Course record ENGL
ENGL 1600
Introduction to American Literature
University of Colorado Boulder
346 grades16 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score45/100
Mixed record
Raza Ali Hasan 129 grades · 1 term 3.69GPA
129 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hasan vs. the course average
A
+7.9
B
+4.3
C
−6.1
D
−1.7
F
−4.4
Difference in percentage points.
1.5% withdrew · 2 of 131 enrolled.
Overall4.34 / 5
47 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.58
Synthesis4.78
Collaboration3.82
Connection4.56
Contribution4.76
Discussion4.49
Inclusivity4.57
Grading4.76
Reflection4.73
Respect4.84
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.74
Challenge4.75
Questions4.79
Judith L. Strathearn 26 grades · 1 term 3.68GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Strathearn vs. the course average
A
+11.2
B
−5.9
C
+1.6
D
−1.7
F
−5.2
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 1 of 27 enrolled.
Michael Steven Somes 25 grades · 1 term 3.64GPA
25 letter grades
Compare with the course
Somes vs. the course average
A
+14.2
B
−1.1
C
−6.1
D
−1.7
F
−5.2
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 25 enrolled.
Overall4.67 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.40
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.70
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Justin Michael Saxby 25 grades · 1 term 3.51GPA
25 letter grades
Compare with the course
Saxby vs. the course average
A
+10.2
B
−9.1
C
+1.9
D
−1.7
F
−1.2
Difference in percentage points.
7.4% withdrew · 2 of 27 enrolled.
Overall4.13 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology2.70
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.40
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.70
Grading3.20
Reflection4.60
Respect4.60
Creativity4.20
Feedback3.20
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.40
Questions3.80
Mairead Corrine Case 26 grades · 1 term 3.12GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Case vs. the course average
A
+3.5
B
−13.6
C
+1.6
D
−1.7
F
+10.2
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 1 of 27 enrolled.
Overall4.94 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.70
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.80
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.80
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Martin Bickman 32 grades · 1 term 3.06GPA
32 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bickman vs. the course average
A
−5.6
B
−6.4
C
+6.4
D
−1.7
F
+7.3
Difference in percentage points.
8.6% withdrew · 3 of 35 enrolled.
Overall4.39 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology3.30
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.60
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.00
Reflection4.90
Respect4.30
Creativity4.60
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.30
Questions4.80
John R Pugh 26 grades · 1 term 2.75GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Pugh vs. the course average
A
−27.2
B
+13.3
C
+5.5
D
+2.1
F
+6.3
Difference in percentage points.
7.1% withdrew · 2 of 28 enrolled.
Overall4.74 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.40
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.50
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
Melodie A Roschman 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.08GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 18 enrolled.
Andrew Luis Escanuela 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.72GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
6.3% withdrew · 1 of 16 enrolled.
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
Jennifer C Cookson 24 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.54GPA
24 letter grades · Limited sample
11.1% withdrew · 3 of 27 enrolled.
Overall3.87 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology3.80
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.20
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.50
Grading3.70
Reflection4.30
Respect4.20
Creativity3.70
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.00
Challenge3.80
Questions3.70
Judith Lynn Costello 8 reported responses 4.86Eval / 5
Overall4.86 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.80
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Marie Jaquelin Pelzer 4 reported responses 4.13Eval / 5
Overall4.13 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.77
Collaboration2.54
Connection4.54
Contribution4.77
Discussion3.77
Inclusivity4.54
Grading4.77
Reflection4.77
Respect4.77
Creativity4.77
Feedback4.31
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.54
Questions4.77
Jaquelin Pelzer 11 reported responses 4.01Eval / 5
Overall4.01 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.20
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.80
Grading3.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.60
Creativity4.00
Feedback2.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.50
Questions4.00
Nir Evron 11 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology3.70
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.50
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.10
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.70
Challenge5.00
Questions4.50
Jason Brandt Schaefer 17 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.00
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.10
Reflection4.20
Respect4.70
Creativity3.90
Feedback3.80
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.00
Questions4.40
Lukas Jedediah Devries 4 reported responses 4.31Eval / 5
Overall4.31 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration2.20
Connection4.50
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.50
Feedback3.20
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.50
Questions5.00
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.