Course record GRMN
GRMN 1020
Beginning German 2
University of Colorado Boulder
405 grades24 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score37/100
Below average
Johanna Katharina Willruth 68 grades · 1 term 3.73GPA
68 letter grades
Compare with the course
Willruth vs. the course average
A
+39.8
B
−21.1
C
−12.3
D
−2.5
F
−4.0
Difference in percentage points.
2.9% withdrew · 2 of 70 enrolled.
Overall4.52 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.18
Contribution4.68
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.30
Reflection4.33
Respect4.85
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.43
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.30
Questions4.65
Rohini Chandra 35 grades · 1 term 3.33GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Chandra vs. the course average
A
+5.9
B
+0.1
C
+1.9
D
−4.0
F
−4.0
Difference in percentage points.
5.4% withdrew · 2 of 37 enrolled.
Overall4.55 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.30
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.60
Creativity4.35
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.55
Questions4.65
Vera Geranpayeh 48 grades · 1 term 3.19GPA
48 letter grades
Compare with the course
Geranpayeh vs. the course average
A
+3.7
B
−4.3
C
+4.3
D
−1.9
F
−1.9
Difference in percentage points.
2.0% withdrew · 1 of 49 enrolled.
Overall4.69 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.28
Technology4.71
Synthesis4.21
Collaboration4.84
Connection4.46
Contribution4.59
Discussion4.67
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.80
Reflection4.36
Respect4.66
Creativity4.64
Feedback4.66
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.57
Questions4.82
Leilani Kay Spurlock 34 grades · 1 term 2.90GPA
34 letter grades
Compare with the course
Spurlock vs. the course average
A
−4.3
B
−1.9
C
−0.6
D
+4.9
F
+1.9
Difference in percentage points.
5.6% withdrew · 2 of 36 enrolled.
Overall4.62 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.42
Technology4.57
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration4.82
Connection4.32
Contribution4.59
Discussion4.62
Inclusivity4.23
Grading4.76
Reflection4.64
Respect4.55
Creativity4.72
Feedback4.74
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.77
Questions4.72
Stefan Daniel Bongers 41 grades · 1 term 2.82GPA
41 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bongers vs. the course average
A
−21.6
B
+10.1
C
+14.5
D
−4.0
F
+0.9
Difference in percentage points.
6.8% withdrew · 3 of 44 enrolled.
Overall4.46 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.93
Technology4.76
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration4.77
Connection4.17
Contribution4.41
Discussion4.46
Inclusivity4.44
Grading4.79
Reflection4.32
Respect4.63
Creativity4.41
Feedback4.06
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.66
Questions4.85
Iwo Hasenkamp 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.39GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 14 enrolled.
Overall4.30 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.40
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.00
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.20
Reflection4.10
Respect4.60
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.40
Questions4.70
Sean S Bray 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.35GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
10.5% withdrew · 2 of 19 enrolled.
Overall4.62 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.40
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.70
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.40
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.50
Questions5.00
Reed Edward Johnson 20 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.18GPA
20 letter grades · Limited sample
9.1% withdrew · 2 of 22 enrolled.
Mari Mccarville 23 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.16GPA
23 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 23 enrolled.
Overall4.84 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.60
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading5.00
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Ursula Berit Jany 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.04GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
11.8% withdrew · 2 of 17 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.00
Contribution4.77
Inclusivity4.77
Reflection4.23
Interaction5.00
Taylor Duncan Budde 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.96GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
13.3% withdrew · 2 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.90 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.70
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Nicholas John Miehe 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.84GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
5.9% withdrew · 1 of 17 enrolled.
Overall4.81 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.70
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Franziska Maria Schoefer 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.75GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
13.3% withdrew · 2 of 15 enrolled.
Alexander Roberto Sellers 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.60GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.78 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.85
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.65
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.65
Reflection4.65
Respect4.95
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.75
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.95
Questions4.85
Janine Marie Kennedy 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.32GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
11.8% withdrew · 2 of 17 enrolled.
Overall3.61 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.26
Technology3.22
Synthesis3.25
Collaboration3.91
Connection3.23
Contribution3.36
Discussion3.51
Inclusivity3.43
Grading3.53
Reflection3.22
Respect3.53
Creativity3.34
Feedback3.13
Interaction3.83
Challenge3.19
Questions3.57
Julius Konstantin Arnold 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.23GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
10.0% withdrew · 2 of 20 enrolled.
Overall4.60 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.50
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.90
Reflection4.40
Respect4.90
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.60
Questions5.00
Petra Sertic 4 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology3.70
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.00
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.70
Reflection4.20
Respect4.50
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.50
Challenge3.30
Questions4.30
Griffen Reese 7 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.90
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.90
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Benjamin Kirchoff 12 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.90
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.20
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.40
Reflection4.40
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.70
Questions4.80
Marie Boell 6 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.30
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Elisa Nastasia Maiete Riga 5 reported responses 4.40Eval / 5
Overall4.40 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.90
Connection3.85
Contribution4.40
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.25
Reflection4.00
Respect4.90
Creativity4.35
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.50
Questions4.40
Xan Faber 22 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.65
Connection4.30
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.05
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.85
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Hannah Horn 5 reported responses 3.91Eval / 5
Overall3.91 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.20
Technology3.60
Synthesis3.20
Collaboration4.60
Connection3.20
Contribution3.60
Discussion3.60
Inclusivity3.00
Grading4.00
Reflection3.60
Respect4.40
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.20
Challenge3.60
Questions4.60
Eva Helga Marie Freiin Von Campenhausen 8 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.65
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.55
Reflection4.55
Respect4.70
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.75
Questions4.70
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.