Course record FNCE
FNCE 3030
Investment and Portfolio Management
University of Colorado Boulder
2,355 grades20 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score29/100
Below average
Katherine Michele Biegelsen 119 grades · 1 term 3.49GPA
119 letter grades
Compare with the course
Biegelsen vs. the course average
A
+31.6
B
−20.7
C
−11.6
D
−0.4
F
+1.2
Difference in percentage points.
4.0% withdrew · 5 of 124 enrolled.
Jason Meshnick 41 grades · 1 term 3.35GPA
41 letter grades
Compare with the course
Meshnick vs. the course average
A
+12.4
B
+0.4
C
−12.6
D
−1.3
F
+1.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 41 enrolled.
Guanqun Zhou 140 grades · 1 term 3.31GPA
140 letter grades
Compare with the course
Zhou vs. the course average
A
+10.4
B
+1.2
C
−9.6
D
−0.6
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
3.4% withdrew · 5 of 145 enrolled.
Overall4.61 / 5
76 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.73
Synthesis4.48
Collaboration4.38
Connection4.70
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.58
Reflection4.63
Respect4.85
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.58
Interaction4.63
Challenge4.63
Questions4.85
Diane Amy Hirschhorn 87 grades · 1 term 3.18GPA
87 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hirschhorn vs. the course average
A
−8.6
B
+20.7
C
−9.4
D
−1.3
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
1.1% withdrew · 1 of 88 enrolled.
Overall4.36 / 5
56 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.15
Technology4.15
Synthesis4.15
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.70
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.00
Reflection4.20
Respect4.85
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.25
Questions4.40
Brian Todd Waters 965 grades · 1 term 3.09GPA
965 letter grades
Compare with the course
Waters vs. the course average
A
−0.2
B
+0.2
C
+2.1
D
−1.3
F
−0.7
Difference in percentage points.
0.9% withdrew · 9 of 974 enrolled.
Overall4.58 / 5
659 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.73
Synthesis4.47
Collaboration4.62
Connection4.73
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.68
Reflection4.70
Respect4.74
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.65
Questions4.81
Simona Abis 136 grades · 1 term 3.05GPA
136 letter grades
Compare with the course
Abis vs. the course average
A
−8.9
B
+13.6
C
−2.8
D
−0.5
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
0.7% withdrew · 1 of 137 enrolled.
Overall4.18 / 5
372 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.54
Synthesis4.13
Collaboration3.40
Connection4.41
Contribution3.81
Discussion4.41
Inclusivity3.80
Grading4.37
Reflection4.32
Respect4.55
Creativity4.19
Feedback3.69
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.35
Questions4.57
Ellen Burnes 87 grades · 1 term 3.01GPA
87 letter grades
Compare with the course
Burnes vs. the course average
A
+1.7
B
−5.7
C
+0.9
D
+3.3
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
4.4% withdrew · 4 of 91 enrolled.
Overall4.07 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology3.50
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.72
Connection4.29
Contribution4.72
Discussion4.63
Inclusivity4.22
Grading3.50
Reflection4.26
Respect4.55
Creativity4.37
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.03
Questions4.19
Jeffrey C Merrell 78 grades · 1 term 3.00GPA
78 letter grades
Compare with the course
Merrell vs. the course average
A
−4.4
B
+5.3
C
−3.4
D
+1.3
F
+1.2
Difference in percentage points.
1.3% withdrew · 1 of 79 enrolled.
Overall4.47 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.70
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.80
Reflection4.50
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.70
Harry Mohr Starn 134 grades · 1 term 2.95GPA
134 letter grades
Compare with the course
Starn vs. the course average
A
−1.8
B
−11.6
C
+12.4
D
+2.5
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
2.9% withdrew · 4 of 138 enrolled.
David Michael Gross 148 grades · 1 term 2.95GPA
148 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gross vs. the course average
A
−6.9
B
+9.5
C
−4.7
D
+0.1
F
+2.0
Difference in percentage points.
4.5% withdrew · 7 of 155 enrolled.
Overall3.81 / 5
50 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.96
Technology4.22
Synthesis3.88
Collaboration3.06
Connection4.50
Contribution3.10
Discussion3.72
Inclusivity3.54
Grading4.00
Reflection3.98
Respect4.14
Creativity3.94
Feedback3.34
Interaction3.60
Challenge4.12
Questions4.12
David L Ikenberry 420 grades · 1 term 2.91GPA
420 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ikenberry vs. the course average
A
−4.9
B
−3.1
C
+3.9
D
+2.1
F
+2.0
Difference in percentage points.
2.6% withdrew · 11 of 431 enrolled.
Overall3.34 / 5
185 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.53
Technology3.21
Synthesis3.51
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.05
Contribution3.56
Discussion3.75
Inclusivity3.24
Grading3.29
Reflection3.67
Respect3.94
Creativity3.33
Feedback2.96
Interaction4.23
Challenge3.70
Questions3.75
Ran Shi 2 reported responses 3.21Eval / 5
Overall3.21 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.50
Synthesis3.50
Collaboration2.00
Connection3.00
Contribution3.50
Inclusivity3.00
Reflection3.50
Interaction3.50
Alexander Lien 11 reported responses 4.70Eval / 5
Overall4.70 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.80
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.70
Reflection4.60
Respect4.80
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.90
Questions4.60
Harry Mohr Starn Jr 81 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
81 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.61
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.33
Connection4.76
Contribution4.74
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.28
Grading4.57
Reflection4.67
Respect4.67
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.54
Interaction4.74
Challenge4.76
Questions4.78
Sasha Lien 6 reported responses 4.97Eval / 5
Overall4.97 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.80
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection4.90
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Ryan C Lewis 1 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.00
Reflection5.00
Interaction5.00
Emmanuella Takyiwah Obeng 31 reported responses 4.38Eval / 5
Overall4.38 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.86
Synthesis4.49
Collaboration4.74
Connection4.54
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.33
Reflection4.52
Respect4.84
Creativity4.82
Feedback4.47
Interaction4.86
Challenge4.65
Questions4.76
Iulian Obreja 72 reported responses 4.35Eval / 5
Overall4.35 / 5
72 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.09
Technology4.58
Synthesis4.08
Collaboration3.49
Connection4.59
Contribution3.95
Discussion4.37
Inclusivity4.06
Grading4.41
Reflection4.28
Respect4.62
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.31
Challenge4.55
Questions4.58
Maria Veihl 15 reported responses 3.72Eval / 5
Overall3.72 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.75
Technology4.10
Synthesis3.55
Collaboration2.25
Connection4.45
Contribution2.70
Discussion3.95
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.05
Reflection3.80
Respect4.75
Creativity3.85
Feedback3.60
Interaction3.15
Challenge3.65
Questions4.50
Ali Jafarzadeh 11 reported responses 4.18Eval / 5
Overall4.18 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration2.40
Connection4.50
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.50
Reflection4.50
Respect4.60
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.80
Interaction3.50
Challenge4.70
Questions4.50
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.