Course record EBIO
EBIO 1220
General Biology 2
University of Colorado Boulder
5,780 grades22 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score23/100
Below average
Warren Sconiers 1,110 grades · 1 term 3.42GPA
1,110 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sconiers vs. the course average
A
+21.5
B
−8.4
C
−11.2
D
−1.5
F
−0.5
Difference in percentage points.
0.6% withdrew · 7 of 1,117 enrolled.
Overall4.31 / 5
1,194 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.48
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.47
Collaboration4.16
Connection4.64
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.73
Inclusivity4.27
Grading4.54
Reflection4.68
Respect4.75
Creativity4.38
Feedback4.03
Interaction4.62
Challenge4.65
Questions4.72
Elizabeth L Paulson 78 grades · 1 term 3.41GPA
78 letter grades
Compare with the course
Paulson vs. the course average
A
+19.9
B
−5.9
C
−9.8
D
−2.8
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
2.5% withdrew · 2 of 80 enrolled.
Jessica A Gorski 154 grades · 1 term 3.36GPA
154 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gorski vs. the course average
A
+25.8
B
−15.1
C
−10.9
D
−2.8
F
+3.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.9% withdrew · 3 of 157 enrolled.
Overall4.47 / 5
90 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.38
Technology4.53
Synthesis4.44
Collaboration4.48
Connection4.47
Contribution4.28
Discussion4.66
Inclusivity4.16
Grading4.21
Reflection4.37
Respect4.84
Creativity4.56
Feedback3.97
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.61
Questions4.66
Derek Michael Sweeney 1,869 grades · 1 term 3.13GPA
1,869 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sweeney vs. the course average
A
−2.4
B
+8.5
C
−4.6
D
−1.2
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
1.7% withdrew · 33 of 1,902 enrolled.
Overall3.68 / 5
1,162 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.65
Technology3.70
Synthesis3.64
Collaboration3.11
Connection3.97
Contribution3.18
Discussion3.71
Inclusivity3.53
Grading3.59
Reflection3.63
Respect4.12
Creativity3.57
Feedback3.09
Interaction4.18
Challenge3.67
Questions3.96
Teresa Bilinski 288 grades · 1 term 3.09GPA
288 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bilinski vs. the course average
A
+4.1
B
−2.3
C
−2.8
D
−0.7
F
+1.7
Difference in percentage points.
2.0% withdrew · 6 of 294 enrolled.
Overall4.16 / 5
243 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.28
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.24
Collaboration4.44
Connection4.40
Contribution3.89
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity3.77
Grading4.03
Reflection4.33
Respect4.39
Creativity4.23
Feedback3.42
Interaction4.54
Challenge4.36
Questions4.26
Rebecca J Safran 524 grades · 1 term 2.89GPA
524 letter grades
Compare with the course
Safran vs. the course average
A
−9.0
B
−1.7
C
+12.0
D
same
F
−1.3
Difference in percentage points.
1.3% withdrew · 7 of 531 enrolled.
Kendi F Davies 419 grades · 1 term 2.88GPA
419 letter grades
Compare with the course
Davies vs. the course average
A
−11.7
B
+3.9
C
+6.3
D
+1.5
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
2.6% withdrew · 11 of 430 enrolled.
Overall3.53 / 5
168 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.70
Technology4.20
Synthesis3.75
Collaboration2.45
Connection4.10
Contribution3.05
Discussion3.20
Inclusivity3.35
Grading3.80
Reflection4.05
Respect4.00
Creativity3.55
Feedback3.05
Interaction3.10
Challenge3.95
Questions3.95
Paige Willever Shilling Littman 45 grades · 1 term 2.87GPA
45 letter grades
Compare with the course
Littman vs. the course average
A
+12.4
B
−24.9
C
−1.0
D
+12.7
F
+0.8
Difference in percentage points.
8.2% withdrew · 4 of 49 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
48 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.76
Technology4.79
Synthesis4.91
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.79
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.33
Grading4.62
Reflection4.81
Respect4.97
Creativity4.59
Feedback4.95
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.98
Questions4.99
Brett Andrew Melbourne 1,051 grades · 1 term 2.84GPA
1,051 letter grades
Compare with the course
Melbourne vs. the course average
A
−10.4
B
−1.0
C
+10.3
D
+0.9
F
+0.2
Difference in percentage points.
1.7% withdrew · 18 of 1,069 enrolled.
