Course record ANTH
ANTH 1190
Origins of Ancient Civilizations
University of Colorado Boulder
959 grades20 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score12/100
Needs work
Inga E Calvin 37 grades · 1 term 3.23GPA
37 letter grades
Compare with the course
Calvin vs. the course average
A
+9.8
B
+22.1
C
−19.3
D
−9.5
F
−3.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.6% withdrew · 1 of 38 enrolled.
Jeffrey Scott Brzezinski 35 grades · 1 term 2.72GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Brzezinski vs. the course average
A
+17.7
B
−14.8
C
−10.6
D
+7.7
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
7.9% withdrew · 3 of 38 enrolled.
Overall4.46 / 5
89 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.74
Technology4.63
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.13
Connection4.48
Contribution4.09
Discussion4.57
Inclusivity4.78
Grading4.41
Reflection4.51
Respect4.77
Creativity4.54
Feedback4.34
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.57
Questions4.63
Arthur A Joyce 851 grades · 1 term 2.56GPA
851 letter grades
Compare with the course
Joyce vs. the course average
A
−2.1
B
−0.1
C
+1.3
D
+0.4
F
+0.5
Difference in percentage points.
6.0% withdrew · 54 of 905 enrolled.
Overall3.62 / 5
507 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.74
Technology3.70
Synthesis3.58
Collaboration2.37
Connection3.44
Contribution3.16
Discussion3.74
Inclusivity4.13
Grading3.94
Reflection3.55
Respect4.35
Creativity3.44
Feedback2.74
Interaction3.76
Challenge3.62
Questions4.11
Dan Albert Zborover 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.50GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
5.9% withdrew · 1 of 17 enrolled.
Overall4.18 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.60
Synthesis3.60
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.20
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.00
Reflection4.40
Respect4.80
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.20
Questions4.20
Jessica Dianne Hedgepeth Balkin 20 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.05GPA
20 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 20 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.37
Technology4.46
Synthesis4.36
Collaboration3.93
Connection3.83
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.61
Inclusivity4.59
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.26
Interaction4.42
Challenge4.51
Questions4.32
Sarah Grace Buckser 43 reported responses 4.06Eval / 5
Overall4.06 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.42
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.44
Connection3.93
Contribution4.18
Discussion4.42
Inclusivity4.54
Grading4.31
Reflection4.32
Respect4.67
Creativity3.77
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.48
Challenge4.31
Questions4.41
Andrew Aceves 34 reported responses 3.86Eval / 5
Overall3.86 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.45
Technology4.39
Synthesis3.88
Collaboration2.01
Connection2.80
Contribution2.77
Discussion4.46
Inclusivity3.60
Grading4.34
Reflection2.35
Respect4.86
Creativity3.91
Feedback3.91
Interaction4.43
Challenge4.18
Questions4.66
Alexandra Marie Kulenguski 12 reported responses 4.07Eval / 5
Overall4.07 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.23
Technology4.20
Synthesis3.73
Collaboration3.40
Connection3.60
Contribution3.57
Discussion3.90
Inclusivity4.33
Grading4.60
Reflection4.07
Respect4.67
Creativity3.90
Feedback4.17
Interaction3.87
Challenge3.80
Questions4.53
Nicholas Alexander Puente 79 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
79 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.51
Synthesis4.58
Collaboration3.44
Connection4.23
Contribution4.04
Discussion4.64
Inclusivity4.51
Grading4.83
Reflection4.46
Respect4.84
Creativity4.56
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.69
Challenge4.48
Questions4.70
Erik Leslie Jurado 73 reported responses 4.42Eval / 5
Overall4.42 / 5
73 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.71
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.47
Connection4.64
Contribution4.69
Discussion4.83
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.74
Reflection4.61
Respect4.83
Creativity4.66
Feedback4.46
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.60
Questions4.91
Anden Harald Drolet 24 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration3.10
Connection4.45
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.45
Respect4.85
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.35
Challenge4.60
Questions4.70
Charles Brentford Andrews 26 reported responses 4.32Eval / 5
Overall4.32 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.25
Synthesis3.80
Collaboration3.80
Connection3.90
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.35
Grading4.40
Reflection4.40
Respect4.55
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.40
Questions4.65
Gabi Perry 45 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
45 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.49
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.05
Collaboration3.81
Connection3.94
Contribution4.09
Discussion4.66
Inclusivity4.74
Grading4.67
Reflection4.57
Respect4.85
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.42
Challenge4.49
Questions4.91
Cristian Figueroa 23 reported responses 4.21Eval / 5
Overall4.21 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.55
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration3.55
Connection3.75
Contribution3.75
Discussion4.35
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.50
Reflection4.20
Respect4.55
Creativity3.95
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.15
Challenge4.25
Questions4.65
Sarah Maureen Simeonoff 28 reported responses 4.49Eval / 5
Overall4.49 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.20
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.65
Reflection4.55
Respect4.65
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.45
Questions4.55
Jack Dalton 16 reported responses 3.91Eval / 5
Overall3.91 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.90
Technology3.65
Synthesis3.75
Collaboration3.65
Connection3.55
Contribution3.45
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.05
Grading4.05
Reflection4.05
Respect4.25
Creativity3.80
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.15
Challenge3.80
Questions4.30
Olumide Ojediran 47 reported responses 3.76Eval / 5
Overall3.76 / 5
47 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.94
Technology3.85
Synthesis3.62
Collaboration2.95
Connection3.38
Contribution3.68
Discussion4.21
Inclusivity4.13
Grading3.93
Reflection3.87
Respect4.38
Creativity3.57
Feedback3.21
Interaction3.90
Challenge3.80
Questions4.25
Robin James 32 reported responses 3.85Eval / 5
Overall3.85 / 5
32 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.13
Technology4.39
Synthesis3.75
Collaboration2.66
Connection3.62
Contribution3.17
Discussion3.78
Inclusivity3.76
Grading4.40
Reflection3.85
Respect4.77
Creativity3.75
Feedback3.46
Interaction3.86
Challenge3.71
Questions4.44
Alex Leigh 18 reported responses 4.33Eval / 5
Overall4.33 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration2.50
Connection4.10
Contribution3.35
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.45
Reflection4.35
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.45
Questions4.75
Leigh Elizabeth Alexander 16 reported responses 4.32Eval / 5
Overall4.32 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.30
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.35
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.45
Reflection4.45
Respect4.60
Creativity3.80
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.15
Questions4.55
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.