Course record BADM
BADM 1260
First-Year Global Experience
University of Colorado Boulder
1,274 grades33 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2021–2026
Flunk Score45/100
Mixed record
Amanda Lucile Hansen 28 grades · 1 term 3.95GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hansen vs. the course average
A
+36.0
B
−31.6
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 28 enrolled.
Overall4.61 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.80
Connection5.00
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.20
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.30
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
Tara O'Brien 30 grades · 1 term 3.91GPA
30 letter grades
Compare with the course
O'Brien vs. the course average
A
+32.7
B
−28.2
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.2% withdrew · 1 of 31 enrolled.
Overall4.25 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.70
Grading3.90
Reflection4.10
Respect4.70
Creativity4.80
Feedback3.60
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.10
Questions3.90
Darrell S Zechman 96 grades · 1 term 3.90GPA
96 letter grades
Compare with the course
Zechman vs. the course average
A
+30.8
B
−26.3
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 96 enrolled.
Overall4.59 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.76
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.24
Collaboration3.91
Connection4.82
Contribution4.54
Discussion4.98
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.52
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.17
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.55
Questions4.97
Heather Rebecca Clark 25 grades · 1 term 3.88GPA
25 letter grades
Compare with the course
Clark vs. the course average
A
+24.0
B
−19.6
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 1 of 26 enrolled.
Stacey C Edgar 33 grades · 1 term 3.86GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Edgar vs. the course average
A
+26.9
B
−22.5
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 33 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.40
Connection5.00
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.20
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.40
Questions4.80
Julie Scher Smith 28 grades · 1 term 3.84GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Smith vs. the course average
A
+25.3
B
−20.8
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 28 enrolled.
Overall4.22 / 5
54 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.93
Technology4.22
Synthesis3.78
Collaboration4.56
Connection4.61
Contribution4.08
Discussion4.33
Inclusivity4.49
Grading3.91
Reflection4.21
Respect4.51
Creativity3.83
Feedback3.68
Interaction4.66
Challenge3.72
Questions4.31
Kelli E Stevens 45 grades · 1 term 3.79GPA
45 letter grades
Compare with the course
Stevens vs. the course average
A
+18.3
B
−13.8
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.2% withdrew · 1 of 46 enrolled.
Nancy Alice Chapple 52 grades · 1 term 3.75GPA
52 letter grades
Compare with the course
Chapple vs. the course average
A
+26.4
B
−23.9
C
−2.1
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 2 of 54 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.73
Technology4.56
Synthesis4.79
Collaboration4.77
Connection4.92
Contribution4.66
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.87
Grading4.00
Reflection4.66
Respect4.97
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.26
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.46
Questions4.55
Vanessa Muriel Napier 88 grades · 1 term 3.70GPA
88 letter grades
Compare with the course
Napier vs. the course average
A
+11.0
B
−6.6
C
−4.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.2% withdrew · 2 of 90 enrolled.
Overall4.29 / 5
49 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.08
Technology4.58
Synthesis4.18
Collaboration4.59
Connection4.79
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.67
Inclusivity4.76
Grading4.46
Reflection4.38
Respect4.59
Creativity4.21
Feedback4.23
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.43
Questions4.68
Michael P Jennings 71 grades · 1 term 3.64GPA
71 letter grades
Compare with the course
Jennings vs. the course average
A
+16.3
B
−16.1
C
−2.6
D
+2.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 71 enrolled.
Overall4.30 / 5
49 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.32
Technology4.57
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration4.84
Connection4.78
Contribution4.43
Discussion4.64
Inclusivity4.83
Grading3.94
Reflection4.58
Respect4.73
Creativity4.49
Feedback4.39
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.49
Questions4.52
Bonnie Judith Auslander 25 grades · 1 term 3.62GPA
25 letter grades
Compare with the course
Auslander vs. the course average
A
+8.0
B
−7.6
C
−4.0
D
+3.6
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 25 enrolled.
Sarah Rosenbaum Cowan 112 grades · 1 term 3.53GPA
112 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cowan vs. the course average
A
+1.2
B
−0.3
C
−0.4
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.9% withdrew · 1 of 113 enrolled.
Overall4.21 / 5
45 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.15
Technology4.36
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.38
Connection4.49
Contribution4.08
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.56
Grading3.83
Reflection4.19
Respect4.69
Creativity4.48
Feedback3.82
Interaction4.70
Challenge3.92
Questions4.46
Alyssa Simone Radtke 59 grades · 1 term 3.51GPA
59 letter grades
Compare with the course
Radtke vs. the course average
A
−8.0
B
+10.8
C
−2.3
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 59 enrolled.
Overall4.38 / 5
45 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.39
Technology4.56
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.71
Contribution4.33
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.63
Grading3.71
Reflection4.36
Respect4.63
Creativity4.42
Feedback3.29
Interaction4.51
Challenge4.41
Questions4.45
Marcia Fadzai Kwaramba 51 grades · 1 term 3.49GPA
51 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kwaramba vs. the course average
A
−1.2
B
−4.1
C
+5.8
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 51 enrolled.
Overall3.71 / 5
51 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.37
Technology3.64
Synthesis4.14
Collaboration4.35
Connection4.50
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.42
Inclusivity4.57
Grading2.88
Reflection3.89
Respect4.16
Creativity3.93
Feedback3.43
Interaction4.33
Challenge4.22
Questions3.63
Kevin Christopher Mcmahon 85 grades · 1 term 3.45GPA
85 letter grades
Compare with the course
Mcmahon vs. the course average
A
−4.0
B
−1.0
C
+5.4
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.3% withdrew · 2 of 87 enrolled.
