Course record HIST
HIST 1025
American History since 1865
University of Colorado Boulder
1,540 grades36 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score26/100
Below average
Vanessa De Los Reyes 37 grades · 1 term 3.56GPA
37 letter grades
Compare with the course
Reyes vs. the course average
A
+34.9
B
−13.6
C
−13.7
D
−4.0
F
−3.5
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 37 enrolled.
Overall4.73 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.70
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.90
Questions4.80
Douglas J Snyder 68 grades · 1 term 3.53GPA
68 letter grades
Compare with the course
Snyder vs. the course average
A
+33.5
B
−11.2
C
−12.0
D
−4.0
F
−6.2
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 68 enrolled.
Overall4.68 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.81
Technology4.86
Synthesis4.83
Collaboration4.41
Connection4.87
Contribution4.69
Discussion4.96
Inclusivity4.86
Grading4.84
Reflection4.77
Respect4.98
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.67
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.84
Questions4.95
Martin Charles Babicz 78 grades · 1 term 3.40GPA
78 letter grades
Compare with the course
Babicz vs. the course average
A
+17.3
B
+1.7
C
−8.7
D
−4.0
F
−6.2
Difference in percentage points.
2.5% withdrew · 2 of 80 enrolled.
Overall3.98 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.96
Technology3.45
Synthesis3.74
Collaboration3.24
Connection4.33
Contribution3.76
Discussion4.07
Inclusivity4.68
Grading4.05
Reflection3.86
Respect4.66
Creativity3.75
Feedback3.60
Interaction3.60
Challenge3.68
Questions4.33
Kerri Beth Clement 26 grades · 1 term 3.19GPA
26 letter grades
Compare with the course
Clement vs. the course average
A
+21.2
B
−9.9
C
−4.9
D
−4.0
F
−2.4
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 1 of 27 enrolled.
Sierra Autumn Standish 76 grades · 1 term 3.15GPA
76 letter grades
Compare with the course
Standish vs. the course average
A
+5.5
B
+5.4
C
−3.3
D
−4.0
F
−3.6
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 3 of 79 enrolled.
Overall4.26 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.04
Technology3.81
Synthesis4.06
Collaboration4.04
Connection3.76
Contribution4.14
Discussion4.13
Inclusivity4.52
Grading3.60
Reflection4.07
Respect4.62
Creativity3.88
Feedback3.76
Interaction4.38
Challenge3.99
Questions4.24
Natalie Mendoza Gutierrez 84 grades · 1 term 3.15GPA
84 letter grades
Compare with the course
Gutierrez vs. the course average
A
+16.1
B
−9.7
C
−2.1
D
−1.6
F
−2.7
Difference in percentage points.
6.7% withdrew · 6 of 90 enrolled.
Overall4.43 / 5
61 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.41
Synthesis4.29
Collaboration3.44
Connection4.10
Contribution3.93
Discussion4.02
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.51
Respect4.90
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.11
Interaction4.22
Challenge4.69
Questions4.61
Micaela Tasha Cruce 29 grades · 1 term 3.02GPA
29 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cruce vs. the course average
A
+5.3
B
+0.7
C
−6.1
D
+2.9
F
−2.8
Difference in percentage points.
3.3% withdrew · 1 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.50 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.32
Synthesis4.29
Collaboration3.72
Connection4.21
Contribution4.69
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.50
Reflection4.61
Respect4.53
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.49
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.30
Questions4.33
Ashleigh Lawrence 33 grades · 1 term 2.92GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lawrence vs. the course average
A
+0.7
B
−7.3
C
+10.8
D
−1.0
F
−3.2
Difference in percentage points.
2.9% withdrew · 1 of 34 enrolled.
Alexander Patrick Langer 77 grades · 1 term 2.86GPA
77 letter grades
Compare with the course
Langer vs. the course average
A
−11.9
B
+21.7
C
−7.3
D
−2.7
F
+0.3
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 3 of 80 enrolled.
