Course record ATOC
ATOC 1050
Weather and the Atmosphere
University of Colorado Boulder
6,115 grades31 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score38/100
Below average
Jan Lenaerts 341 grades · 1 term 3.60GPA
341 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lenaerts vs. the course average
A
+18.1
B
−13.0
C
−4.4
D
−0.6
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
1.7% withdrew · 6 of 347 enrolled.
Overall4.27 / 5
123 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.40
Connection4.70
Contribution3.60
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity3.80
Grading4.60
Reflection4.40
Respect4.70
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.50
Questions4.70
Carl A Hager 1,558 grades · 1 term 3.50GPA
1,558 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hager vs. the course average
A
+8.2
B
−5.8
C
−1.6
D
−0.9
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.3% withdrew · 20 of 1,578 enrolled.
Overall4.70 / 5
735 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.54
Technology4.86
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.07
Connection4.90
Contribution4.41
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.28
Grading4.78
Reflection4.71
Respect4.85
Creativity4.42
Feedback4.37
Interaction4.76
Challenge4.80
Questions4.76
Sebastian K. Schmidt 1,334 grades · 1 term 3.45GPA
1,334 letter grades
Compare with the course
Schmidt vs. the course average
A
+3.3
B
−0.1
C
−2.0
D
−0.5
F
−0.7
Difference in percentage points.
1.8% withdrew · 25 of 1,359 enrolled.
Overall4.31 / 5
278 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.24
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.19
Collaboration3.85
Connection4.49
Contribution3.92
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity3.97
Grading4.46
Reflection4.31
Respect4.70
Creativity4.13
Feedback3.88
Interaction4.52
Challenge4.40
Questions4.69
Derek Philip Brown 334 grades · 1 term 3.32GPA
334 letter grades
Compare with the course
Brown vs. the course average
A
−7.0
B
+5.6
C
+2.6
D
−0.8
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
1.5% withdrew · 5 of 339 enrolled.
Overall4.32 / 5
80 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.40
Connection4.70
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.30
Respect4.70
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.40
Questions4.80
Aneesh Chamakuzhi Subramanian 336 grades · 1 term 3.31GPA
336 letter grades
Compare with the course
Subramanian vs. the course average
A
−3.7
B
+3.3
C
−0.8
D
+0.7
F
+0.5
Difference in percentage points.
2.6% withdrew · 9 of 345 enrolled.
Overall4.14 / 5
150 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.50
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.50
Reflection4.20
Respect4.50
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.10
Challenge4.20
Questions4.40
Elizabeth Noel Cassano 1,274 grades · 1 term 3.24GPA
1,274 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cassano vs. the course average
A
−10.3
B
+8.0
C
+1.8
D
+0.2
F
+0.2
Difference in percentage points.
1.9% withdrew · 25 of 1,299 enrolled.
Overall4.12 / 5
530 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.06
Technology4.50
Synthesis3.98
Collaboration3.93
Connection4.52
Contribution3.70
Discussion4.31
Inclusivity3.39
Grading4.30
Reflection4.24
Respect4.63
Creativity4.03
Feedback4.04
Interaction4.39
Challenge4.18
Questions4.54
Andrew Winters 641 grades · 1 term 3.20GPA
641 letter grades
Compare with the course
Winters vs. the course average
A
−5.3
B
−1.9
C
+4.2
D
+2.8
F
+0.2
Difference in percentage points.
2.1% withdrew · 14 of 655 enrolled.
Overall4.32 / 5
436 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology4.68
Synthesis4.27
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.59
Contribution3.89
Discussion4.39
Inclusivity4.06
Grading4.49
Reflection4.39
Respect4.68
Creativity4.28
Feedback4.27
Interaction4.47
Challenge4.39
Questions4.50
Katja Friedrich 297 grades · 1 term 3.17GPA
297 letter grades
Compare with the course
Friedrich vs. the course average
A
−11.1
B
+5.4
C
+3.4
D
+1.0
F
+1.4
Difference in percentage points.
1.7% withdrew · 5 of 302 enrolled.
Overall3.80 / 5
50 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.90
Technology3.80
Synthesis3.80
Collaboration3.20
Connection4.40
Contribution3.40
Discussion3.90
Inclusivity3.60
Grading3.90
Reflection4.00
Respect4.20
Creativity3.50
Feedback3.40
Interaction3.90
Challenge3.90
Questions3.80
Cheng Lu 225 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
225 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.31
Collaboration3.94
Connection4.70
Contribution4.06
Discussion4.51
Inclusivity4.26
Grading4.55
Reflection4.55
Respect4.75
Creativity4.41
Feedback4.38
Interaction4.43
Challenge4.45
Questions4.65
Jacopo Sala 116 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
116 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.40
Connection4.50
Contribution3.60
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity3.80
Grading4.50
Reflection4.30
Respect4.60
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.