Course record FREN
FREN 1010
Beginning French 1
University of Colorado Boulder
714 grades32 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score39/100
Below average
Israel James Wheatley 27 grades · 1 term 3.47GPA
27 letter grades
Compare with the course
Wheatley vs. the course average
A
+14.0
B
−5.0
C
−1.7
D
−1.5
F
−5.7
Difference in percentage points.
6.9% withdrew · 2 of 29 enrolled.
Overall4.76 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.11
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.49
Collaboration4.67
Connection4.60
Contribution4.63
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.67
Grading4.71
Reflection4.79
Respect4.85
Creativity4.71
Feedback4.97
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.79
Questions4.90
Lydia Jean Hoffman 32 grades · 1 term 3.41GPA
32 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hoffman vs. the course average
A
+17.8
B
−3.3
C
−10.3
D
−1.5
F
−2.6
Difference in percentage points.
5.9% withdrew · 2 of 34 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.23
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.18
Collaboration4.84
Connection4.11
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.39
Grading4.82
Reflection4.40
Respect4.83
Creativity4.47
Feedback4.74
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.59
Questions4.87
Ayelen Costa 32 grades · 1 term 3.27GPA
32 letter grades
Compare with the course
Costa vs. the course average
A
+5.3
B
+6.0
C
−7.2
D
−1.5
F
−2.6
Difference in percentage points.
8.6% withdrew · 3 of 35 enrolled.
Overall4.92 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.92
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.99
Connection4.57
Contribution4.74
Discussion4.99
Inclusivity4.81
Grading4.96
Reflection4.86
Respect5.00
Creativity4.86
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.91
Questions5.00
Julie Colette Catel 42 grades · 1 term 3.10GPA
42 letter grades
Compare with the course
Catel vs. the course average
A
−1.1
B
+8.3
C
−7.0
D
+0.8
F
−1.0
Difference in percentage points.
2.3% withdrew · 1 of 43 enrolled.
Overall4.63 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.23
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.61
Connection4.03
Contribution4.43
Discussion4.63
Inclusivity4.24
Grading4.43
Reflection4.48
Respect4.63
Creativity4.41
Feedback4.58
Interaction4.61
Challenge4.45
Questions4.71
Miranda P Paikowski 32 grades · 1 term 3.10GPA
32 letter grades
Compare with the course
Paikowski vs. the course average
A
+5.3
B
−0.2
C
−7.2
D
+1.6
F
+0.5
Difference in percentage points.
5.9% withdrew · 2 of 34 enrolled.
Overall4.54 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence2.92
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.15
Collaboration4.31
Connection4.67
Contribution3.55
Discussion4.86
Inclusivity4.13
Grading4.84
Reflection4.83
Respect3.77
Creativity4.73
Feedback4.37
Interaction4.35
Challenge4.78
Questions4.99
Laurie Ann Rech 90 grades · 1 term 3.06GPA
90 letter grades
Compare with the course
Rech vs. the course average
A
+6.2
B
−4.6
C
−1.0
D
−0.4
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
3.2% withdrew · 3 of 93 enrolled.
Overall4.82 / 5
50 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.91
Synthesis4.79
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.73
Contribution4.87
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.89
Reflection4.90
Respect4.96
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.86
Interaction4.96
Challenge4.90
Questions4.96
Hope Dolores Hecht 53 grades · 1 term 3.04GPA
53 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hecht vs. the course average
A
+3.7
B
−4.4
C
+2.3
D
−1.5
F
−0.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.6% withdrew · 2 of 55 enrolled.
Overall4.80 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.37
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.44
Contribution4.71
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.62
Grading4.71
Reflection4.79
Respect4.96
Creativity4.77
Feedback4.91
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.81
Questions4.96
Emmaline E Moore 28 grades · 1 term 2.99GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Moore vs. the course average
A
+1.3
B
+4.7
C
−9.4
D
−1.5
F
+5.0
Difference in percentage points.
6.7% withdrew · 2 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.45 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.84
Technology4.78
Synthesis4.18
Collaboration4.93
Connection4.06
Contribution4.56
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity4.11
Grading4.38
Reflection4.38
Respect4.83
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.33
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.58
Questions4.65
Juliette J Andre 49 grades · 1 term 2.97GPA
49 letter grades
Compare with the course
Andre vs. the course average
A
+5.3
B
−4.0
C
−4.3
D
−1.5
F
+4.5
Difference in percentage points.
5.8% withdrew · 3 of 52 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.37
Technology4.74
Synthesis4.13
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.26
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.67
Reflection4.56
Respect4.76
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.57
Questions4.85
Sandrine Florence Vandermarliere 77 grades · 1 term 2.95GPA
77 letter grades
Compare with the course
Vandermarliere vs. the course average
A
−7.8
B
+4.4
C
+6.9
D
−1.5
F
−1.8
Difference in percentage points.
6.1% withdrew · 5 of 82 enrolled.
Overall4.69 / 5
115 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.59
Collaboration4.89
Connection4.44
Contribution4.75
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.57
Grading4.73
Reflection4.64
Respect4.97
Creativity4.57
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.97
Challenge4.84
Questions4.71
Anthony Cailleteau 28 grades · 1 term 2.87GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cailleteau vs. the course average
A
+8.4
B
−9.6
C
−13.0
D
+12.7
F
+1.4
Difference in percentage points.
