Course record APRD
APRD 2001
Strategic Thinking in Advertising and Public Relations
University of Colorado Boulder
1,610 grades25 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score34/100
Below average
Michael Hart Stoner 237 grades · 1 term 3.56GPA
237 letter grades
Compare with the course
Stoner vs. the course average
A
+18.3
B
−5.4
C
−10.1
D
−2.0
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
0.4% withdrew · 1 of 238 enrolled.
Overall4.39 / 5
74 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.20
Grading3.80
Reflection4.30
Respect4.50
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.50
Questions4.30
Harsha S Gangadharbatla 444 grades · 1 term 3.33GPA
444 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gangadharbatla vs. the course average
A
+1.9
B
+4.5
C
−5.1
D
−1.4
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.7% withdrew · 3 of 447 enrolled.
Overall4.20 / 5
152 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.48
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration3.39
Connection4.54
Contribution4.03
Discussion4.54
Inclusivity4.51
Grading3.95
Reflection4.24
Respect4.68
Creativity4.19
Feedback3.55
Interaction4.29
Challenge4.34
Questions4.34
Erik Morgan Young 193 grades · 1 term 3.25GPA
193 letter grades
Compare with the course
Young vs. the course average
A
−9.2
B
+17.0
C
−5.9
D
−1.5
F
−0.3
Difference in percentage points.
1.0% withdrew · 2 of 195 enrolled.
Melinda Kiger Cheval 538 grades · 1 term 3.24GPA
538 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cheval vs. the course average
A
+3.0
B
−4.0
C
+0.5
D
+0.4
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.1% withdrew · 6 of 544 enrolled.
Overall4.36 / 5
149 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.42
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.52
Connection4.57
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.27
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.25
Reflection4.37
Respect4.35
Creativity4.39
Feedback3.76
Interaction4.39
Challenge4.37
Questions4.19
Glenn Griffin 180 grades · 1 term 2.52GPA
180 letter grades
Compare with the course
Griffin vs. the course average
A
−30.5
B
−7.7
C
+30.5
D
+6.8
F
+0.9
Difference in percentage points.
3.2% withdrew · 6 of 186 enrolled.
Overall4.10 / 5
32 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.10
Connection4.70
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.30
Reflection4.20
Respect4.30
Creativity3.80
Feedback3.80
Interaction3.80
Challenge4.50
Questions4.10
Kendra L Gale 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.58GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
5.3% withdrew · 1 of 19 enrolled.
Melinda J Cheval 149 reported responses 4.36Eval / 5
Overall4.36 / 5
149 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.42
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.52
Connection4.57
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.27
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.25
Reflection4.37
Respect4.35
Creativity4.39
Feedback3.76
Interaction4.39
Challenge4.37
Questions4.19
Michael Andrew Phipps 201 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
201 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.29
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.65
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.29
Inclusivity4.25
Grading3.86
Reflection4.37
Respect4.47
Creativity4.62
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.62
Challenge4.45
Questions4.27
Burton St John 8 reported responses 3.51Eval / 5
Overall3.51 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.50
Technology3.06
Synthesis3.64
Collaboration3.57
Connection3.64
Contribution3.68
Discussion4.11
Inclusivity3.14
Grading2.99
Reflection3.14
Respect3.56
Creativity3.78
Feedback3.64
Interaction3.39
Challenge3.64
Questions3.75
Emily Anne King Kinsey 73 reported responses 4.49Eval / 5
Overall4.49 / 5
73 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.28
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration3.44
Connection4.68
Contribution4.06
Discussion4.49
Inclusivity4.18
Grading4.54
Reflection4.23
Respect4.60
Creativity4.18
Feedback4.41
Interaction4.01
Challenge4.57
Questions4.61
Saima A Kazmi 64 reported responses 4.43Eval / 5
Overall4.43 / 5
64 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.34
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.36
Collaboration3.17
Connection4.63
Contribution3.97
Discussion4.54
Inclusivity4.62
Grading4.12
Reflection4.36
Respect4.63
Creativity4.27
Feedback3.91
Interaction4.27
Challenge4.34
Questions4.45
Pulung Perbawani 3 reported responses 3.74Eval / 5
Overall3.74 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.00
Connection4.30
Contribution3.70
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.30
Reflection3.30
Respect4.70
Creativity3.70
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.30
Challenge3.70
Questions4.70
Mark David Heisten 76 reported responses 4.14Eval / 5
Overall4.14 / 5
76 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.22
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.28
Collaboration3.31
Connection4.63
Contribution3.99
Discussion4.15
Inclusivity4.22
Grading4.05
Reflection4.15
Respect4.45
Creativity4.15
Feedback3.80
Interaction3.94
Challenge4.25
Questions4.38
Kaitlyn Elayne Wright 36 reported responses 4.17Eval / 5
Overall4.17 / 5
36 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.60
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.00
Reflection4.10
Respect4.50
Creativity4.50
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.00
Questions4.20
Kate Friedel 7 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.93
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.95
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.84
Grading4.18
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.23
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.95
Questions4.18
Yu-Han Wu 177 reported responses 4.33Eval / 5
Overall4.33 / 5
177 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.26
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.14
Connection4.86
Contribution4.43
Discussion4.52
Inclusivity4.56
Grading4.22
Reflection4.65
Respect4.66
Creativity4.48
Feedback3.96
Interaction4.43
Challenge4.42
Questions4.43
Melissa A Pickett 124 reported responses 4.35Eval / 5
Overall4.35 / 5
124 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.33
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.15
Connection4.82
Contribution4.32
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.68
Grading4.10
Reflection4.65
Respect4.58
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.95
Interaction4.58
Challenge4.45
Questions4.45
Morgan Young 366 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
366 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.63
Technology4.58
Synthesis4.68
Collaboration4.22
Connection4.88
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity4.59
Grading4.31
Reflection4.68
Respect4.70
Creativity4.61
Feedback4.02
Interaction4.66
Challenge4.72
Questions4.59
Cheri Lynn Felix 141 reported responses 4.87Eval / 5
Overall4.87 / 5
141 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.92
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.96
Collaboration4.76
Connection4.92
Contribution4.86
Discussion4.96
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.84
Reflection4.88
Respect4.98
Creativity4.86
Feedback4.86
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.86
Questions4.98
Kyle Harris 4 reported responses 4.88Eval / 5
Overall4.88 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.80
Connection5.00
Contribution4.50
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.70
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Sara Alatmi 2 reported responses 4.82Eval / 5
Overall4.82 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.50
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.50
Yiqing Liao 156 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
156 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.52
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.15
Connection4.90
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.58
Grading4.40
Reflection4.70
Respect4.55
Creativity4.60
Feedback3.88
Interaction4.62
Challenge4.60
Questions4.58
Bachchu Shekh 28 reported responses 4.88Eval / 5
Overall4.88 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.90
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect4.80
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions4.90
Hunter Krajewski 3 reported responses 4.96Eval / 5
Overall4.96 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect4.70
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Matea Beukelman 2 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.