Fall 2025 · Section not specified
Instructor:
Read syllabus Checked 2026-09-09
Course record CHEN
CHEN 5838
Special Topics in Chemical Engineering
University of Colorado Boulder
287 grades25 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score74/100
Strong
Timothy John White 37 grades · 1 term 3.97GPA
37 letter grades
Compare with the course
White vs. the course average
A
+8.4
B
−7.8
C
−0.3
D
same
F
−0.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 37 enrolled.
Overall4.51 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.32
Technology4.67
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.96
Connection4.69
Contribution4.34
Discussion4.71
Inclusivity3.76
Grading4.01
Reflection4.06
Respect4.36
Creativity4.67
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.34
Challenge4.67
Questions4.05
Michael R Shirts 111 grades · 1 term 3.93GPA
111 letter grades
Compare with the course
Shirts vs. the course average
A
+6.6
B
−5.9
C
−0.3
D
same
F
−0.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.9% withdrew · 1 of 112 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
103 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.73
Synthesis4.31
Collaboration4.67
Connection4.05
Contribution4.31
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity2.96
Grading4.59
Reflection4.46
Respect4.60
Creativity4.54
Feedback4.58
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.81
Questions4.61
Kristi S Anseth 32 grades · 1 term 3.46GPA
32 letter grades
Compare with the course
Anseth vs. the course average
A
−35.7
B
+33.3
C
+2.8
D
same
F
−0.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 32 enrolled.
Overall4.33 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.76
Synthesis4.18
Collaboration4.68
Connection4.75
Contribution4.32
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity3.88
Grading4.23
Reflection4.65
Respect4.88
Creativity4.48
Feedback3.19
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.53
Questions4.73
Ryan Hayward 19 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 4.00GPA
19 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 19 enrolled.
Overall4.55 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.40
Connection3.90
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity3.50
Grading4.60
Reflection4.00
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.70
Questions4.60
Joel L. Kaar 10 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 4.00GPA
10 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 10 enrolled.
Overall4.70 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.75
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity3.70
Grading4.45
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.85
Questions5.00
Charles Bruce Musgrave 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.98GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
6.7% withdrew · 1 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.26 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.70
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity2.70
Grading3.10
Reflection4.60
Respect4.80
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.60
Christine M Hrenya 10 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.94GPA
10 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 10 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.50
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.40
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.70
Questions4.60
Adam P Holewinski 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.87GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
6.7% withdrew · 1 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.53 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.04
Technology4.63
Synthesis4.05
Collaboration3.74
Connection4.39
Contribution4.75
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.46
Grading4.23
Reflection4.61
Respect4.90
Creativity4.62
Feedback4.21
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.62
Questions4.81
Daniel K. Schwartz 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.75GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 16 enrolled.
Overall4.74 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.98
Technology4.98
Synthesis4.98
Collaboration4.97
Connection4.98
Contribution4.97
Discussion4.98
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.98
Reflection4.98
Respect5.00
Creativity4.99
Feedback4.98
Interaction4.98
Challenge5.00
Questions4.99
Christopher Bowman 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.72GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 13 enrolled.
Overall4.48 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.90
Connection5.00
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.40
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.90
Questions4.90
Timothy Andrew Whitehead 11 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.43GPA
11 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 11 enrolled.
Overall4.45 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.90
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.50
Reflection4.70
Respect4.40
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.60
Questions4.60
Evan Alexander Bisirri 16 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.70
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity3.50
Grading4.40
Reflection4.40
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.50
Questions4.80
James William Medlin 9 reported responses 4.86Eval / 5
Overall4.86 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.80
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.60
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Michael David Mcgehee 9 reported responses 4.38Eval / 5
Overall4.38 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.15
Collaboration4.34
Connection4.65
Contribution4.53
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.23
Grading4.15
Reflection4.62
Respect4.78
Creativity4.62
Feedback4.23
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.95
Questions4.85
Ryan Jackson Morelock 4 reported responses 3.97Eval / 5
Overall3.97 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.50
Technology2.50
Synthesis3.30
Collaboration2.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.30
Reflection4.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.70
Challenge3.70
Questions4.80
Stephanie J Bryant 19 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.60
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity2.80
Grading4.20
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity4.20
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.30
Questions4.70
Samantha Kaczaral 5 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.60
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.60
Reflection4.80
Respect4.40
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.80
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Laurel Hind 43 reported responses 4.69Eval / 5
Overall4.69 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.61
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration4.78
Connection4.78
Contribution4.72
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity4.37
Grading4.78
Reflection4.66
Respect4.87
Creativity4.61
Feedback4.72
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.82
Questions4.89
Jason A Burdick 9 reported responses 4.93Eval / 5
Overall4.93 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.99
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.99
Collaboration4.98
Connection5.00
Contribution4.99
Discussion4.99
Inclusivity4.92
Grading4.99
Reflection4.99
Respect4.99
Creativity4.98
Feedback4.98
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.99
Questions5.00
Anushree Chatterjee 2 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection3.50
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity3.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback3.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Eric Ginter 18 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.80
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.60
Questions4.90
Charles Wyatt Shields 20 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
Katie Trese 20 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Tim Bernat 16 reported responses 4.69Eval / 5
Overall4.69 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.40
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity2.60
Grading4.90
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Michael Folsom Toney 30 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.50
Contribution4.75
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.05
Grading4.05
Reflection4.65
Respect4.75
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.80
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.