Course record HIST
HIST 1012
Empire, Revolution and Global War: European History Since 1600
University of Colorado Boulder
997 grades19 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score20/100
Below average
Michael Clifton Bunch 29 grades · 1 term 3.33GPA
29 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bunch vs. the course average
A
+33.2
B
−21.4
C
−6.4
D
−3.8
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
3.3% withdrew · 1 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.81 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.66
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration3.65
Connection4.54
Contribution4.41
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.92
Reflection4.75
Respect4.92
Creativity4.42
Feedback4.49
Interaction4.58
Challenge4.58
Questions4.92
John B Hatch 156 grades · 1 term 3.18GPA
156 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hatch vs. the course average
A
+0.7
B
+17.2
C
−10.1
D
−1.9
F
−5.9
Difference in percentage points.
5.5% withdrew · 9 of 165 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
100 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.13
Technology4.49
Synthesis3.98
Collaboration3.28
Connection4.43
Contribution4.06
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.55
Grading4.70
Reflection3.94
Respect4.82
Creativity3.99
Feedback4.26
Interaction4.49
Challenge4.43
Questions4.81
Alexander Patrick Langer 33 grades · 1 term 3.01GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Langer vs. the course average
A
+6.6
B
+3.8
C
−10.3
D
−3.8
F
+3.7
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 33 enrolled.
Overall4.72 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.90
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Martha Hanna 99 grades · 1 term 2.95GPA
99 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hanna vs. the course average
A
+6.6
B
−5.3
C
−1.2
D
+1.2
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
5.7% withdrew · 6 of 105 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.10
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.70
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
Jacob Allen Flaws 36 grades · 1 term 2.93GPA
36 letter grades
Compare with the course
Flaws vs. the course average
A
−5.3
B
+5.8
C
+6.1
D
−3.8
F
−2.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 36 enrolled.
Overall4.32 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.40
Synthesis3.80
Collaboration2.90
Connection4.20
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.00
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.70
Interaction3.90
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
David Michael Ciarlo 181 grades · 1 term 2.89GPA
181 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ciarlo vs. the course average
A
−5.4
B
+4.5
C
+6.0
D
+0.1
F
−5.1
Difference in percentage points.
9.5% withdrew · 19 of 200 enrolled.
Overall4.26 / 5
47 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.39
Technology3.88
Synthesis4.19
Collaboration2.79
Connection4.70
Contribution4.09
Discussion4.39
Inclusivity4.59
Grading4.77
Reflection4.59
Respect4.79
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.69
Interaction4.29
Challenge4.40
Questions4.88
Tiffany Heather Lynn Beebe 52 grades · 1 term 2.89GPA
52 letter grades
Compare with the course
Beebe vs. the course average
A
+8.4
B
−2.1
C
−11.4
D
same
F
+5.0
Difference in percentage points.
5.5% withdrew · 3 of 55 enrolled.
Overall4.74 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.47
Collaboration4.49
Connection4.62
Contribution4.52
Discussion4.44
Inclusivity4.83
Grading4.77
Reflection4.49
Respect4.90
Creativity4.81
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.77
Challenge4.72
Questions4.95
Erin Marija Hutchinson 116 grades · 1 term 2.66GPA
116 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hutchinson vs. the course average
A
−6.5
B
−4.1
C
+8.2
D
+3.9
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
4.1% withdrew · 5 of 121 enrolled.
Overall4.34 / 5
119 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.52
Technology4.09
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration3.99
Connection4.12
Contribution3.89
Discussion4.52
Inclusivity4.31
Grading4.29
Reflection4.43
Respect4.80
Creativity4.31
Feedback3.86
Interaction4.57
Challenge4.28
Questions4.72
Matthew Dean Gerber 258 grades · 1 term 2.58GPA
258 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gerber vs. the course average
A
−4.0
B
−6.1
C
+2.2
D
+0.8
F
+7.1
Difference in percentage points.
11.6% withdrew · 34 of 292 enrolled.
Overall3.80 / 5
149 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.91
Technology3.19
Synthesis3.59
Collaboration2.84
Connection3.79
Contribution3.10
Discussion3.49
Inclusivity4.31
Grading4.06
Reflection3.58
Respect4.35
Creativity3.87
Feedback3.38
Interaction3.74
Challenge3.85
Questions3.76
Nicole V Jobin 19 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.34GPA
19 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 19 enrolled.
Overall4.55 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.00
Connection3.80
Contribution4.20
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.70
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.30
Questions5.00
Susan Leigh Guinn-Chipman 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.71GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
14.3% withdrew · 3 of 21 enrolled.
Overall4.45 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.00
Connection4.30
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection3.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.50
Questions4.80
Sheena Marshalla Barnes 39 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
39 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.81
Technology4.14
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.48
Connection4.44
Contribution4.63
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity4.67
Grading4.55
Reflection4.85
Respect4.86
Creativity4.31
Feedback4.71
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.77
Questions4.75
Abby E Lagemann 3 reported responses 4.90Eval / 5
Overall4.90 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration4.75
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.75
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.75
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.75
Questions5.00
Susan K Kent 5 reported responses 3.79Eval / 5
Overall3.79 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.00
Synthesis3.80
Collaboration1.00
Connection4.00
Contribution3.80
Discussion3.30
Inclusivity3.60
Grading4.50
Reflection4.00
Respect4.50
Creativity3.20
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.00
Challenge3.40
Questions4.80
Trevor Egerton 10 reported responses 4.88Eval / 5
Overall4.88 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.65
Contribution4.55
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.90
Reflection4.95
Respect5.00
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.90
Mathew Greenlee 85 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
85 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.31
Technology3.73
Synthesis4.34
Collaboration3.93
Connection3.88
Contribution4.12
Discussion4.61
Inclusivity4.47
Grading4.38
Reflection4.27
Respect4.56
Creativity4.47
Feedback4.86
Interaction4.05
Challenge4.52
Questions4.40
Augusto Rocha 29 reported responses 4.63Eval / 5
Overall4.63 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.79
Technology4.67
Synthesis4.68
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.55
Contribution4.71
Discussion4.83
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.52
Reflection4.75
Respect4.90
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.59
Interaction4.87
Challenge4.79
Questions4.80
Dylan Moucka 5 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.50
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.75
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Kevin Ray Winterhalt 6 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.50
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.