How exactly do you arrive at the conclusion that they like him because he has easier material? He even says that he wanted to conduct harder tests but was force

How exactly do you arrive at the conclusion that they like him because he has easier material? He even says that he wanted to conduct harder tests but was forced to dumb them down/reduce the scope. And why is it only weaker students that appreciate the class? As far as I know the class is open to anyone no matter how smart they are (assuming they are Berkeley students) He's simply significantly better at teaching if the provided data is correct. The takeaway here should be...why are (other) Berkeley math professors so bad at teaching? I guess you could question the reported statistics and if it makes sense to rely on evidence based teaching. Feel free to suggest a better approach.