Course record BMED
BMED 2250
Problems in Biomedical Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus
51 sections40 professors
Grades: 2015–2025Evaluations: 2016–2024
Flunk Score55/100
Mixed record
Maysam Nezafati 2 sections · 2 terms · 2019 3.94GPA
Published grade shares · 2 sections · 2019
Compare with the course
Nezafati vs. the course average
A
+14.3
B
−11.5
C
−2.3
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Overall4.74 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.53
Instructor clarity4.60
Course effectiveness4.50
Instructor enthusiasm4.90
Instructor helpfulness4.63
Instructor availability4.80
Instructor communication4.60
Instructor effectiveness4.80
Instructor respectfulness4.93
Assignment measured knowledge4.30
Instructor stimulates interest4.67
Todd Fernandez 4 sections · 4 terms · 2024–2025 3.90GPA
Published grade shares · 4 sections · 2024–2025
Compare with the course
Fernandez vs. the course average
A
+12.7
B
−12.2
C
−0.5
D
+0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
Each term against the course average
Spring 2024Fall 2025
Overall4.70 / 5
44 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.63
Instructor clarity4.60
Course effectiveness4.63
Instructor enthusiasm4.84
Instructor helpfulness4.78
Instructor availability4.67
Instructor communication4.60
Instructor effectiveness4.64
Instructor respectfulness4.83
Assignment measured knowledge4.51
Instructor stimulates interest4.64
Paul Benkeser 8 sections · 8 terms · 2018–2023 3.87GPA
Published grade shares · 8 sections · 2018–2023
Compare with the course
Benkeser vs. the course average
A
+10.2
B
−9.1
C
−1.1
D
−0.1
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
Each term against the course average
Spring 2018Fall 2023
Overall4.01 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.02
Instructor clarity3.75
Course effectiveness4.30
Instructor enthusiasm4.15
Instructor helpfulness3.88
Instructor availability4.16
Instructor communication4.07
Instructor effectiveness4.05
Instructor respectfulness4.35
Assignment measured knowledge3.90
Instructor stimulates interest3.70
Wendy Newstetter 7 sections · 5 terms · 2016–2020 3.83GPA
Published grade shares · 7 sections · 2016–2020
Compare with the course
Newstetter vs. the course average
A
+5.7
B
−5.1
C
−0.4
D
−0.1
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
Each term against the course average
Fall 2016Fall 2020
Overall4.47 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.57
Instructor clarity4.41
Course effectiveness4.55
Instructor enthusiasm4.75
Instructor helpfulness4.33
Instructor availability4.37
Instructor communication4.45
Instructor effectiveness4.46
Instructor respectfulness4.61
Assignment measured knowledge4.12
Instructor stimulates interest4.37
Annabelle Singer 4 sections · 4 terms · 2017–2019 3.77GPA
Published grade shares · 4 sections · 2017–2019
Compare with the course
Singer vs. the course average
A
−2.1
B
+3.8
C
−1.2
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Each term against the course average
Spring 2017Fall 2019
Overall4.64 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.28
Instructor clarity4.53
Course effectiveness4.33
Instructor enthusiasm4.63
Instructor helpfulness4.75
Instructor availability4.60
Instructor communication4.55
Instructor effectiveness4.72
Instructor respectfulness4.83
Assignment measured knowledge3.98
Instructor stimulates interest4.50
Bilal Haider 4 sections · 4 terms · 2017–2019 3.76GPA
Published grade shares · 4 sections · 2017–2019
Compare with the course
Haider vs. the course average
A
same
B
−0.3
C
+0.7
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Each term against the course average
Fall 2017Fall 2019
Overall4.04 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.55
Instructor clarity3.92
Course effectiveness4.25
Instructor enthusiasm3.98
Instructor helpfulness4.28
Instructor availability4.00
Instructor communication3.84
Instructor effectiveness4.18
Instructor respectfulness3.98
Assignment measured knowledge3.90
Instructor stimulates interest4.12
Julia Babensee 3 sections · 3 terms · 2016–2018 3.74GPA
Published grade shares · 3 sections · 2016–2018
Compare with the course
Babensee vs. the course average
A
−0.7
B
+1.1
C
−1.6
D
−0.1
F
+1.3
Difference in percentage points.
