Course record ENGL
ENGL 1270
Introduction to American Literature by Women
University of Colorado Boulder
668 grades26 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score55/100
Mixed record
Melodie A Roschman 53 grades · 1 term 3.78GPA
53 letter grades
Compare with the course
Roschman vs. the course average
A
+20.1
B
−11.5
C
−6.7
D
+1.0
F
−2.8
Difference in percentage points.
5.4% withdrew · 3 of 56 enrolled.
Overall4.83 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.15
Connection4.65
Contribution4.75
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.95
Reflection5.00
Respect4.90
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.90
Questions4.95
Mairead Corrine Case 26 grades · 1 term 3.72GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Case vs. the course average
A
+8.4
B
+2.1
C
−6.7
D
−0.9
F
−2.8
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 26 enrolled.
Overall4.34 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology3.40
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.50
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.10
Reflection4.50
Respect4.70
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.20
Questions4.50
Alyssa Renee Miller 51 grades · 1 term 3.60GPA
51 letter grades
Compare with the course
Miller vs. the course average
A
−3.9
B
+10.4
C
−2.8
D
−0.9
F
−2.8
Difference in percentage points.
5.6% withdrew · 3 of 54 enrolled.
Overall4.68 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.55
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.50
Reflection4.75
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.60
Questions4.85
Lukas Jedediah Devries 78 grades · 1 term 3.58GPA
78 letter grades
Compare with the course
Devries vs. the course average
A
+8.4
B
−5.6
C
−2.9
D
−0.9
F
+1.0
Difference in percentage points.
2.5% withdrew · 2 of 80 enrolled.
Overall4.61 / 5
32 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration3.59
Connection4.44
Contribution4.93
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.94
Grading4.61
Reflection4.60
Respect4.94
Creativity4.64
Feedback4.12
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.81
Questions4.70
Jenna Michaele Gersie 27 grades · 1 term 3.57GPA
27 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gersie vs. the course average
A
+9.2
B
−2.4
C
−6.7
D
−0.9
F
+0.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 27 enrolled.
Mary K Klages 103 grades · 1 term 3.56GPA
103 letter grades
Compare with the course
Klages vs. the course average
A
+4.3
B
−1.5
C
−1.9
D
−0.9
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.9% withdrew · 2 of 105 enrolled.
Overall4.62 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.21
Technology4.12
Synthesis4.72
Collaboration4.63
Connection3.54
Contribution4.72
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.74
Grading4.12
Reflection4.64
Respect4.72
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.63
Questions4.69
Leah M White 25 grades · 1 term 3.52GPA
25 letter grades
Compare with the course
White vs. the course average
A
+7.4
B
−9.0
C
+1.3
D
−0.9
F
+1.2
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 1 of 26 enrolled.
Overall3.70 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology3.30
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.00
Connection3.90
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.00
Reflection4.00
Respect4.10
Creativity3.70
Feedback3.40
Interaction3.40
Challenge3.40
Questions4.30
John R Pugh 100 grades · 1 term 3.45GPA
100 letter grades
Compare with the course
Pugh vs. the course average
A
−2.6
B
+5.0
C
−1.7
D
+0.1
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
4.8% withdrew · 5 of 105 enrolled.
Overall4.53 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.47
Collaboration4.37
Connection4.29
Contribution4.47
Discussion4.66
Inclusivity4.48
Grading4.65
Reflection4.78
Respect4.57
Creativity3.83
Feedback3.95
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.81
Questions3.87
Sarah Dawn Ramsey 54 grades · 1 term 3.35GPA
54 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ramsey vs. the course average
A
−7.5
B
−2.4
C
+11.8
D
−0.9
F
−1.0
Difference in percentage points.
5.3% withdrew · 3 of 57 enrolled.
Overall4.78 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.85
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions4.85
Cheryl A Higashida 67 grades · 1 term 3.33GPA
67 letter grades
Compare with the course
Higashida vs. the course average
A
−10.4
B
+5.9
C
+3.7
D
+0.6
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
6.9% withdrew · 5 of 72 enrolled.
Overall4.75 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.42
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.51
Collaboration4.62
Connection4.41
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.88
Grading4.61
Reflection4.53
Respect4.99
Creativity4.61
Feedback4.79
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.87
Questions4.89
Jessica Lynn Lawson 28 grades · 1 term 3.14GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lawson vs. the course average
A
−7.8
B
−6.7
C
+11.1
D
−0.9
F
+4.3
Difference in percentage points.
3.4% withdrew · 1 of 29 enrolled.
Overall4.79 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.40
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect5.00
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Devon Lamonte Keyes 56 grades · 1 term 3.11GPA
56 letter grades
Compare with the course
Keyes vs. the course average
A
−18.6
B
+5.8
C
+4.0
D
+4.5
F
+4.3
Difference in percentage points.
3.4% withdrew · 2 of 58 enrolled.
Overall4.79 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.45
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.90
Reflection4.80
Respect4.85
Creativity4.95
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.95
Stephanie Lynne Couey 17 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.72
Technology4.89
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.41
Connection4.87
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.67
Grading4.59
Reflection4.80
Respect4.93
Creativity4.72
Feedback4.76
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.89
Questions4.85
Jack Pugh 2 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 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
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Amanda L Hurtado 5 reported responses 3.59Eval / 5
Overall3.59 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.30
Technology3.30
Synthesis3.39
Collaboration3.30
Connection3.00
Contribution3.30
Discussion3.23
Inclusivity4.32
Grading3.30
Reflection3.23
Respect4.45
Creativity3.85
Feedback2.16
Interaction3.23
Challenge4.38
Questions3.30
Brittany Whelan 18 reported responses 4.70Eval / 5
Overall4.70 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.50
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
Brooks Mitchell 4 reported responses 4.92Eval / 5
Overall4.92 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.80
Connection5.00
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Lilly Rothman 12 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.60
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.70
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.60
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.70
Questions5.00
Michael Schrimper 19 reported responses 4.53Eval / 5
Overall4.53 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.92
Synthesis4.77
Collaboration4.34
Connection4.36
Contribution4.77
Discussion4.26
Inclusivity4.91
Grading4.26
Reflection4.75
Respect4.89
Creativity4.72
Feedback4.36
Interaction4.52
Challenge4.77
Questions4.59
Jaquelin Pelzer 8 reported responses 3.81Eval / 5
Overall3.81 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.20
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.60
Grading3.50
Reflection4.10
Respect4.60
Creativity3.50
Feedback2.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge3.50
Questions3.10
Bk Clapham 7 reported responses 4.06Eval / 5
Overall4.06 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology3.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.70
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity5.00
Grading2.90
Reflection4.90
Respect4.70
Creativity4.00
Feedback2.70
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.40
Questions3.30
Kaige Sellers 31 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology3.90
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.35
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.90
Grading3.90
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.35
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.45
Questions4.00
Jenny Cookson 6 reported responses 3.58Eval / 5
Overall3.58 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology3.30
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.20
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.20
Grading2.50
Reflection4.20
Respect4.00
Creativity3.20
Feedback3.00
Interaction3.80
Challenge4.00
Questions4.00
Tucker Conine 17 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.40
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
Charlotte Dickinson 17 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.40
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.60
Questions4.70
Rachel Franklin Wood 6 reported responses 4.47Eval / 5
Overall4.47 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.00
Connection3.50
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.00
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.30
Challenge5.00
Questions4.60
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.