Course record EBIO
EBIO 2040
Principles of Ecology
University of Colorado Boulder
1,197 grades53 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score56/100
Mixed record
Kendi F Davies 269 grades · 1 term 3.66GPA
269 letter grades
Compare with the course
Davies vs. the course average
A
+13.8
B
−8.2
C
−3.8
D
−0.3
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
2.2% withdrew · 6 of 275 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
630 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.69
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.57
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.66
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.11
Grading4.67
Reflection4.53
Respect4.74
Creativity4.73
Feedback4.69
Interaction4.86
Challenge4.68
Questions4.74
Michael Gil 97 grades · 1 term 3.57GPA
97 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gil vs. the course average
A
+11.5
B
−9.9
C
−0.8
D
−1.1
F
+0.2
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 97 enrolled.
Overall4.55 / 5
125 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.68
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.68
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.80
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.69
Inclusivity4.32
Grading4.24
Reflection4.60
Respect4.80
Creativity4.66
Feedback4.18
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.78
Questions4.62
Lisa Corwin 97 grades · 1 term 3.46GPA
97 letter grades
Compare with the course
Corwin vs. the course average
A
+4.3
B
−2.7
C
−3.9
D
+1.0
F
+1.3
Difference in percentage points.
2.0% withdrew · 2 of 99 enrolled.
Overall4.44 / 5
64 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.30
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Stephanie Kathryn Polutchko 185 grades · 1 term 3.44GPA
185 letter grades
Compare with the course
Polutchko vs. the course average
A
−3.3
B
+5.0
C
−0.4
D
same
F
−1.3
Difference in percentage points.
1.6% withdrew · 3 of 188 enrolled.
Overall4.76 / 5
113 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.61
Technology4.81
Synthesis4.64
Collaboration4.84
Connection4.90
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity4.52
Grading4.72
Reflection4.87
Respect4.93
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.34
Interaction4.94
Challenge4.78
Questions4.94
Laura Dee 160 grades · 1 term 3.42GPA
160 letter grades
Compare with the course
Dee vs. the course average
A
−6.0
B
+6.7
C
+1.0
D
−0.5
F
−1.2
Difference in percentage points.
3.0% withdrew · 5 of 165 enrolled.
Overall4.44 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.10
Reflection4.50
Respect4.70
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.40
Questions4.70
Elizabeth L Paulson 203 grades · 1 term 3.31GPA
203 letter grades
Compare with the course
Paulson vs. the course average
A
−0.1
B
−3.7
C
+0.8
D
−0.1
F
+3.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 8 of 211 enrolled.
Teresa Bilinski 104 grades · 1 term 3.24GPA
104 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bilinski vs. the course average
A
−14.5
B
+10.1
C
+4.4
D
−0.1
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.8% withdrew · 3 of 107 enrolled.
Overall4.66 / 5
61 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.91
Technology4.84
Synthesis4.86
Collaboration4.98
Connection4.91
Contribution4.84
Discussion4.91
Inclusivity4.86
Grading4.86
Reflection4.88
Respect4.88
Creativity4.86
Feedback4.77
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.91
Questions4.88
William D Bowman 82 grades · 1 term 2.99GPA
82 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bowman vs. the course average
A
−26.3
B
+13.8
C
+9.3
D
+2.6
F
+0.6
Difference in percentage points.
5.7% withdrew · 5 of 87 enrolled.