Overall4.38 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.74
Technology4.36
Synthesis4.59
Collaboration4.64
Connection4.98
Contribution4.78
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity4.71
Grading4.23
Reflection4.71
Respect4.66
Creativity4.26
Feedback4.02
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.59
Questions4.66
Elmer Feliciano Ramos 101 grades · 1 term 3.38GPA
101 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ramos vs. the course average
A
−17.4
B
+18.0
C
−1.0
D
−0.4
F
+0.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 101 enrolled.
Overall3.78 / 5
82 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.17
Technology4.26
Synthesis4.28
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.48
Contribution4.36
Discussion4.43
Inclusivity4.16
Grading4.23
Reflection4.44
Respect4.46
Creativity4.13
Feedback3.93
Interaction4.41
Challenge4.21
Questions4.40
Erik Morgan Young 31 grades · 1 term 3.34GPA
31 letter grades
Compare with the course
Young vs. the course average
A
−9.1
B
+7.2
C
+2.4
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 31 enrolled.
Jaclyn Ann Abeloe 55 grades · 1 term 3.33GPA
55 letter grades
Compare with the course
Abeloe vs. the course average
A
−14.9
B
+10.3
C
+5.1
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.8% withdrew · 1 of 56 enrolled.
Overall3.52 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology3.60
Synthesis3.50
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.10
Contribution3.60
Discussion3.90
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.10
Reflection3.30
Respect4.00
Creativity3.50
Feedback3.30
Interaction3.50
Challenge3.40
Questions3.40
Kevin D. Schaub 122 grades · 1 term 3.13GPA
122 letter grades
Compare with the course
Schaub vs. the course average
A
−44.3
B
+42.2
C
+2.6
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 122 enrolled.
Overall4.15 / 5
84 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.70
Technology3.46
Synthesis3.64
Collaboration4.46
Connection4.58
Contribution4.27
Discussion4.44
Inclusivity4.21
Grading3.17
Reflection4.10
Respect4.30
Creativity3.81
Feedback3.19
Interaction4.60
Challenge3.93
Questions3.71
Mary Beth Lewis 26 grades · 1 term 3.02GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lewis vs. the course average
A
−40.9
B
+26.1
C
+11.4
D
+3.5
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 26 enrolled.
Kimberly Campbell 25 grades · 1 term 2.98GPA
25 letter grades
Compare with the course
Campbell vs. the course average
A
−48.0
B
+32.4
C
+16.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
7.4% withdrew · 2 of 27 enrolled.
Overall3.71 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.40
Technology3.40
Synthesis3.40
Collaboration4.10
Connection3.70
Contribution4.10
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.10
Reflection3.30
Respect4.60
Creativity3.80
Feedback3.40
Interaction4.70
Challenge3.30
Questions3.40
Heather Lee Kennedy 22 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.68GPA
22 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 22 enrolled.
Andrea Rooks Straccia 23 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.51GPA
23 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 23 enrolled.
Overall4.02 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.30
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.70
Grading3.60
Reflection4.00
Respect4.50
Creativity3.90
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.30
Challenge3.90
Questions4.20
Meghan Van Portfliet 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.41GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 18 enrolled.
Overall4.60 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.52
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.82
Connection4.82
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.68
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.42
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.52
Feedback4.62
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.52
Questions4.75
Cynthia Lee Banks 23 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.33GPA
23 letter grades · Limited sample
4.2% withdrew · 1 of 24 enrolled.
Sarah Denapoli 24 reported responses 4.09Eval / 5
Overall4.09 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.30
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.70
Grading3.70
Reflection4.00
Respect4.50
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.00
Questions4.30
Heather Rebecca Venechuk 13 reported responses 4.43Eval / 5
Overall4.43 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.50
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.20
Reflection4.50
Respect4.70
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.20
Questions4.70
Virginia Marie Benson 11 reported responses 3.98Eval / 5
Overall3.98 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.00
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.40
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.50
Reflection4.00
Respect4.10
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.20
Questions4.10
Jennifer Emerling Bone 10 reported responses 4.19Eval / 5
Overall4.19 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.90
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.60
Grading3.60
Reflection4.30
Respect4.30
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.50
Questions4.30
Scott Livengood 18 reported responses 4.23Eval / 5
Overall4.23 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.05
Technology4.71
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.78
Contribution4.09
Discussion4.73
Inclusivity4.25
Grading3.87
Reflection4.66
Respect4.73
Creativity3.87
Feedback3.21
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.25
Questions4.73
Erick Michael Mueller 7 reported responses 2.94Eval / 5
Overall2.94 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence2.70
Technology2.70
Synthesis2.90
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.40
Contribution3.00
Discussion2.90
Inclusivity2.40
Grading1.90
Reflection3.40
Respect2.50
Creativity3.10
Feedback2.70
Interaction3.00
Challenge3.40
Questions3.10
Ellen Burnes 17 reported responses 3.78Eval / 5
Overall3.78 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology3.40
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.40
Contribution4.00
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.30
Reflection3.80
Respect4.10
Creativity3.80
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.40
Challenge3.70
Questions3.80
Erik J Estrada 8 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.60
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.10
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.20
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.60
Questions4.60
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.