Overall3.73 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.17
Instructor clarity3.55
Course effectiveness4.11
Instructor enthusiasm3.51
Instructor helpfulness3.63
Instructor availability3.98
Instructor communication3.75
Instructor effectiveness3.87
Instructor respectfulness4.14
Assignment measured knowledge3.87
Instructor stimulates interest3.44
Francisco Robles Guerrero 2 sections · 2 terms · 2017 3.58GPA
Published grade shares · 2 sections · 2017
Compare with the course
Guerrero vs. the course average
A
−17.3
B
+15.5
C
+2.3
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Overall4.63 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.50
Instructor clarity4.50
Course effectiveness4.30
Instructor enthusiasm4.40
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.80
Instructor communication4.60
Instructor effectiveness4.80
Instructor respectfulness4.40
Assignment measured knowledge3.60
Instructor stimulates interest4.70
Eva Dyer 2 sections · 2 terms · 2018–2019 3.55GPA
Published grade shares · 2 sections · 2018–2019
Compare with the course
Dyer vs. the course average
A
−18.2
B
+14.5
C
+4.2
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Overall4.35 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.29
Instructor clarity3.98
Course effectiveness4.35
Instructor enthusiasm4.67
Instructor helpfulness4.03
Instructor availability4.61
Instructor communication4.14
Instructor effectiveness4.34
Instructor respectfulness4.72
Assignment measured knowledge4.12
Instructor stimulates interest4.31
Barbara Fasse 3 sections · 3 terms · 2015–2016 3.50GPA
Published grade shares · 3 sections · 2015–2016
Compare with the course
Fasse vs. the course average
A
−23.4
B
+19.8
C
+4.1
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Overall3.86 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.30
Instructor clarity3.37
Course effectiveness4.50
Instructor enthusiasm4.80
Instructor helpfulness3.47
Instructor availability4.22
Instructor communication3.60
Instructor effectiveness3.57
Instructor respectfulness4.40
Assignment measured knowledge3.70
Instructor stimulates interest3.45
Brooks Lindsey 3 sections · 3 terms · 2018–2019 3.45GPA
Published grade shares · 3 sections · 2018–2019
Compare with the course
Lindsey vs. the course average
A
−30.1
B
+28.4
C
+2.1
D
−0.1
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
Overall4.22 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.57
Instructor clarity4.17
Course effectiveness4.47
Instructor enthusiasm3.83
Instructor helpfulness4.50
Instructor availability4.67
Instructor communication4.03
Instructor effectiveness4.30
Instructor respectfulness4.47
Assignment measured knowledge3.90
Instructor stimulates interest3.80
Fatiesa Sulejmani 1 sections · 1 term · 2024 · Limited sample 4.00GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2024 · Limited sample
Edward Botchwey 1 sections · 1 term · 2017 · Limited sample 3.93GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2017 · Limited sample
James Dahlman 1 sections · 1 term · 2017 · Limited sample 3.91GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2017 · Limited sample
Overall4.91 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.50
Instructor clarity4.90
Course effectiveness4.60
Instructor enthusiasm5.00
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.90
Instructor communication4.90
Instructor effectiveness4.90
Instructor respectfulness5.00
Assignment measured knowledge4.10
Instructor stimulates interest4.90
Peng Qiu 1 sections · 1 term · 2017 · Limited sample 3.87GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2017 · Limited sample
Shu Jia 1 sections · 1 term · 2019 · Limited sample 3.83GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2019 · Limited sample
Cheng Zhu 1 sections · 1 term · 2019 · Limited sample 3.78GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2019 · Limited sample
Overall2.98 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.80
Instructor clarity2.90
Course effectiveness4.60
Instructor enthusiasm3.20
Instructor helpfulness2.30
Instructor availability3.30
Instructor communication2.80
Instructor effectiveness3.10
Instructor respectfulness3.30
Assignment measured knowledge4.10
Instructor stimulates interest2.90
Charles Kemp 1 sections · 1 term · 2016 · Limited sample 3.76GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2016 · Limited sample
Overall4.20 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.25
