Fall 2025 · Section not specified
Instructor not extracted
Read syllabus Checked 2026-09-09
Course record ASEN
ASEN 4018
Senior Projects 1: Design Synthesis
University of Colorado Boulder
827 grades34 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2025
Flunk Score66/100
Strong
Matthew E Rhode 214 grades · 1 term 3.74GPA
214 letter grades
Compare with the course
Rhode vs. the course average
A
+6.6
B
−6.6
C
same
D
same
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 214 enrolled.
Overall4.89 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.54
Grading4.78
Reflection5.00
Respect4.54
Creativity4.93
Feedback4.69
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.85
Jelliffe Kevin Jackson 194 grades · 1 term 3.74GPA
194 letter grades
Compare with the course
Jackson vs. the course average
A
+6.5
B
−7.1
C
+0.5
D
same
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 194 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
104 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.61
Technology4.37
Synthesis4.61
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.73
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.36
Inclusivity4.03
Grading4.33
Reflection4.48
Respect4.85
Creativity4.63
Feedback4.36
Interaction4.73
Challenge4.51
Questions4.24
Christopher Michael Muldrow 222 grades · 1 term 3.67GPA
222 letter grades
Compare with the course
Muldrow vs. the course average
A
−3.2
B
+3.7
C
−0.5
D
same
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 222 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.50
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.20
Reflection4.40
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions4.40
Kathryn Anne Wingate 197 grades · 1 term 3.62GPA
197 letter grades
Compare with the course
Wingate vs. the course average
A
−10.0
B
+10.0
C
same
D
same
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 197 enrolled.
Overall4.64 / 5
215 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.64
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.89
Connection4.60
Contribution4.66
Discussion4.51
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.15
Reflection4.49
Respect4.57
Creativity4.53
Feedback4.34
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.38
Questions4.31
Erik Knudsen 13 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
13 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
Zachary Sunberg 4 reported responses 3.81Eval / 5
Overall3.81 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.85
Technology4.00
Synthesis3.50
Collaboration4.50
Connection2.85
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.15
Inclusivity3.30
Grading3.00
Reflection3.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.35
Interaction5.00
Challenge3.50
Questions5.00
Donna Sue Gerren 7 reported responses 4.98Eval / 5
Overall4.98 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.94
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.94
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Allison Paige Anderson 38 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.91
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.93
Collaboration4.93
Connection4.90
Contribution4.93
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.47
Grading4.63
Reflection4.93
Respect4.91
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.95
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.86
Questions4.89
Francisco Lopez Jimenez 16 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.34
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.34
Contribution4.67
Discussion4.67
Inclusivity3.84
Grading4.17
Reflection4.17
Respect4.67
Creativity4.17
Feedback4.34
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.50
Questions5.00
Dennis M Akos 63 reported responses 4.48Eval / 5
Overall4.48 / 5
63 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.36
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.78
Connection4.61
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.35
Inclusivity4.27
Grading4.11
Reflection4.50
Respect4.59
Creativity4.34
Feedback4.22
Interaction4.73
Challenge4.35
Questions4.35
John K Mah 31 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.69
Synthesis4.56
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity3.81
Grading4.05
Reflection4.53
Respect5.00
Creativity4.53
Feedback4.43
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.70
Questions4.93
Yu T Morton 8 reported responses 4.98Eval / 5
Overall4.98 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.73
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.88
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.88
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.62
Grading5.00
Reflection4.88
Respect5.00
Creativity4.81
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Sanghamitra Neogi 4 reported responses 4.22Eval / 5
Overall4.22 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.50
Reflection5.00
Respect4.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.30
Questions4.00
Alexandra Le Moine 20 reported responses 4.91Eval / 5
Overall4.91 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.98
Synthesis4.99
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.97
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.99
Inclusivity4.42
Grading4.75
Reflection4.98
Respect4.99
Creativity4.96
Feedback4.99
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.99
Yu Takahashi 3 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
3 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
Christopher Andrew Roseman 4 reported responses 4.41Eval / 5
Overall4.41 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity3.00
Grading4.70
Reflection4.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.85
Challenge3.50
Questions4.15
Jean N Koster 5 reported responses 4.07Eval / 5