Overall4.41 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.37
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.91
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.69
Grading4.31
Reflection4.45
Respect4.77
Creativity4.74
Feedback4.42
Interaction4.69
Challenge4.15
Questions4.83
Catherine Anne Costley 29 grades · 1 term 2.86GPA
29 letter grades
Compare with the course
Costley vs. the course average
A
+5.3
B
−9.6
C
+0.8
D
+2.9
F
+0.7
Difference in percentage points.
3.3% withdrew · 1 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.81 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.72
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.64
Collaboration4.51
Connection4.53
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.92
Inclusivity4.92
Grading4.86
Reflection4.88
Respect4.80
Creativity4.67
Feedback4.86
Interaction4.68
Challenge4.83
Questions4.91
Thomas G Andrews 154 grades · 1 term 2.83GPA
154 letter grades
Compare with the course
Andrews vs. the course average
A
+10.2
B
−9.5
C
−9.3
D
+2.5
F
+6.1
Difference in percentage points.
7.2% withdrew · 12 of 166 enrolled.
Overall4.14 / 5
96 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.36
Technology4.26
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration3.11
Connection4.20
Contribution3.23
Discussion3.47
Inclusivity4.66
Grading3.96
Reflection4.17
Respect4.68
Creativity4.46
Feedback3.54
Interaction4.11
Challenge4.31
Questions4.23
Phoebe S. Kropp 545 grades · 1 term 2.72GPA
545 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kropp vs. the course average
A
−6.4
B
+0.3
C
+4.3
D
+0.6
F
+1.3
Difference in percentage points.
4.0% withdrew · 23 of 568 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
81 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.30
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.50
Reflection4.50
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.40
Questions4.50
Kimberly Jackson 54 grades · 1 term 2.71GPA
54 letter grades
Compare with the course
Jackson vs. the course average
A
+0.7
B
−3.6
C
−3.5
D
+1.5
F
+4.9
Difference in percentage points.
3.6% withdrew · 2 of 56 enrolled.
Overall4.29 / 5
127 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.48
Technology4.13
Synthesis4.42
Collaboration4.43
Connection3.98
Contribution4.28
Discussion4.31
Inclusivity4.41
Grading4.45
Reflection4.36
Respect4.37
Creativity4.16
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.17
Questions4.69
Paul Shriver Sutter 233 grades · 1 term 2.55GPA
233 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sutter vs. the course average
A
−19.4
B
+8.3
C
+9.3
D
+2.4
F
−0.7
Difference in percentage points.
4.5% withdrew · 11 of 244 enrolled.
Overall3.94 / 5
129 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology3.55
Synthesis4.02
Collaboration2.85
Connection4.25
Contribution3.63
Discussion3.88
Inclusivity4.55
Grading3.91
Reflection4.25
Respect4.65
Creativity4.18
Feedback3.45
Interaction4.08
Challenge4.28
Questions4.28
Andrew Oldroyd Pace 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.78GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
5.6% withdrew · 1 of 18 enrolled.
