Course record ANTH
ANTH 2100
Introduction to Cultural Anthropology
University of Colorado Boulder
1,232 grades33 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score39/100
Below average
Carole Ann Mcgranahan Ph.D. 156 grades · 1 term 3.63GPA
156 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ph.D. vs. the course average
A
+17.2
B
−6.8
C
−2.8
D
−3.1
F
−4.5
Difference in percentage points.
2.5% withdrew · 4 of 160 enrolled.
Alison Collier Cool 169 grades · 1 term 3.40GPA
169 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cool vs. the course average
A
+4.3
B
+1.3
C
−0.9
D
−3.1
F
−1.6
Difference in percentage points.
3.4% withdrew · 6 of 175 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
380 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration3.71
Connection4.62
Contribution4.11
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.58
Reflection4.48
Respect4.90
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.13
Interaction4.45
Challenge4.48
Questions4.60
Kathryn Elissa Goldfarb 258 grades · 1 term 3.29GPA
258 letter grades
Compare with the course
Goldfarb vs. the course average
A
+0.5
B
−0.1
C
+2.1
D
−0.2
F
−2.3
Difference in percentage points.
4.4% withdrew · 12 of 270 enrolled.
Overall4.41 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.70
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.60
Reflection4.60
Respect5.00
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.40
Questions4.70
Kristen Drybread 51 grades · 1 term 3.11GPA
51 letter grades
Compare with the course
Drybread vs. the course average
A
−17.3
B
+17.1
C
+3.8
D
+0.2
F
−3.8
Difference in percentage points.
1.9% withdrew · 1 of 52 enrolled.
Overall4.12 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.38
Technology3.94
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration4.18
Connection4.59
Contribution4.56
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.71
Grading3.89
Reflection4.16
Respect4.83
Creativity4.01
Feedback3.88
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.28
Questions4.31
Carla Mae Jones 598 grades · 1 term 3.07GPA
598 letter grades
Compare with the course
Jones vs. the course average
A
−4.4
B
same
C
−0.3
D
+1.8
F
+2.9
Difference in percentage points.
4.6% withdrew · 29 of 627 enrolled.
Overall4.25 / 5
205 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.48
Technology4.23
Synthesis4.36
Collaboration3.32
Connection4.59
Contribution3.92
Discussion4.24
Inclusivity4.78
Grading4.18
Reflection4.41
Respect4.69
Creativity4.24
Feedback3.78
Interaction4.18
Challenge4.44
Questions4.36
Paige Edmiston 34 reported responses 4.86Eval / 5
Overall4.86 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.97
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.73
Connection4.93
Contribution4.87
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.73
Reflection4.90
Respect4.97
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.67
Interaction4.97
Challenge4.97
Questions4.97
Caitrin Scarlett Engle 16 reported responses 4.73Eval / 5
Overall4.73 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.95
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.75
Reflection4.85
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.15
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.80
Questions4.85
Anna Kari Hermann 34 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.53
Technology4.67
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.73
Contribution4.57
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity4.83
Grading4.47
Reflection4.80
Respect4.77
Creativity4.43
Feedback4.13
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.37
Questions4.67
Katherine V Fischer 51 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
51 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.13
Connection4.81
Contribution4.81
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.26
Reflection4.73
Respect4.96
Creativity4.39
Feedback3.68
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.61
Questions4.75
Jason Bartholomew Scott 13 reported responses 3.92Eval / 5
Overall3.92 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.05
Technology2.87
Synthesis3.66
Collaboration2.59
Connection3.78
Contribution3.25
Discussion4.02
Inclusivity4.21
Grading3.18
Reflection3.71
Respect4.95
Creativity3.64
Feedback3.62
Interaction4.09
Challenge4.07
Questions3.68
Danielle Reaney Merriman 5 reported responses 4.95Eval / 5
Overall4.95 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Alexandra Marie Kulenguski 13 reported responses 4.53Eval / 5
Overall4.53 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.70
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.45
Reflection4.65
Respect4.75
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.55
Questions4.85
Kevin Darcy Jr 12 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.60
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.75
Reflection4.60
Respect4.85
Creativity4.35
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.70
Questions4.65
Anden Harald Drolet 17 reported responses 4.73Eval / 5
Overall4.73 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.65
Contribution4.50
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.85
Reflection4.75
Respect4.95
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.65
Questions4.95
Gregorio Ortiz 44 reported responses 4.41Eval / 5
Overall4.41 / 5
44 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.55
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.75
Reflection4.35
Respect4.80
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.95
