Course record BASE
BASE 2104
BCOR Applied Semester Experience
University of Colorado Boulder
5,798 grades31 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score27/100
Below average
Gurumurthi Ravishankar 76 grades · 1 term 3.17GPA
76 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ravishankar vs. the course average
A
+5.8
B
+1.4
C
−6.9
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.3% withdrew · 1 of 77 enrolled.
Overall3.89 / 5
97 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.17
Technology3.73
Synthesis4.23
Collaboration4.63
Connection4.33
Contribution4.13
Discussion3.60
Inclusivity3.93
Grading3.50
Reflection4.07
Respect4.13
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.23
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.00
Questions3.40
Robert Scott Livengood 165 grades · 1 term 3.17GPA
165 letter grades
Compare with the course
Livengood vs. the course average
A
+12.3
B
−7.5
C
−4.5
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.6% withdrew · 1 of 166 enrolled.
Elizabeth Cole Stapp 233 grades · 1 term 3.15GPA
233 letter grades
Compare with the course
Stapp vs. the course average
A
+9.6
B
−6.5
C
−3.2
D
−0.2
F
+0.3
Difference in percentage points.
1.3% withdrew · 3 of 236 enrolled.
Overall4.36 / 5
179 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.48
Technology4.41
Synthesis4.54
Collaboration4.89
Connection4.63
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.46
Inclusivity4.26
Grading4.31
Reflection4.52
Respect4.51
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.34
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.48
Questions4.36
Mark Robert Gasta 331 grades · 1 term 3.14GPA
331 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gasta vs. the course average
A
+2.0
B
+7.1
C
−8.8
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 331 enrolled.
Overall4.39 / 5
119 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.38
Synthesis4.43
Collaboration4.68
Connection4.55
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.43
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.07
Reflection4.45
Respect4.68
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.43
Questions4.40
Stacey C Edgar 89 grades · 1 term 3.13GPA
89 letter grades
Compare with the course
Edgar vs. the course average
A
+3.3
B
−0.5
C
−2.5
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 89 enrolled.
Overall4.30 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.20
Grading3.60
Reflection4.30
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.70
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.50
Questions4.10
Michael P Jennings 688 grades · 1 term 3.08GPA
688 letter grades
Compare with the course
Jennings vs. the course average
A
+2.2
B
+1.7
C
−3.6
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.4% withdrew · 3 of 691 enrolled.
Overall4.56 / 5
728 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.71
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.72
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.81
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.78
Inclusivity4.36
Grading4.13
Reflection4.78
Respect4.68
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.78
Questions4.60
Karen G Laszlo 80 grades · 1 term 3.05GPA
80 letter grades
Compare with the course
Laszlo vs. the course average
A
+3.3
B
−6.9
C
+3.9
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.2% withdrew · 1 of 81 enrolled.
Overall4.09 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.50
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity3.90
Grading3.30
Reflection4.00
Respect4.60
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.70
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.20
Questions4.10
John Anthony Ploumitsakos 251 grades · 1 term 3.05GPA
251 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ploumitsakos vs. the course average
A
+5.1
B
−1.2
C
−5.3
D
+0.6
F
+0.7
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 251 enrolled.
Overall4.67 / 5
144 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.69
Synthesis4.56
Collaboration4.88
Connection4.81
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.79
Inclusivity4.46
Grading4.33
Reflection4.64
Respect4.69
Creativity4.64
Feedback4.48
Interaction4.82
Challenge4.58
Questions4.75
Heather Lee Kennedy 659 grades · 1 term 3.04GPA
659 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kennedy vs. the course average
A
+2.5
B
−2.0
C
−0.4
D
−0.1
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.5% withdrew · 3 of 662 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
541 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.34
Collaboration4.78
Connection4.49
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity3.68
Grading3.97
Reflection4.37
Respect4.37
Creativity4.37
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.67
Challenge4.39
Questions4.25
Mary Beth Lewis 776 grades · 1 term 2.97GPA
776 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lewis vs. the course average
A
−1.0
B
−2.4
C
+3.5
D
−0.1
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
0.3% withdrew · 2 of 778 enrolled.
Overall4.46 / 5
366 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.52
Technology4.47
Synthesis4.49
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.61
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.41
Inclusivity4.38
Grading3.90
Reflection4.35
Respect4.53
Creativity4.43
Feedback4.12
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.38
Questions4.27
Nancy Alice Chapple 555 grades · 1 term 2.97GPA
555 letter grades
Compare with the course
Chapple vs. the course average
A
−3.9
B
+3.5
C
+0.3
D
+0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.2% withdrew · 1 of 556 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
287 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.17
Technology4.21
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.25
Contribution4.31
Discussion4.09
Inclusivity3.96
Grading3.63
Reflection4.19
Respect4.48
Creativity4.37
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.72
Challenge4.27
Questions4.15
Jay L Waddell 170 grades · 1 term 2.97GPA
170 letter grades
Compare with the course
Waddell vs. the course average
A
−3.9
B
+2.0
C
+1.7
D
+0.4
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 170 enrolled.
John Andrew Lacy 536 grades · 1 term 2.97GPA
536 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lacy vs. the course average
A
−1.1
B
−1.5
C
+2.7
D
−0.2
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.4% withdrew · 2 of 538 enrolled.
Overall4.70 / 5
263 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.79
Synthesis4.71
Collaboration4.87
Connection4.87
Contribution4.71
Discussion4.67
Inclusivity4.49
Grading4.56
Reflection4.74
Respect4.81
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.97
Challenge4.75
Questions4.90
Kimberly Gray Orton 534 grades · 1 term 2.96GPA
534 letter grades
Compare with the course
Orton vs. the course average
A
−6.1
B
+5.7
C
+0.5
D
same
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.7% withdrew · 4 of 538 enrolled.