Overall4.07 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.85
Technology3.15
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.10
Reflection4.65
Respect4.35
Creativity2.65
Feedback3.60
Interaction4.85
Challenge3.90
Questions4.65
Melvin Rafi 95 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
95 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.78
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.76
Collaboration4.96
Connection4.73
Contribution4.78
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.71
Reflection4.85
Respect4.79
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.61
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.62
Questions4.73
Marcus J Holzinger 5 reported responses 3.98Eval / 5
Overall3.98 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.33
Technology3.50
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.50
Contribution4.17
Discussion3.67
Inclusivity5.00
Grading2.50
Reflection4.17
Respect4.50
Creativity5.00
Feedback3.17
Interaction4.17
Challenge4.83
Questions2.33
Dale A Lawrence 13 reported responses 4.02Eval / 5
Overall4.02 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology3.93
Synthesis4.93
Collaboration4.96
Connection4.90
Contribution4.89
Discussion3.48
Inclusivity4.03
Grading3.46
Reflection4.92
Respect4.43
Creativity3.53
Feedback3.97
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.02
Questions4.43
Matt Rhode 51 reported responses 4.91Eval / 5
Overall4.91 / 5
51 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.98
Technology4.92
Synthesis4.98
Collaboration4.98
Connection4.95
Contribution4.98
Discussion4.94
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.90
Reflection4.95
Respect4.94
Creativity4.93
Feedback4.92
Interaction4.96
Challenge4.93
Questions4.94
Robert F Hodgkinson 87 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
87 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.52
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.89
Connection4.60
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.32
Inclusivity4.18
Grading4.42
Reflection4.51
Respect4.60
Creativity4.61
Feedback4.49
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.32
Questions4.32
Trudy L Schwartz 122 reported responses 4.54Eval / 5
Overall4.54 / 5
122 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.56
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.78
Connection4.60
Contribution4.57
Discussion4.54
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.29
Reflection4.50
Respect4.66
Creativity4.56
Feedback4.46
Interaction4.72
Challenge4.57
Questions4.48
Nisar Razzi Ahmed 8 reported responses 4.87Eval / 5
Overall4.87 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology4.93
Synthesis4.93
Collaboration4.93
Connection4.73
Contribution4.93
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.73
Reflection4.93
Respect4.90
Creativity4.93
Feedback4.83
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.93
Questions4.93
Robert Andrew Marshall 24 reported responses 4.83Eval / 5
Overall4.83 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.73
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.77
Contribution4.83
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.23
Grading4.60
Reflection4.80
Respect4.87
Creativity4.87
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.90
Questions4.87
Eric Lee Peters 2 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.50
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.50
Sean Peters 4 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.85
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.85
Contribution4.65
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.65
Respect5.00
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.65
Questions4.85
Khosro Ghobadi-Far 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
Inclusivity4.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Charles M Hoke 40 reported responses 4.17Eval / 5
Overall4.17 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.78
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.14
Collaboration4.21
Connection4.12
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.41
Inclusivity4.12
Grading3.59
Reflection4.07
Respect4.43
Creativity4.05
Feedback3.93
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.41
Questions4.41
Xinlin Li 4 reported responses 3.29Eval / 5
Overall3.29 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.00
Technology2.85
Synthesis3.00
Collaboration3.50
Connection3.50
Contribution3.00
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity3.50
Grading3.00
Reflection3.50
Respect3.00
Creativity2.85
Feedback4.00
Interaction3.50
Challenge2.85
Questions3.35
Jeffrey Foster Glusman 13 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology3.93
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.77
Connection4.53
Contribution4.37
Discussion4.17
Inclusivity4.33
Grading3.63
Reflection4.33
Respect4.50
Creativity4.27
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.47
Challenge4.53
Questions4.17
Torin K Clark 2 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 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
Grading4.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Tomoko Matsuo 2 reported responses 4.67Eval / 5
Overall4.67 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.50
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.50
Reflection4.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.50
Penina Axelrad 10 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.00
Reflection4.40
Respect5.00
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.50
Questions4.40
Course documents
Syllabi 1
University-published syllabi. Dates apply to these documents, independently of the grade data range.
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.