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.45
Questions4.70
Carole Ann Mcgranahan 49 reported responses 4.34Eval / 5
Overall4.34 / 5
49 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration3.40
Connection4.70
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.50
Reflection4.60
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.50
Questions4.70
Sangjie Zhaxi Sr 11 reported responses 4.39Eval / 5
Overall4.39 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.65
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.45
Reflection4.65
Respect4.90
Creativity3.85
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.35
Challenge4.10
Questions4.65
Kevin Darcy 65 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
65 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.85
Technology4.86
Synthesis4.84
Collaboration4.74
Connection4.88
Contribution4.83
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.55
Reflection4.76
Respect4.90
Creativity4.68
Feedback4.81
Interaction4.82
Challenge4.64
Questions4.66
Georgia Baldwin Butcher 39 reported responses 4.77Eval / 5
Overall4.77 / 5
39 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.76
Technology4.52
Synthesis4.78
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.81
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.94
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.76
Reflection4.83
Respect5.00
Creativity4.64
Feedback4.74
Interaction4.94
Challenge4.64
Questions4.88
Kathleen Elizabeth Donlan 12 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.45
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.65
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.75
Questions4.65
Olivia Lauren Kimes 10 reported responses 4.91Eval / 5
Overall4.91 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.95
Contribution4.95
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.90
Reflection5.00
Respect4.95
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.90
Questions4.95
Jacob Matthew Jansen 18 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.80
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.75
Respect4.95
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.75
Questions4.65
Adi Prakash 21 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.70
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.30
Reflection4.70
Respect4.95
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.80
Questions4.70
Patrick Mckenzie 46 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
46 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.35
Connection4.60
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.45
Reflection4.55
Respect4.80
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.55
Questions4.70
Chilton Lee Tippin 56 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
56 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.42
Synthesis4.56
Collaboration4.68
Connection4.72
Contribution4.64
Discussion4.76
Inclusivity4.68
Grading4.60
Reflection4.66
Respect4.89
Creativity4.37
Feedback4.58
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.65
Questions4.70
Sangjie Zhaxi 27 reported responses 4.48Eval / 5
Overall4.48 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.60
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.30
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.45
Questions4.55
Kate Fischer 98 reported responses 4.63Eval / 5
Overall4.63 / 5
98 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.66
Synthesis4.69
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.99
Contribution4.81
Discussion4.99
Inclusivity4.98
Grading4.53
Reflection4.87
Respect4.98
Creativity4.83
Feedback4.26
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.79
Questions4.79
Warren Morgan Thompson 11 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.94
Technology4.98
Synthesis4.92
Collaboration4.16
Connection4.96
Contribution4.96
Discussion4.98
Inclusivity4.98
Grading4.11
Reflection4.47
Respect4.96
Creativity4.78
Feedback4.86
Interaction4.47
Challenge4.92
Questions4.96
Yuxiang Lin 72 reported responses 4.49Eval / 5
Overall4.49 / 5
72 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.71
Collaboration4.18
Connection4.62
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.71
Inclusivity4.83
Grading4.80
Reflection4.71
Respect4.85
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.69
Challenge4.49
Questions4.77
Jessica Misiorek 35 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.15
Connection4.35
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.40
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.40
Questions4.70
Annabelle Lewis 52 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
52 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.75
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.95
Reflection4.85
Respect4.95
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.65
Questions4.95
Anna Wynfield 46 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
46 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.15
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.35
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.65
Reflection4.45
Respect4.85
Creativity4.05
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.35
Questions4.75
Conor Lanning 47 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
47 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.35
Connection4.65
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.75
Reflection4.75
Respect4.85
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.60
Questions4.90
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.