Overall4.27 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.60
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.00
Reflection4.40
Respect4.70
Creativity4.20
Feedback3.70
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.50
Questions4.40
Meghan Truax Hayden 24 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.13
Technology4.82
Synthesis4.44
Collaboration4.94
Connection4.17
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.94
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.94
Reflection4.36
Respect4.78
Creativity4.23
Feedback4.94
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.20
Questions4.94
Laurel Brigham 45 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
45 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.69
Technology4.72
Synthesis4.86
Collaboration4.76
Connection4.53
Contribution4.54
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.22
Grading4.59
Reflection4.42
Respect4.92
Creativity4.47
Feedback4.72
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.56
Questions4.92
Brendan Karl Hobart 29 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.37
Collaboration4.66
Connection4.52
Contribution4.52
Discussion4.44
Inclusivity4.18
Grading4.33
Reflection4.47
Respect4.55
Creativity4.08
Feedback4.69
Interaction4.84
Challenge4.67
Questions4.69
Christa Lyn Torrens 11 reported responses 4.29Eval / 5
Overall4.29 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.35
Connection4.05
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.55
Reflection4.20
Respect4.85
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.05
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.45
Questions4.45
Ellen Waddle 8 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.05
Collaboration4.75
Connection4.55
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.80
Reflection4.65
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Peter Alexander Innes 11 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.75
Connection4.75
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity3.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.65
Challenge5.00
Questions4.80
Thomas Merchant 38 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.70
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity3.66
Grading4.26
Reflection4.45
Respect4.80
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.60
Questions4.75
Matthew E Bitters 22 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.88
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.92
Connection4.72
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.48
Grading4.70
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.78
Feedback4.88
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.76
Questions4.90
Grant Levi Vagle 17 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.41
Technology4.91
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.87
Connection4.65
Contribution4.59
Discussion4.83
Inclusivity4.04
Grading4.87
Reflection4.59
Respect4.70
Creativity4.26
Feedback4.74
Interaction4.96
Challenge4.65
Questions4.91
Wynne Emily Moss 3 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.30
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.70
Reflection4.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.70
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.70
Questions5.00
Scott Watson Nordstrom 8 reported responses 4.82Eval / 5
Overall4.82 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.90
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.60
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.60
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.90
Questions5.00
Kyle Christianson 3 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.70
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.30
Reflection4.70
Respect4.70
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.30
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.30
Questions5.00
Megan Zabinski 17 reported responses 4.53Eval / 5
Overall4.53 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.46
Technology4.66
Synthesis4.66
Collaboration4.76
Connection4.46
Contribution4.47
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.04
Grading4.78
Reflection4.75
Respect4.81
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.82
Interaction4.81
Challenge4.43
Questions4.63
Joshua Berton Seabaugh 8 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.30
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.80
Reflection4.65
Respect4.90
Creativity4.75
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.90
Questions4.90
Sierra Dawn Jech 11 reported responses 4.82Eval / 5
Overall4.82 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.70
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.70
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions4.60
Micaela Marie Seaver 35 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.83
Technology4.91
Synthesis4.85
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.74
Contribution4.88
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity4.68
Grading4.71
Reflection4.85
Respect4.90
Creativity4.84
Feedback4.68
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.96
Questions4.83
Jessica Edith Rush 13 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.85
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.70
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.45
Reflection4.65
Respect4.75
Creativity4.75
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.60
Questions4.75
Kyle Samuel Schutz 50 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
50 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.87
Synthesis4.68
Collaboration4.79
Connection4.64
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.86
Inclusivity4.11
Grading4.69
Reflection4.68
Respect4.92
Creativity4.67
Feedback4.85
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.77
Questions4.87
Aislyn Keyes 11 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.75
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.35
Grading4.65
Reflection4.75
Respect5.00
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.65
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.65
Questions4.65
Will Reed 10 reported responses 4.39Eval / 5
Overall4.39 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.70
Connection3.90
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.50
Reflection4.20
Respect4.60
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.10
Questions4.30
Kaitlyn Marie Barthell 20 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.60
Contribution3.95
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity3.40
Grading4.80
Reflection4.35
Respect4.75
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.60
Questions4.85
Anna Isabel Spiers 20 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.60
Contribution3.95
Discussion4.25
Inclusivity3.40
Grading4.35
Reflection4.35
Respect4.35
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.45
Questions4.75
Josh Seabaugh 17 reported responses 3.73Eval / 5
Overall3.73 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.19
Technology4.34
Synthesis3.25
Collaboration3.74
Connection3.77
Contribution3.02
Discussion3.10
Inclusivity3.42
Grading3.64
Reflection3.35
Respect3.75
Creativity3.24
Feedback3.61
Interaction3.67
Challenge3.35
Questions4.14