Overall3.64 / 5
210 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.95
Technology4.25
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration2.15
Connection4.15
Contribution3.20
Discussion3.25
Inclusivity3.45
Grading3.90
Reflection4.10
Respect4.30
Creativity3.75
Feedback2.90
Interaction3.35
Challenge4.20
Questions3.85
Carol A Kearns 35 grades · 1 term 2.35GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kearns vs. the course average
A
−25.1
B
−14.8
C
+24.1
D
+17.2
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
2.8% withdrew · 1 of 36 enrolled.
Diana Oliveras 207 grades · 1 term 2.32GPA
207 letter grades
Compare with the course
Oliveras vs. the course average
A
−25.4
B
−6.2
C
+17.5
D
+9.7
F
+4.3
Difference in percentage points.
5.9% withdrew · 13 of 220 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
124 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.39
Technology4.46
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration3.81
Connection4.34
Contribution4.53
Discussion4.72
Inclusivity3.65
Grading4.45
Reflection4.67
Respect4.68
Creativity4.39
Feedback4.38
Interaction4.54
Challenge4.64
Questions4.86
Jennifer Lynne Allison 24 reported responses 4.44Eval / 5
Overall4.44 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.41
Technology4.28
Synthesis4.09
Collaboration3.75
Connection4.43
Contribution4.82
Discussion4.38
Inclusivity4.35
Grading4.44
Reflection4.53
Respect4.93
Creativity3.73
Feedback3.84
Interaction4.44
Challenge4.56
Questions4.29
Kristin Hayley White 202 reported responses 3.64Eval / 5
Overall3.64 / 5
202 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.95
Technology4.10
Synthesis3.95
Collaboration2.20
Connection4.10
Contribution3.20
Discussion3.35
Inclusivity3.50
Grading3.80
Reflection4.10
Respect4.30
Creativity3.75
Feedback3.10
Interaction3.35
Challenge4.05
Questions3.85
Megan Zabinski 362 reported responses 3.60Eval / 5
Overall3.60 / 5
362 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.83
Technology4.15
Synthesis3.85
Collaboration2.35
Connection4.10
Contribution3.13
Discussion3.38
Inclusivity3.45
Grading3.78
Reflection4.08
Respect4.18
Creativity3.65
Feedback3.18
Interaction3.28
Challenge3.93
Questions3.83
Caitlin Anne Kelly 277 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5
277 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.46
Technology4.83
Synthesis4.48
Collaboration4.61
Connection4.61
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.74
Grading4.73
Reflection4.84
Respect4.96
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.77
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.83
Questions4.98
Robert Buchwald 356 reported responses 4.60Eval / 5
Overall4.60 / 5
356 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.88
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.77
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.34
Grading4.62
Reflection4.78
Respect4.94
Creativity4.68
Feedback4.29
Interaction4.82
Challenge4.83
Questions4.86
Jennifer L Van De Kamp 32 reported responses 4.09Eval / 5
Overall4.09 / 5
32 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.24
Technology4.54
Synthesis4.09
Collaboration2.72
Connection3.19
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.17
Inclusivity3.96
Grading4.50
Reflection4.33
Respect4.48
Creativity3.09
Feedback3.12
Interaction4.41
Challenge4.31
Questions4.31
Abbey Paulson 137 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
137 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.72
Technology4.79
Synthesis4.67
Collaboration3.16
Connection4.46
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.57
Inclusivity4.14
Grading4.62
Reflection4.85
Respect4.67
Creativity4.74
Feedback4.42
Interaction4.27
Challenge4.79
Questions4.66
Eve Bonser Cooper 131 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
131 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.54
Technology4.83
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration3.83
Connection4.58
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.54
Inclusivity3.98
Grading4.66
Reflection4.66
Respect4.71
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.23
Interaction4.62
Challenge4.68
Questions4.72
Manuela Mejia 55 reported responses 3.95Eval / 5
Overall3.95 / 5
55 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.40
Contribution3.90
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity3.70
Grading3.60
Reflection4.40
Respect4.40
Creativity3.70
Feedback3.40
Interaction4.50
Challenge3.80
Questions3.90
Stephanie Kathryn Polutchko 56 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
56 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.80
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Chelsea Pretz 6 reported responses 4.19Eval / 5
Overall4.19 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.30
Synthesis3.80
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.00
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.20
Reflection4.20
Respect4.80
Creativity4.30
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.00
Questions4.20
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.