Course record ENGL
ENGL 2112
Introduction to Literary Theory
University of Colorado Boulder
490 grades16 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score52/100
Mixed record
Benjamin John Robertson 29 grades · 1 term 3.92GPA
29 letter grades
Compare with the course
Robertson vs. the course average
A
+26.3
B
−22.4
C
+0.6
D
−1.2
F
−3.3
Difference in percentage points.
3.3% withdrew · 1 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.23 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.72
Technology3.37
Synthesis4.07
Collaboration3.77
Connection4.68
Contribution4.34
Discussion4.36
Inclusivity5.00
Grading2.49
Reflection4.08
Respect4.98
Creativity3.77
Feedback3.12
Interaction4.36
Challenge3.79
Questions4.32
Justin Michael Saxby 35 grades · 1 term 3.80GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Saxby vs. the course average
A
+15.5
B
−8.2
C
−2.9
D
−1.2
F
−3.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 35 enrolled.
Overall4.59 / 5
44 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology3.89
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.97
Contribution4.87
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.00
Reflection4.87
Respect5.00
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.29
Interaction4.77
Challenge4.93
Questions4.77
Paul G Neimann 98 grades · 1 term 3.65GPA
98 letter grades
Compare with the course
Neimann vs. the course average
A
+6.3
B
−2.0
C
−2.9
D
−1.2
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
3.9% withdrew · 4 of 102 enrolled.
Overall4.26 / 5
64 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.46
Technology4.15
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration2.55
Connection4.24
Contribution4.23
Discussion2.94
Inclusivity4.08
Grading3.85
Reflection4.28
Respect4.05
Creativity4.28
Feedback3.46
Interaction2.91
Challenge4.07
Questions4.08
Kelly Krumrie 34 grades · 1 term 3.57GPA
34 letter grades
Compare with the course
Krumrie vs. the course average
A
+6.3
B
−4.8
C
−2.9
D
−1.2
F
+2.6
Difference in percentage points.
8.1% withdrew · 3 of 37 enrolled.
Overall4.71 / 5
37 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.88
Technology4.63
Synthesis4.81
Collaboration4.64
Connection4.78
Contribution4.92
Discussion4.97
Inclusivity4.97
Grading4.64
Reflection4.98
Respect4.98
Creativity4.76
Feedback4.83
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.92
Questions4.92
Jeremy F Green 53 grades · 1 term 3.46GPA
53 letter grades
Compare with the course
Green vs. the course average
A
−6.1
B
+5.9
C
+0.9
D
+0.7
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
5.4% withdrew · 3 of 56 enrolled.
Overall4.51 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.65
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.25
Reflection4.50
Respect4.75
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.75
Questions4.55
Jason Daniel Gladstone 112 grades · 1 term 3.28GPA
112 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gladstone vs. the course average
A
−21.1
B
+17.7
C
+3.4
D
+0.6
F
−0.6
Difference in percentage points.
3.4% withdrew · 4 of 116 enrolled.
Overall4.61 / 5
56 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.79
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.22
Collaboration3.04
Connection4.60
Contribution4.98
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.79
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.01
Feedback3.82
Interaction4.22
Challenge4.60
Questions5.00
Karim Mattar 40 grades · 1 term 3.16GPA
40 letter grades
Compare with the course
Mattar vs. the course average
A
−2.7
B
−12.4
C
+4.6
D
+3.8
F
+6.7
Difference in percentage points.
4.8% withdrew · 2 of 42 enrolled.
Overall4.64 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.23
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration3.67
Connection5.00
Contribution4.43
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.37
Reflection4.62
Respect5.00
Creativity4.31
Feedback4.52
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.89
Questions4.91
Mark Winokur 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 4.00GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
5.6% withdrew · 1 of 18 enrolled.
Lori Ann Emerson 21 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.83GPA
21 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 21 enrolled.
Overall4.93 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.90
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.90
Reflection5.00
Respect4.90
Creativity4.60
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge5.00
Questions4.90
Maxwell C Cassity 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.50GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.69 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.30
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.80
Karen S Jacobs 20 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.33GPA
20 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 20 enrolled.
Overall4.09 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology3.40
Synthesis4.05
Collaboration3.20
Connection4.40
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.15
Inclusivity4.65
Grading4.20
Reflection4.20
Respect4.75
Creativity2.80
Feedback3.40
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.25
Questions4.35
Catherine Labio 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.28GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 16 enrolled.
Overall4.56 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.31
Collaboration4.31
Connection4.50
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.00
Reflection4.70
Respect4.50
Creativity4.21
Feedback4.01
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.31
Questions4.50
Amanda L Hurtado 8 reported responses 4.35Eval / 5
Overall4.35 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.30
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.05
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.15
Reflection4.15
Respect4.70
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.75
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.70
Questions3.90
Cooper Casale 1 reported responses 4.94Eval / 5
Overall4.94 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Connection4.00
Contribution5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.00
Lilly Rothman 11 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.60
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.50
Questions4.60
Marissa Elizabeth Grunes 20 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology3.25
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.65
Connection4.00
Contribution4.85
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.75
Reflection4.90
Respect4.85
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.95
Questions4.90
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.