9.7% withdrew · 3 of 31 enrolled.
Overall4.72 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.43
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.58
Connection4.53
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.42
Reflection4.95
Respect4.98
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.95
Questions4.95
Idriss Djiofack Teledjieu 26 grades · 1 term 2.81GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Teledjieu vs. the course average
A
−22.4
B
+15.4
C
+10.4
D
−1.5
F
−1.9
Difference in percentage points.
10.3% withdrew · 3 of 29 enrolled.
Overall3.80 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence1.92
Technology3.73
Synthesis2.51
Collaboration4.23
Connection2.65
Contribution3.62
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity2.37
Grading3.28
Reflection3.28
Respect3.80
Creativity3.28
Feedback3.03
Interaction4.16
Challenge3.42
Questions3.46
Anthony Djessy Dathy 28 grades · 1 term 2.60GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Dathy vs. the course average
A
−23.7
B
+8.3
C
+12.0
D
+5.6
F
−2.2
Difference in percentage points.
9.7% withdrew · 3 of 31 enrolled.
Overall4.56 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.11
Technology4.78
Synthesis4.42
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.43
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.78
Inclusivity4.08
Grading4.84
Reflection4.69
Respect4.84
Creativity4.42
Feedback4.71
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.78
Questions4.88
Niloofar Sarhadi 31 grades · 1 term 2.38GPA
31 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sarhadi vs. the course average
A
−12.6
B
−8.8
C
+9.3
D
−1.5
F
+13.6
Difference in percentage points.
3.1% withdrew · 1 of 32 enrolled.
Overall4.48 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.30
Technology4.71
Synthesis4.08
Collaboration4.43
Connection4.49
Contribution3.97
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity3.99
Grading4.54
Reflection4.81
Respect4.88
Creativity4.57
Feedback4.78
Interaction4.54
Challenge4.70
Questions4.88
Arianne Nicole Margolin 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.30GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
6.3% withdrew · 1 of 16 enrolled.
Marketa Raevsky 12 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.30GPA
12 letter grades · Limited sample
7.7% withdrew · 1 of 13 enrolled.
Sara Fischer 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.25GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.76 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.60
Reflection5.00
Respect4.80
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.40
Questions5.00
Danica Petrovska 24 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.14GPA
24 letter grades · Limited sample
14.3% withdrew · 4 of 28 enrolled.
Overall4.56 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.18
Technology4.73
Synthesis4.48
Collaboration4.82
Connection4.22
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.91
Inclusivity4.32
Grading4.68
Reflection4.50
Respect4.73
Creativity4.68
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.68
Challenge4.50
Questions4.71
Benjamin Mauduit 19 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.12GPA
19 letter grades · Limited sample
9.5% withdrew · 2 of 21 enrolled.
Leah Kiraly Sigle Holz 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.88GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 13 enrolled.
Overall4.81 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.60
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading5.00
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.40
Questions5.00
Ashton Noel Nicewonger 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.78GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
5.3% withdrew · 1 of 19 enrolled.
Alysha Janee Allsman 23 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.39GPA
23 letter grades · Limited sample
8.0% withdrew · 2 of 25 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis3.30
Collaboration4.60
Connection3.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity3.60
Grading4.50
Reflection3.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.60
Questions4.50
Leah K Powers 4 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.80
Contribution4.50
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge5.00
Questions4.80
Lea Caulet 25 reported responses 4.53Eval / 5
Overall4.53 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.68
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.79
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.77
Contribution4.63
Discussion3.94
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.02
Reflection4.92
Respect4.87
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.05
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.75
Questions4.93
Ernest Baloka Ngong 20 reported responses 4.19Eval / 5
Overall4.19 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.46
Technology4.37
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration4.62
Connection4.69
Contribution4.66
Discussion3.68
Inclusivity4.62
Grading3.38
Reflection4.81
Respect4.05
Creativity4.85
Feedback3.62
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.28
Questions4.89
Suzan Van Den Broek 9 reported responses 4.69Eval / 5
Overall4.69 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.60
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.80
Colleen P Dunne 10 reported responses 4.10Eval / 5
Overall4.10 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.40
Synthesis3.70
Collaboration4.40
Connection3.50
Contribution4.10
Discussion3.90
Inclusivity3.60
Grading4.20
Reflection4.10
Respect4.10
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.50
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.50
Questions4.10
Stella Belony 4 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.50
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge5.00
Questions4.20
Lulu Heffernan 21 reported responses 4.86Eval / 5
Overall4.86 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.22
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.61
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.51
Contribution4.86
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.42
Grading4.90
Reflection4.88
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.98
Questions5.00
Natalie Plaia 17 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.49
Technology4.63
Synthesis4.42
Collaboration4.82
Connection4.32
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.65
Grading4.70
Reflection4.68
Respect4.90
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.82
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.75
Questions4.92
Sophie Rose 8 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.60
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.60
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.90
Questions5.00
Malick Lo 22 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.06
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.22
Collaboration4.78
Connection4.39
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.55
Grading3.90
Reflection4.50
Respect4.75
Creativity4.45
Feedback4.78
Interaction4.82
Challenge4.59
Questions4.62
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.