Course record COMM
COMM 3420
Gender and Communication
University of Colorado Boulder
696 grades19 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score57/100
Mixed record
Bernardita Maria Yunis 174 grades · 1 term 3.70GPA
174 letter grades
Compare with the course
Yunis vs. the course average
A
+17.4
B
−11.6
C
−5.2
D
−1.1
F
+0.6
Difference in percentage points.
3.3% withdrew · 6 of 180 enrolled.
Overall4.67 / 5
96 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.88
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.71
Collaboration4.02
Connection4.86
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.53
Inclusivity4.99
Grading4.48
Reflection4.73
Respect4.98
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.09
Interaction4.59
Challenge4.70
Questions4.63
Salwa Kazi 26 grades · 1 term 3.59GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kazi vs. the course average
A
+19.2
B
−18.3
C
−2.5
D
+2.7
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 1 of 27 enrolled.
Overall4.27 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.49
Technology4.25
Synthesis3.93
Collaboration3.91
Connection4.70
Contribution4.51
Discussion4.52
Inclusivity4.69
Grading4.19
Reflection4.05
Respect4.35
Creativity3.75
Feedback3.59
Interaction4.36
Challenge3.66
Questions4.43
Danielle Soibelman 51 grades · 1 term 3.54GPA
51 letter grades
Compare with the course
Soibelman vs. the course average
A
+1.3
B
+3.4
C
−4.4
D
−1.1
F
+0.8
Difference in percentage points.
1.9% withdrew · 1 of 52 enrolled.
Ruth Lynne Hickerson 157 grades · 1 term 3.49GPA
157 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hickerson vs. the course average
A
+0.2
B
−1.2
C
+2.6
D
−0.5
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.6% withdrew · 1 of 158 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
108 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.88
Technology4.21
Synthesis4.87
Collaboration4.81
Connection4.99
Contribution4.92
Discussion4.91
Inclusivity4.95
Grading4.67
Reflection4.81
Respect4.89
Creativity4.86
Feedback4.17
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.88
Questions4.84
Ace Jordan Eckstein 74 grades · 1 term 3.41GPA
74 letter grades
Compare with the course
Eckstein vs. the course average
A
−4.6
B
−0.3
C
+3.1
D
+2.9
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.6% withdrew · 2 of 76 enrolled.
Overall4.76 / 5
68 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.51
Collaboration4.65
Connection4.83
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.62
Inclusivity4.76
Grading4.63
Reflection4.75
Respect4.74
Creativity4.56
Feedback4.51
Interaction4.66
Challenge4.62
Questions4.68
Karen Lee Ashcraft 141 grades · 1 term 3.39GPA
141 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ashcraft vs. the course average
A
−12.9
B
+13.7
C
−0.6
D
−1.1
F
+1.0
Difference in percentage points.
4.1% withdrew · 6 of 147 enrolled.
Overall4.82 / 5
63 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.97
Technology4.68
Synthesis4.84
Collaboration4.86
Connection4.97
Contribution4.93
Discussion4.97
Inclusivity4.96
Grading4.89
Reflection4.91
Respect4.97
Creativity4.87
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.97
Challenge4.93
Questions4.97
Audra Kelly Barber 57 grades · 1 term 3.12GPA
57 letter grades
Compare with the course
Barber vs. the course average
A
−21.5
B
+9.1
C
+9.5
D
+4.1
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
5.0% withdrew · 3 of 60 enrolled.
Lisa A. Flores 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.15GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
5.9% withdrew · 1 of 17 enrolled.
Overall4.64 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.40
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Deborha Ashley Tycoliz Campbell 28 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.30
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.60
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Carolin Aronis 21 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.49
Synthesis4.42
Collaboration4.18
Connection4.65
Contribution4.77
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.65
Reflection4.62
Respect4.82
Creativity4.38
Feedback4.52
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.57
Questions4.75
Elisa Mercedes Varela 9 reported responses 4.89Eval / 5
Overall4.89 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.90
Connection5.00
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection4.90
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions4.70
Emily Therese Loker 13 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.36
Technology4.44
Synthesis4.36
Collaboration3.69
Connection4.44
Contribution4.77
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.98
Grading4.61
Reflection4.38
Respect4.85
Creativity4.23
Feedback4.55
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.38
Questions4.42
Dani Soibelman 44 reported responses 4.36Eval / 5
Overall4.36 / 5
44 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.44
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.58
Connection4.93
Contribution4.64
Discussion4.13
Inclusivity4.89
Grading3.55
Reflection4.63
Respect4.65
Creativity4.22
Feedback3.79
Interaction4.47
Challenge4.16
Questions3.84
Jone Laura Brunelle 7 reported responses 4.74Eval / 5
Overall4.74 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.60
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.60
Connection5.00
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.60
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.30
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.60
Joanne Christine Marras Tate 2 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading3.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Sarah Jane Blithe 15 reported responses 4.69Eval / 5
Overall4.69 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.78
Synthesis4.06
Collaboration4.78
Connection5.00
Contribution4.78
Discussion4.78
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.04
Reflection4.06
Respect5.00
Creativity4.27
Feedback4.06
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.06
Questions4.23
Miranda Lynn Mccreary 37 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
37 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.69
Technology4.67
Synthesis4.59
Collaboration4.81
Connection4.84
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity4.78
Grading4.61
Reflection4.78
Respect4.73
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.57
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.52
Questions4.70
Kellie Carstensen 9 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.70
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.70
Reflection4.50
Respect4.50
Creativity4.60
Feedback3.85
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.45
Questions4.90
Cassidy Moore 20 reported responses 4.89Eval / 5
Overall4.89 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.97
Technology4.69
Synthesis4.95
Collaboration4.94
Connection4.94
Contribution4.93
Discussion4.99
Inclusivity4.99
Grading4.89
Reflection4.94
Respect4.93
Creativity4.97
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.94
Questions4.97
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.