Instructor clarity4.00
Course effectiveness4.15
Instructor enthusiasm4.37
Instructor helpfulness4.20
Instructor availability4.23
Instructor communication3.93
Instructor effectiveness4.37
Instructor respectfulness4.43
Assignment measured knowledge3.70
Instructor stimulates interest4.07
Costas Arvanitis 1 sections · 1 term · 2018 · Limited sample 3.58GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2018 · Limited sample
Overall4.71 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.60
Instructor clarity4.50
Course effectiveness4.60
Instructor enthusiasm4.90
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.70
Instructor communication4.50
Instructor effectiveness4.80
Instructor respectfulness4.90
Assignment measured knowledge4.30
Instructor stimulates interest4.60
Shuichi Takayama 1 sections · 1 term · 2019 · Limited sample 3.45GPA
Published grade shares · 1 section · 2019 · Limited sample
Overall4.83 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.80
Instructor clarity4.80
Course effectiveness4.30
Instructor enthusiasm4.90
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.90
Instructor communication4.80
Instructor effectiveness4.80
Instructor respectfulness4.90
Assignment measured knowledge4.80
Instructor stimulates interest4.70
Denis Tsygankov 27 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Instructor clarity4.70
Instructor enthusiasm4.60
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.90
Instructor communication4.60
Instructor effectiveness4.80
Instructor respectfulness4.60
Instructor stimulates interest4.70
Jeffrey Markowitz 14 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.60
Instructor clarity4.78
Course effectiveness4.78
Instructor enthusiasm4.88
Instructor helpfulness4.78
Instructor availability4.78
Instructor communication4.78
Instructor effectiveness4.78
Instructor respectfulness4.88
Assignment measured knowledge4.00
Instructor stimulates interest4.88
Kelly Cross 18 reported responses 2.94Eval / 5
Overall2.94 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned3.58
Instructor clarity3.12
Course effectiveness3.69
Instructor enthusiasm4.09
Instructor helpfulness2.20
Instructor availability2.50
Instructor communication2.77
Instructor effectiveness2.41
Instructor respectfulness3.69
Assignment measured knowledge3.19
Instructor stimulates interest2.71
Ellen Zerbe 13 reported responses 4.72Eval / 5
Overall4.72 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.28
Instructor clarity4.62
Course effectiveness4.10
Instructor enthusiasm4.78
Instructor helpfulness4.62
Instructor availability4.78
Instructor communication4.78
Instructor effectiveness4.82
Instructor respectfulness4.78
Assignment measured knowledge4.00
Instructor stimulates interest4.62
Wendy Cocke 18 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.12
Instructor clarity4.79
Course effectiveness4.29
Instructor enthusiasm4.92
Instructor helpfulness4.67
Instructor availability4.83
Instructor communication4.67
Instructor effectiveness4.99
Instructor respectfulness5.00
Assignment measured knowledge3.50
Instructor stimulates interest4.89
Aniruddh Sarkar 13 reported responses 4.61Eval / 5
Overall4.61 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.40
Instructor clarity4.65
Course effectiveness4.60
Instructor enthusiasm4.42
Instructor helpfulness4.60
Instructor availability4.70
Instructor communication4.63
Instructor effectiveness4.75
Instructor respectfulness4.70
Assignment measured knowledge4.47
Instructor stimulates interest4.42
Jaydev Desai 39 reported responses 4.20Eval / 5
Overall4.20 / 5
39 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.40
Instructor clarity3.80
Course effectiveness4.50
Instructor enthusiasm4.25
Instructor helpfulness4.33
Instructor availability4.22
Instructor communication4.05
Instructor effectiveness4.47
Instructor respectfulness4.28
Assignment measured knowledge3.90
Instructor stimulates interest4.22
Laura Christian 12 reported responses 4.47Eval / 5
Overall4.47 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.50
Instructor clarity4.40
Course effectiveness4.32
Instructor enthusiasm4.21
Instructor helpfulness4.46
Instructor availability4.72
Instructor communication4.49
Instructor effectiveness4.70
Instructor respectfulness4.80
Assignment measured knowledge4.30
Instructor stimulates interest4.00
Mingfai Fong 13 reported responses 4.97Eval / 5
Overall4.97 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.30
