Spring 2025 · Section not specified
Instructor not extracted
Read syllabus Checked 2026-09-09
Course record CHEN
CHEN 3200
Chemical Engineering Fluid Mechanics
University of Colorado Boulder
439 grades8 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2021–2026
Flunk Score33/100
Below average
Carolyn Schoenbaum Kohlmeier 114 grades · 1 term 3.21GPA
114 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kohlmeier vs. the course average
A
+7.4
B
−4.5
C
−3.9
D
+0.4
F
+0.6
Difference in percentage points.
0.9% withdrew · 1 of 115 enrolled.
Ankur Gupta 143 grades · 1 term 3.15GPA
143 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gupta vs. the course average
A
−2.0
B
+4.4
C
+0.1
D
−2.3
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
2.1% withdrew · 3 of 146 enrolled.
Overall4.61 / 5
116 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.51
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.39
Connection4.61
Contribution4.75
Discussion4.79
Inclusivity4.71
Grading4.67
Reflection4.51
Respect4.97
Creativity4.77
Feedback4.58
Interaction4.61
Challenge4.79
Questions4.80
Daniel K. Schwartz 182 grades · 1 term 3.03GPA
182 letter grades
Compare with the course
Schwartz vs. the course average
A
−3.0
B
−0.7
C
+2.3
D
+1.6
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
0.5% withdrew · 1 of 183 enrolled.
Overall4.44 / 5
152 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.52
Technology4.33
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.42
Connection4.60
Contribution4.02
Discussion4.42
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.33
Reflection4.45
Respect4.67
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.57
Challenge4.63
Questions4.55
Juan Jose Hernandez 48 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
48 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.40
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity3.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.70
Questions4.80
Peter Paul Mitrano 35 reported responses 4.17Eval / 5
Overall4.17 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.33
Technology4.46
Synthesis4.48
Collaboration3.25
Connection4.74
Contribution4.08
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity3.47
Grading3.67
Reflection4.37
Respect4.65
Creativity4.29
Feedback3.71
Interaction3.99
Challenge4.28
Questions4.37
Hunter Wayne Simonson 23 reported responses 4.38Eval / 5
Overall4.38 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.60
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity3.50
Grading4.20
Reflection4.30
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.30
Questions4.60
Ian Wyllie 17 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.60
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Peter Romero 65 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
65 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.60
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.40
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.70
Questions4.70
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.