Overall4.45 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration3.50
Connection5.00
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.30
Questions4.70
Amy Renee Haines 38 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.36
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.59
Connection4.58
Contribution4.54
Discussion4.74
Inclusivity4.81
Grading4.53
Reflection4.85
Respect4.94
Creativity4.69
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.92
Questions4.80
James Edward Fell Jr 30 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.79
Collaboration4.88
Connection4.77
Contribution4.79
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.94
Grading4.74
Reflection4.82
Respect4.91
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.89
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.78
Questions4.78
Douglas Richard Sheflin 16 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.85
Technology4.97
Synthesis4.79
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.51
Contribution4.98
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.98
Grading4.74
Reflection4.85
Respect4.98
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.74
Interaction4.91
Challenge4.85
Questions4.95
Phoebe S K Young 249 reported responses 4.39Eval / 5
Overall4.39 / 5
249 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.71
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.38
Connection4.62
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.79
Inclusivity4.67
Grading4.44
Reflection4.70
Respect4.72
Creativity4.49
Feedback4.31
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.64
Questions4.70
Viola Ann Burlew 45 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5
45 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.15
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.25
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.25
Reflection4.35
Respect4.60
Creativity3.95
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.20
Questions4.45
Gregory Benedict Ledonne 43 reported responses 4.31Eval / 5
Overall4.31 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.05
Connection3.95
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.35
Grading4.25
Reflection4.25
Respect4.80
Creativity3.85
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.25
Questions4.65
Ashleigh Lawrence-Sanders 16 reported responses 4.24Eval / 5
Overall4.24 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.30
Contribution3.70
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.50
Reflection4.50
Respect4.20
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.50
Questions4.20
Maggie Leigh Mcnulty 46 reported responses 4.64Eval / 5
Overall4.64 / 5
46 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.79
Technology4.52
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.38
Connection4.52
Contribution4.76
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.24
Reflection4.65
Respect4.77
Creativity4.36
Feedback4.66
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.51
Questions4.83
Ben Clingman 25 reported responses 4.49Eval / 5
Overall4.49 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.88
Technology4.66
Synthesis4.64
Collaboration4.86
Connection4.66
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.83
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.62
Reflection4.77
Respect4.86
Creativity4.05
Feedback4.38
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.54
Questions4.73
Jeanne Cho 14 reported responses 4.39Eval / 5
Overall4.39 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.65
Connection4.25
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.20
Reflection4.65
Respect4.65
Creativity3.95
Feedback4.15
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.40
Questions4.35
Kevin Ray Winterhalt 67 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
67 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.73
Synthesis4.43
Collaboration4.59
Connection4.40
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.58
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.57
Reflection4.67
Respect4.87
Creativity4.63
Feedback4.36
Interaction4.86
Challenge4.66
Questions4.62
Greg Ledonne 14 reported responses 4.60Eval / 5
Overall4.60 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.35
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.15
Reflection4.55
Respect4.95
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.80
Questions4.55
Ali Moreno 9 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.65
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.45
Contribution4.75
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.85
Reflection4.75
Respect4.95
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.95
Questions5.00
Cate Costley 10 reported responses 4.89Eval / 5
Overall4.89 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.60
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions4.90
Miles Hubble 48 reported responses 4.36Eval / 5
Overall4.36 / 5
48 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.82
Technology4.28
Synthesis4.64
Collaboration4.47
Connection4.84
Contribution4.24
Discussion4.61
Inclusivity4.83
Grading4.19
Reflection4.64
Respect4.74
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.28
Interaction4.72
Challenge4.66
Questions4.47
Trevor Egerton 62 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
62 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.91
Technology4.64
Synthesis4.88
Collaboration4.68
Connection4.70
Contribution4.86
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.86
Grading4.68
Reflection4.83
Respect4.98
Creativity4.46
Feedback4.84
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.88
Questions4.90
Vi Burlew 24 reported responses 4.15Eval / 5
Overall4.15 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.10
Contribution4.15
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.50
Grading3.55
Reflection4.30
Respect4.50
Creativity3.90
Feedback3.85
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.10
Questions4.25
Chloe Zehr 10 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.40
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.50
Reflection4.40
Respect4.85
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.35
Questions4.75
Will Holsclaw 28 reported responses 4.63Eval / 5
Overall4.63 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.76
Technology4.79
Synthesis4.84
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.64
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.94
Grading4.61
Reflection4.76
Respect4.98
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.84
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.61
Questions4.99
Ben Stewart 36 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
36 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.56
Synthesis4.62
Collaboration4.76
Connection4.72
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.57
Reflection4.83
Respect4.90
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.58
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.78
Questions4.83
Hannah Delvecchio 34 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.78
Technology4.68
Synthesis4.58
Collaboration4.73
Connection4.20
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.63
Inclusivity4.65
Grading4.65
Reflection4.65
Respect4.78
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.70
Questions4.73
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.