exams.

Format shift

Only in-person evidence exists.

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

13 reviews

High confidence · Best fit for Hardcore Learner

Studio classes are widely described as disrespectful and drawing practice.

Main concern

Public put-downs, yelling, and demotivating critiques.

What students said

“AWFUL. Just AWFUL. and extremeley disrespectful.”
ART25
“She routinely makes people cry. .”
ART25
“ a desire to learn how to draw.”
ART25

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 focus on studio critiques rather than formal exams, so .

Studio critiquesIn-class drawing work

Assessment risk

Varies

50/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

Assessment is described through critiques and drawing performance, not proctored written exams.

Studio critiquesDrawing demonstrations expected by students
“She only art critiques.”
ART25
“Doesn't allow students to speak during crits, then yells at them for not responding!”
ART26

Online

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“ .”

Voice snapshots generated from 13 in-person reviews, highlighting harsh studio climate and rare skill praise. Credibility rating: High.

🚫 Recommendation Rate

18/100

“ .”

🎯 Teaching Climate

22/100

“ and extremeley disrespectful. Will tell you how terrible you are and how you should quit trying.”

⚖️

15/100

“Grades based on her level of expertise which is impossible to attain an A”

🎨 Rare Positive Draw Growth

70/100

“Various techniques were used to teach hand eye coordination which greatly improved my drawings.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • She doesn't draw to demonstrate what she's expressing
  • She only art critiques
  • very uninspiring, unmotivating

Theme 2

😤 About Respect and Tone

  • Always yelled at the class
  • makes people cry
  • Constantly degrading students work

Theme 3

📈 About Difficulty and Grades

  • impossible to attain an A
  • Number dropped from 35 to 15
  • expect an f

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

13

Recent reviews read by the AI

13

Lifetime ratings

78/100

Evidence confidence

Thirteen detailed in-person reviews from 2006-2011 show strong consistency about harshness and poor classroom climate.

Inside 13 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 52
4 out of 50
3 out of 52
2 out of 56
1 out of 53

Course coverage

ART257 reviews
ART0202 reviews
ART262 reviews
ART201 review
ART24T1 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