Course record INFO
INFO 1201
Computational Reasoning
University of Colorado Boulder
1,297 grades27 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score19/100
Needs work
Christopher M Carruth 484 grades · 1 term 3.06GPA
484 letter grades
Compare with the course
Carruth vs. the course average
A
+8.9
B
−1.5
C
−2.3
D
−1.5
F
−3.6
Difference in percentage points.
8.9% withdrew · 47 of 531 enrolled.
Jason Ian Zietz 813 grades · 1 term 2.66GPA
813 letter grades
Compare with the course
Zietz vs. the course average
A
−5.3
B
+0.9
C
+1.4
D
+0.9
F
+2.2
Difference in percentage points.
6.3% withdrew · 55 of 868 enrolled.
Overall4.07 / 5
177 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.06
Collaboration3.23
Connection4.18
Contribution3.75
Discussion4.26
Inclusivity3.96
Grading4.45
Reflection4.35
Respect4.61
Creativity4.21
Feedback3.55
Interaction4.10
Challenge4.38
Questions4.17
Janghee Cho 76 reported responses 3.89Eval / 5
Overall3.89 / 5
76 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology4.20
Synthesis3.60
Collaboration2.80
Connection3.80
Contribution3.20
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity3.40
Grading3.90
Reflection3.90
Respect4.50
Creativity4.30
Feedback3.80
Interaction3.70
Challenge4.20
Questions3.70
Mikhaila Friske 90 reported responses 4.17Eval / 5
Overall4.17 / 5
90 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.71
Synthesis4.01
Collaboration4.00
Connection3.95
Contribution3.99
Discussion4.66
Inclusivity3.86
Grading4.36
Reflection4.57
Respect4.77
Creativity4.61
Feedback4.36
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.49
Questions4.38
Shamika Goddard 72 reported responses 4.21Eval / 5
Overall4.21 / 5
72 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis3.60
Collaboration2.80
Connection3.70
Contribution3.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity3.40
Grading4.30
Reflection3.90
Respect4.90
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.50
Interaction3.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.40
Vladislav Andreyevich Grozin 71 reported responses 3.78Eval / 5
Overall3.78 / 5
71 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology4.20
Synthesis3.60
Collaboration2.70
Connection3.70
Contribution3.30
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity3.40
Grading3.80
Reflection3.90
Respect4.00
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.70
Interaction3.80
Challenge4.10
Questions3.90
Nelufar Dianna Radpour 107 reported responses 3.96Eval / 5
Overall3.96 / 5
107 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.22
Technology4.25
Synthesis4.06
Collaboration3.47
Connection4.01
Contribution3.89
Discussion4.39
Inclusivity3.78
Grading4.35
Reflection4.52
Respect4.44
Creativity4.35
Feedback4.07
Interaction4.34
Challenge4.32
Questions4.32
Shiva M Darian 53 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
53 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.15
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.05
Grading4.75
Reflection4.65
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.70
Questions4.80
Anthony Thomas Pinter 39 reported responses 4.44Eval / 5
Overall4.44 / 5
39 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.10
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.60
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Jack Chandler Weathington 35 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.10
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity3.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.70
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Deepika Rama Subramanian 12 reported responses 3.88Eval / 5
Overall3.88 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.20
Synthesis3.65
Collaboration3.75
Connection3.70
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity3.65
Grading4.00
Reflection3.85
Respect4.00
Creativity3.50
Feedback3.55
Interaction4.05
Challenge3.85
Questions4.25
Hannah Laurie Jones 11 reported responses 4.21Eval / 5
Overall4.21 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.90
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.15
Connection3.65
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity3.60
Grading4.15
Reflection4.35
Respect4.50
Creativity3.95
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.40
Questions4.40
Dipto Das 13 reported responses 4.05Eval / 5
Overall4.05 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.91
Technology4.39
Synthesis3.97
Collaboration2.98
Connection3.78
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity3.89
Grading4.00
Reflection4.13
Respect4.57
Creativity4.09
Feedback4.02
Interaction3.93
Challenge3.87
Questions4.23
Joshua Paup 38 reported responses 4.33Eval / 5
Overall4.33 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology4.81