Overall4.28 / 5
396 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.38
Technology4.51
Synthesis4.44
Collaboration4.76
Connection4.56
Contribution4.44
Discussion4.32
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.89
Reflection4.34
Respect4.62
Creativity4.46
Feedback4.21
Interaction4.76
Challenge4.37
Questions4.41
Timothy William Rodgers 521 grades · 1 term 2.92GPA
521 letter grades
Compare with the course
Rodgers vs. the course average
A
−3.6
B
−1.8
C
+5.0
D
+0.6
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.8% withdrew · 4 of 525 enrolled.
Overall4.26 / 5
144 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.31
Technology4.24
Synthesis4.48
Collaboration4.81
Connection4.54
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.08
Inclusivity4.22
Grading3.77
Reflection4.33
Respect4.46
Creativity4.57
Feedback3.89
Interaction4.54
Challenge4.30
Questions4.01
Laura Joyce Kornish 134 grades · 1 term 2.87GPA
134 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kornish vs. the course average
A
−7.3
B
−3.0
C
+10.6
D
−0.2
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 134 enrolled.
Overall4.63 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.90
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.40
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
Kimberly Campbell 35 reported responses 3.66Eval / 5
Overall3.66 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology3.70
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.30
Connection3.90
Contribution4.20
Discussion3.40
Inclusivity3.40
Grading2.90
Reflection3.90
Respect4.10
Creativity3.70
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.20
Challenge3.60
Questions3.50
Kristin Joy Swisher 175 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
175 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.23
Technology4.17
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.69
Connection4.26
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.11
Inclusivity3.99
Grading4.01
Reflection4.21
Respect4.43
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.57
Challenge4.20
Questions4.14
Salma Tariq Shukri 472 reported responses 4.48Eval / 5
Overall4.48 / 5
472 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.47
Technology4.39
Synthesis4.47
Collaboration4.75
Connection4.42
Contribution4.53
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity4.24
Grading4.30
Reflection4.46
Respect4.58
Creativity4.38
Feedback4.41
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.42
Questions4.36
Christopher J Carbone 412 reported responses 4.29Eval / 5
Overall4.29 / 5
412 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.24
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.36
Collaboration4.64
Connection4.23
Contribution4.34
Discussion4.22
Inclusivity3.99
Grading3.89
Reflection4.22
Respect4.41
Creativity4.32
Feedback4.06
Interaction4.72
Challenge4.15
Questions4.23
Cory Brooke Cunningham 38 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.60
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.40
Questions4.70
Bonnie Judith Auslander 323 reported responses 4.08Eval / 5
Overall4.08 / 5
323 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology3.82
Synthesis4.13
Collaboration4.57
Connection4.18
Contribution4.33
Discussion4.08
Inclusivity3.59
Grading3.49
Reflection4.07
Respect3.94
Creativity4.01
Feedback3.92
Interaction4.45
Challenge3.94
Questions3.93
Jennifer Emerling Bone 175 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
175 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.63
Technology4.46
Synthesis4.58
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.67
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.47
Inclusivity4.47
Grading4.29
Reflection4.58
Respect4.65
Creativity4.53
Feedback4.38
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.54
Questions4.50
Julie Scher Smith 717 reported responses 4.42Eval / 5
Overall4.42 / 5
717 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.41
Technology4.43
Synthesis4.44
Collaboration4.74
Connection4.48
Contribution4.46
Discussion4.47
Inclusivity4.29
Grading4.02
Reflection4.40
Respect4.61
Creativity4.43
Feedback4.36
Interaction4.73
Challenge4.36
Questions4.41
Erin Leigh Lionberger 284 reported responses 4.28Eval / 5
Overall4.28 / 5
284 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.47
Technology4.69
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.81
Connection4.60
Contribution4.57
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.47
Grading4.34
Reflection4.57
Respect4.69
Creativity4.51
Feedback4.55
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.62
Questions4.64
Scott Livengood 160 reported responses 4.44Eval / 5
Overall4.44 / 5
160 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.24
Technology4.54
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.66
Connection4.43
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.44
Inclusivity3.98
Grading3.91
Reflection4.20
Respect4.61
Creativity4.39
Feedback4.07
Interaction4.67
Challenge4.33
Questions4.26
Andy Lacy 494 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
494 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.71
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.72
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.83
Contribution4.71
Discussion4.68
Inclusivity4.33
Grading4.37
Reflection4.72
Respect4.74
Creativity4.78
Feedback4.55
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.79
Questions4.78
Elizabeth Kay Meyers Bass 95 reported responses 4.34Eval / 5
Overall4.34 / 5
95 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.18
Technology4.51
Synthesis4.07
Collaboration4.68
Connection4.28
Contribution4.29
Discussion4.19
Inclusivity3.89
Grading4.31
Reflection4.09
Respect4.41
Creativity4.21
Feedback4.19
Interaction4.53
Challenge4.00
Questions4.47
Pablo Slough 121 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5
121 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.39
Technology4.47
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.84
Connection4.60
Contribution4.53
Discussion4.39
Inclusivity4.11
Grading3.67
Reflection4.43
Respect4.51
Creativity4.53
Feedback3.97
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.50
Questions4.23
Raymond Dutkin 37 reported responses 4.28Eval / 5
Overall4.28 / 5
37 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.75
Connection4.55
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity3.70
Grading3.75
Reflection4.30
Respect4.25
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.25
Questions4.15
Carly Leilani Fabian 72 reported responses 3.99Eval / 5
Overall3.99 / 5
72 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.05
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.10
Contribution4.15
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.60
Reflection4.05
Respect4.25
Creativity3.85
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.35
Challenge3.85
Questions3.90
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.