Course record INFO
INFO 4871
Special Topics
University of Colorado Boulder
184 grades13 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score73/100
Strong
Stephen A Voida 45 grades · 1 term 3.82GPA
45 letter grades
Compare with the course
Voida vs. the course average
A
+9.6
B
−6.9
C
−3.3
D
−0.5
F
+1.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.2% withdrew · 1 of 46 enrolled.
Overall4.84 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.91
Technology4.82
Synthesis4.72
Collaboration4.45
Connection5.00
Contribution4.72
Discussion4.91
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.89
Reflection4.82
Respect5.00
Creativity4.82
Feedback4.27
Interaction4.63
Challenge4.82
Questions4.82
Benjamin F Waggoner 43 grades · 1 term 3.72GPA
43 letter grades
Compare with the course
Waggoner vs. the course average
A
+4.5
B
−4.3
C
+1.4
D
−0.5
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 43 enrolled.
Overall4.50 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.30
Reflection4.60
Respect4.80
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.30
Questions4.40
Bryan Semaan 33 grades · 1 term 3.67GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Semaan vs. the course average
A
−2.7
B
+1.6
C
+2.8
D
−0.5
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 33 enrolled.
Overall4.98 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Amy Kathryn Mitchell Voida 35 grades · 1 term 3.65GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Voida vs. the course average
A
−7.2
B
+6.4
C
−0.4
D
+2.3
F
−1.1
Difference in percentage points.
2.8% withdrew · 1 of 36 enrolled.
Overall4.79 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.87
Technology4.84
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.88
Connection4.91
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity4.71
Grading4.45
Reflection4.86
Respect4.81
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.73
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.88
Questions4.98
Brian Keegan 28 grades · 1 term 3.54GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Keegan vs. the course average
A
−10.1
B
+7.8
C
+0.3
D
−0.5
F
+2.5
Difference in percentage points.
6.7% withdrew · 2 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.55 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.41
Connection4.91
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.32
Inclusivity4.46
Grading4.68
Reflection4.30
Respect5.00
Creativity4.85
Feedback4.32
Interaction4.56
Challenge4.59
Questions4.82
Robin Douglas Burke 9 reported responses 4.32Eval / 5
Overall4.32 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity4.80
Grading3.80
Reflection4.70
Respect4.40
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.30
Questions4.60
Jed Richards Brubaker 8 reported responses 4.97Eval / 5
Overall4.97 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.85
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.85
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection4.77
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.85
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Alexandra Beattie 2 reported responses 4.70Eval / 5
Overall4.70 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.50
Questions3.50
Julia Marie Proft 19 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.65
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.70
Reflection4.90
Respect4.95
Creativity4.95
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.80
Challenge5.00
Questions4.80
Jonathan Zong 15 reported responses 4.58Eval / 5
Overall4.58 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.50
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.70
Questions4.80
Evan Mitchell Peck 5 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.80
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.80
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
Casey Lynn Fiesler 6 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.70
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.70
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.70
Katlyn Turner 5 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.60
Reflection5.00
Respect4.80
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.