Asia Amira Kaiser 18 reported responses 4.70Eval / 5
Overall4.70 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.63
Technology4.93
Synthesis4.72
Collaboration4.96
Connection4.30
Contribution4.43
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.35
Grading4.75
Reflection4.72
Respect4.91
Creativity4.53
Feedback4.79
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.75
Questions4.93
Hailey Webb 23 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.87
Synthesis4.39
Collaboration4.79
Connection4.52
Contribution4.52
Discussion4.64
Inclusivity4.38
Grading4.72
Reflection4.53
Respect4.68
Creativity4.51
Feedback4.67
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.60
Questions4.73
Abbey Paulson 416 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
416 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.56
Collaboration4.76
Connection4.78
Contribution4.51
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.54
Reflection4.77
Respect4.78
Creativity4.56
Feedback4.36
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.71
Questions4.88
Aly Ennis 11 reported responses 4.93Eval / 5
Overall4.93 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.95
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.95
Reflection4.90
Respect4.95
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.75
Questions5.00
Sean Patrick Streich 10 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.70
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.50
Grading5.00
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.65
Questions4.60
Collin Ross Power 13 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.30
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity3.10
Grading4.65
Reflection4.40
Respect4.55
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.30
Questions4.55
Andrew Veselka 86 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
86 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.48
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration4.86
Connection4.60
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.62
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.32
Reflection4.34
Respect4.61
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.49
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.54
Questions4.67
Claire Winfrey 10 reported responses 4.54Eval / 5
Overall4.54 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.65
Connection4.25
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity3.35
Grading4.15
Reflection4.40
Respect5.00
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.65
Questions4.40
Nikki Addison 12 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.65
Reflection4.55
Respect4.90
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.65
Questions5.00
Rebecca Mchugh 51 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
51 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.50
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.60
Questions4.60
Rachel Rubin 55 reported responses 4.72Eval / 5
Overall4.72 / 5
55 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.64
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.61
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.22
Grading4.77
Reflection4.46
Respect4.93
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.78
Interaction4.87
Challenge4.75
Questions4.90
Sam Ahler 229 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
229 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.68
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.57
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.78
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.69
Inclusivity4.28
Grading4.40
Reflection4.78
Respect4.79
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.58
Questions4.71
Joey Lodge 40 reported responses 4.67Eval / 5
Overall4.67 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.83
Synthesis4.66
Collaboration4.93
Connection4.71
Contribution4.59
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.42
Grading4.78
Reflection4.57
Respect4.94
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.81
Interaction4.87
Challenge4.81
Questions4.92
Mary Childress 42 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
42 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.84
Synthesis4.86
Collaboration4.94
Connection4.78
Contribution4.81
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity4.27
Grading4.89
Reflection4.69
Respect4.90
Creativity4.84
Feedback4.88
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.88
Questions4.94
Charlie Oliver 76 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
76 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.81
Technology4.81
Synthesis4.74
Collaboration4.99
Connection4.82
Contribution4.79
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.81
Reflection4.70
Respect4.97
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.89
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.94
Questions4.96
Amir Dehbi 42 reported responses 4.89Eval / 5
Overall4.89 / 5
42 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.81
Technology4.96
Synthesis4.81
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.73
Contribution4.77
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.43
Grading4.90
Reflection4.67
Respect4.83
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.99
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.95
Questions5.00
Advyth Ramachandran 40 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.92
Connection4.17
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.69
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.49
Reflection4.40
Respect4.60
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.61
Interaction4.82
Challenge4.36
Questions4.65
Manuela Mejia 90 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5
90 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.70
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.35
Grading3.85
Reflection4.55
Respect4.55
Creativity4.30
Feedback3.85
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.25
Questions4.40
Katie Kariatsumari 60 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
60 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.80
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.40
Reflection4.70
Respect4.60
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.40
Questions4.90
Laura Rea 22 reported responses 4.74Eval / 5
Overall4.74 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.65
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity3.40
Grading4.70
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.75
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions4.85
Candice Perrotta 25 reported responses 4.93Eval / 5
Overall4.93 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.70
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.15
Grading5.00
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.95
Feedback4.95
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.95
Questions4.90
Kaylee Rosenberger 18 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.65
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.95
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.85
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.60
Questions4.95
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.