Course record APRD
APRD 4873
Special Topics
University of Colorado Boulder
383 grades22 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score72/100
Strong
Patrick C Finn 33 grades · 1 term 3.94GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Finn vs. the course average
A
+30.2
B
−24.0
C
−4.4
D
−1.0
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
2.9% withdrew · 1 of 34 enrolled.
Overall4.89 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.88
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.99
Contribution4.99
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.78
Grading4.79
Reflection4.95
Respect4.96
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.88
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Jon D Ligon 27 grades · 1 term 3.86GPA
27 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ligon vs. the course average
A
+21.5
B
−15.2
C
−4.4
D
−1.0
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
3.6% withdrew · 1 of 28 enrolled.
Overall4.89 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.70
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.70
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Andrew William Clurman 27 grades · 1 term 3.64GPA
27 letter grades
Compare with the course
Clurman vs. the course average
A
+14.1
B
−11.5
C
−4.4
D
−1.0
F
+2.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 27 enrolled.
Overall4.92 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.50
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Joseph Labrecque 50 grades · 1 term 3.45GPA
50 letter grades
Compare with the course
Labrecque vs. the course average
A
+2.3
B
−14.0
C
+11.6
D
+1.0
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 50 enrolled.
Overall4.67 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.84
Synthesis4.84
Collaboration3.62
Connection4.07
Contribution4.93
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.84
Grading4.70
Reflection4.93
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.84
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.93
Questions4.93
Dustin P Finkel 90 grades · 1 term 3.36GPA
90 letter grades
Compare with the course
Finkel vs. the course average
A
−20.4
B
+18.9
C
+2.2
D
+0.1
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 90 enrolled.
Tobias Hopp 10 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 4.00GPA
10 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 10 enrolled.
Overall4.92 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.77
Connection5.00
Contribution4.54
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Norm Shearer 19 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.87GPA
19 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 19 enrolled.
Christopher Eric Vardeman 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.64GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
10.5% withdrew · 2 of 19 enrolled.
Overall4.98 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Dawn Doty 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.61GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 14 enrolled.
Overall4.94 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.90
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.90
Jeffry A Blumenfeld 20 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.60GPA
20 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 20 enrolled.
Julie Meyers 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.46GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 17 enrolled.
Erin Kathryn Stenzel 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.32GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 16 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.70
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.70
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.50
Questions4.20
Erin N Willis 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.24GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.
Overall5.00 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Matthew R Duncan 12 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.20GPA
12 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 12 enrolled.
Scott J Hooten 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.05GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 16 enrolled.
Jonathan Dorn 2 reported responses 4.92Eval / 5
Overall4.92 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.50
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Irma J Fisher 5 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.77
Connection5.00
Contribution4.54
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.24
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.24
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Norman Dale Shearer 6 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.20
Reflection4.50
Respect4.30
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.30
Questions5.00
Bridget Barrett 8 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.90
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
James Radcliffe Cheston 2 reported responses 4.77Eval / 5
Overall4.77 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.50
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.50
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Mia Wang 17 reported responses 4.83Eval / 5
Overall4.83 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.85
Collaboration4.95
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.95
Grading4.55
Reflection4.85
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.60
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.95
Loni Marie Peterson 7 reported responses 4.98Eval / 5
Overall4.98 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.69
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.69
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.69
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.69
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.