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration4.05
Connection3.93
Contribution4.22
Discussion4.68
Inclusivity3.97
Grading4.70
Reflection4.55
Respect4.54
Creativity4.62
Feedback4.44
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.48
Questions4.71
Hande Batan 17 reported responses 3.83Eval / 5
Overall3.83 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.28
Synthesis3.68
Collaboration3.83
Connection3.65
Contribution3.80
Discussion4.05
Inclusivity3.33
Grading3.75
Reflection3.75
Respect4.53
Creativity3.88
Feedback3.50
Interaction4.15
Challenge3.60
Questions4.15
Noah Quinn Cowit 7 reported responses 3.89Eval / 5
Overall3.89 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.65
Technology4.65
Synthesis3.75
Collaboration3.60
Connection3.65
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity3.85
Grading3.85
Reflection3.55
Respect4.50
Creativity3.00
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.65
Challenge3.25
Questions4.65
Chris Carruth 330 reported responses 4.36Eval / 5
Overall4.36 / 5
330 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.42
Collaboration4.03
Connection4.13
Contribution4.04
Discussion4.56
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.59
Reflection4.43
Respect4.58
Creativity4.59
Feedback4.19
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.49
Questions4.53
Laurie Jones 22 reported responses 4.24Eval / 5
Overall4.24 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.22
Technology4.74
Synthesis4.41
Collaboration3.76
Connection3.46
Contribution4.32
Discussion4.57
Inclusivity3.57
Grading4.63
Reflection4.22
Respect4.56
Creativity4.39
Feedback4.02
Interaction4.42
Challenge4.48
Questions4.26
Tajanae Harris 9 reported responses 3.53Eval / 5
Overall3.53 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.10
Technology3.40
Synthesis3.30
Collaboration3.80
Connection2.85
Contribution3.50
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity3.25
Grading2.90
Reflection3.40
Respect4.10
Creativity3.60
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.30
Challenge3.70
Questions3.00
Kit Lewers 8 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.70
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.40
Connection3.20
Contribution3.60
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity3.80
Grading4.60
Reflection4.40
Respect4.60
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.50
Questions4.50
Matt Nicholson 9 reported responses 4.86Eval / 5
Overall4.86 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.85
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.95
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Estevan Sandoval 27 reported responses 4.34Eval / 5
Overall4.34 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration3.40
Connection3.70
Contribution3.85
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity3.45
Grading4.55
Reflection4.45
Respect4.80
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.15
Interaction4.45
Challenge4.60
Questions4.55
Divyanshu Kumar Singh 85 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
85 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.94
Synthesis4.78
Collaboration4.67
Connection4.54
Contribution4.78
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.55
Grading4.85
Reflection4.83
Respect4.88
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.84
Interaction4.82
Challenge4.85
Questions4.94
Amanda Aird 21 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.83
Synthesis4.54
Collaboration4.57
Connection3.93
Contribution4.52
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.12
Grading4.61
Reflection4.59
Respect4.77
Creativity4.67
Feedback4.52
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.56
Questions4.25
Blakeley Hoffman 72 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
72 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology4.69
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration4.36
Connection4.04
Contribution4.23
Discussion4.69
Inclusivity4.03
Grading4.40
Reflection4.55
Respect4.62
Creativity4.53
Feedback4.41
Interaction4.62
Challenge4.54
Questions4.55
Joseph Trybala 25 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.33
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.46
Collaboration4.48
Connection4.34
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.53
Inclusivity4.05
Grading4.48
Reflection4.63
Respect4.83
Creativity4.68
Feedback4.47
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.67
Questions4.51
Zoe Fisher 12 reported responses 4.42Eval / 5
Overall4.42 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.00
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.50
Reflection4.55
Respect4.65
Creativity4.15
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.35
Questions4.55
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.