Instructor clarity4.80
Course effectiveness4.80
Instructor enthusiasm5.00
Instructor helpfulness5.00
Instructor availability5.00
Instructor communication5.00
Instructor effectiveness5.00
Instructor respectfulness5.00
Assignment measured knowledge4.30
Instructor stimulates interest5.00
Leslie Chan 28 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Instructor clarity4.40
Instructor enthusiasm4.60
Instructor helpfulness4.40
Instructor availability4.60
Instructor communication4.40
Instructor effectiveness4.50
Instructor respectfulness4.70
Instructor stimulates interest4.00
Yue Chen 11 reported responses 4.00Eval / 5
Overall4.00 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.60
Instructor clarity3.30
Course effectiveness4.60
Instructor enthusiasm4.00
Instructor helpfulness3.50
Instructor availability4.20
Instructor communication4.50
Instructor effectiveness3.50
Instructor respectfulness4.70
Assignment measured knowledge4.30
Instructor stimulates interest4.30
Athanasios Mantalaris 30 reported responses 4.22Eval / 5
Overall4.22 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.00
Instructor clarity3.90
Course effectiveness4.20
Instructor enthusiasm4.30
Instructor helpfulness3.77
Instructor availability4.60
Instructor communication4.20
Instructor effectiveness4.33
Instructor respectfulness4.53
Assignment measured knowledge3.90
Instructor stimulates interest4.17
Gabriel Kwong 19 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.50
Instructor clarity4.60
Course effectiveness4.90
Instructor enthusiasm4.80
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.80
Instructor communication4.80
Instructor effectiveness4.90
Instructor respectfulness4.90
Assignment measured knowledge4.30
Instructor stimulates interest4.80
Wei Sun 16 reported responses 4.74Eval / 5
Overall4.74 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.60
Instructor clarity4.70
Course effectiveness4.70
Instructor enthusiasm4.80
Instructor helpfulness4.80
Instructor availability4.70
Instructor communication4.70
Instructor effectiveness4.80
Instructor respectfulness4.80
Assignment measured knowledge4.90
Instructor stimulates interest4.60
Garrett Stanley 43 reported responses 4.23Eval / 5
Overall4.23 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Instructor clarity4.05
Instructor enthusiasm4.30
Instructor helpfulness4.10
Instructor availability4.20
Instructor communication4.05
Instructor effectiveness4.35
Instructor respectfulness4.60
Instructor stimulates interest4.20
Dana Abouelnasr 41 reported responses 4.19Eval / 5
Overall4.19 / 5
41 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.50
Instructor clarity3.80
Course effectiveness4.60
Instructor enthusiasm4.20
Instructor helpfulness3.95
Instructor availability4.65
Instructor communication3.90
Instructor effectiveness4.25
Instructor respectfulness4.70
Assignment measured knowledge3.80
Instructor stimulates interest4.05
Hannah Song 18 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Instructor clarity4.35
Instructor enthusiasm4.70
Instructor helpfulness4.75
Instructor availability4.50
Instructor communication4.30
Instructor effectiveness4.75
Instructor respectfulness4.85
Instructor stimulates interest4.25
Alpa Gautam 33 reported responses 3.74Eval / 5
Overall3.74 / 5
33 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned3.88
Instructor clarity3.50
Course effectiveness4.00
Instructor enthusiasm4.13
Instructor helpfulness3.17
Instructor availability4.30
Instructor communication3.10
Instructor effectiveness3.71
Instructor respectfulness4.07
Assignment measured knowledge3.00
Instructor stimulates interest3.94
Jonathan Chang 34 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.14
Instructor clarity4.52
Course effectiveness4.50
Instructor enthusiasm4.17
Instructor helpfulness4.55
Instructor availability4.64
Instructor communication4.52
Instructor effectiveness4.45
Instructor respectfulness4.55
Assignment measured knowledge4.00
Instructor stimulates interest4.24
Simone Douglas 17 reported responses 4.88Eval / 5
Overall4.88 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Amount learned4.21
Instructor clarity4.86
Course effectiveness4.50
Instructor enthusiasm4.92
Instructor helpfulness4.86
Instructor availability4.92
Instructor communication4.86
Instructor effectiveness4.96
Instructor respectfulness4.96
Assignment measured knowledge4.38
Instructor stimulates interest4.72
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.