Course record LING
LING 1000
Language in U.S. Society
University of Colorado Boulder
1,679 grades27 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score36/100
Below average
Mary Maureen Kosse 97 grades · 1 term 3.49GPA
97 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kosse vs. the course average
A
+24.9
B
−18.4
C
−8.1
D
−1.7
F
+3.2
Difference in percentage points.
4.0% withdrew · 4 of 101 enrolled.
Overall4.48 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.97
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.69
Inclusivity4.92
Grading4.84
Reflection4.88
Respect4.71
Creativity4.48
Feedback4.39
Interaction4.52
Challenge4.53
Questions4.88
Chase Raymond 1,005 grades · 1 term 3.32GPA
1,005 letter grades
Compare with the course
Raymond vs. the course average
A
+5.5
B
−2.3
C
−2.1
D
−0.2
F
−0.9
Difference in percentage points.
4.4% withdrew · 46 of 1,051 enrolled.
Overall4.38 / 5
402 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.72
Technology4.88
Synthesis4.71
Collaboration4.04
Connection4.97
Contribution4.82
Discussion4.41
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.91
Reflection4.79
Respect4.92
Creativity4.82
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.19
Challenge4.77
Questions4.93
Kira Hall 146 grades · 1 term 3.21GPA
146 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hall vs. the course average
A
−7.9
B
+10.7
C
+2.2
D
−2.4
F
−2.6
Difference in percentage points.
2.0% withdrew · 3 of 149 enrolled.
Overall4.46 / 5
134 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.69
Synthesis4.59
Collaboration4.18
Connection4.79
Contribution4.59
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.89
Grading4.69
Reflection4.79
Respect4.89
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.39
Interaction4.69
Challenge4.69
Questions4.79
Natalie Marie Grothues 184 grades · 1 term 3.07GPA
184 letter grades
Compare with the course
Grothues vs. the course average
A
−9.3
B
+4.8
C
+3.0
D
+1.7
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
4.7% withdrew · 9 of 193 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
147 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.95
Technology3.86
Synthesis3.67
Collaboration3.16
Connection4.22
Contribution3.36
Discussion3.49
Inclusivity4.52
Grading3.68
Reflection3.74
Respect4.25
Creativity3.85
Feedback2.91
Interaction3.68
Challenge3.86
Questions3.86
Adam Wayne Hodges 181 grades · 1 term 2.80GPA
181 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hodges vs. the course average
A
−18.5
B
+4.8
C
+7.7
D
+2.3
F
+3.7
Difference in percentage points.
5.2% withdrew · 10 of 191 enrolled.
Overall4.22 / 5
60 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration3.20
Connection4.60
Contribution3.60
Discussion3.90
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.60
Reflection4.20
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.30
Questions4.50
Olivia Scrivanich Hirschey 66 grades · 1 term 2.70GPA
66 letter grades
Compare with the course
Hirschey vs. the course average
A
−25.6
B
+12.3
C
+9.0
D
−0.7
F
+5.1
Difference in percentage points.
9.6% withdrew · 7 of 73 enrolled.
Overall4.16 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.65
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.60
Grading3.80
Reflection4.40
Respect4.45
Creativity3.90
Feedback3.65
Interaction4.80
Challenge3.90
Questions4.50
Meredith Leigh Church 42 reported responses 3.96Eval / 5
Overall3.96 / 5
42 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.67
Technology3.86
Synthesis3.69
Collaboration3.43
Connection4.08
Contribution3.62
Discussion3.70
Inclusivity4.13
Grading3.99
Reflection3.68
Respect3.95
Creativity3.77
Feedback3.59
Interaction3.71
Challenge3.62
Questions4.05
Kate Arnold-Murray 117 reported responses 4.72Eval / 5
Overall4.72 / 5
117 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.52
Technology4.98
Synthesis4.51
Collaboration4.15
Connection4.57
Contribution4.23
Discussion4.11
Inclusivity4.89
Grading4.94
Reflection4.51
Respect4.92
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.72
Interaction4.57
Challenge4.88
Questions4.97
Justin Bai 78 reported responses 4.40Eval / 5
Overall4.40 / 5
78 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.31
Technology4.17
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.09
Connection4.50
Contribution4.02
Discussion4.24
Inclusivity4.51
Grading3.99
Reflection4.15
Respect4.47
Creativity4.03
Feedback3.66
Interaction4.44
Challenge4.15
Questions4.26
Kathryn Summerville Conger 12 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.85
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.40
Reflection4.95
Respect5.00
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.50
Questions4.70
Maya Stephens 71 reported responses 4.33Eval / 5
Overall4.33 / 5
71 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.55
Contribution4.29
Discussion4.44
Inclusivity4.62
Grading4.58
Reflection4.42
Respect4.72
Creativity4.04
Feedback4.17
Interaction4.42
Challenge4.32
Questions4.70
Brienna Johnson-Morris 7 reported responses 3.94Eval / 5
Overall3.94 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology4.30
Synthesis3.70
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.10
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.40
Grading3.60
Reflection4.10
Respect4.00
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.70
Interaction3.90
Challenge3.90
Questions4.30
Forest Stuart 25 reported responses 4.23Eval / 5
Overall4.23 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.57
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.48
Contribution4.12
Discussion4.74
Inclusivity4.76
Grading4.11
Reflection4.52
Respect4.84
Creativity3.62
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.13
Challenge4.43
Questions4.57
Merlin Caitlin Ramsey 14 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.90
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.95
Grading4.80
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.35
Feedback4.40
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.50
Questions4.75
Aubrey Megan Villanueva 14 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.85
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.95
Reflection4.85
Respect5.00
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.85
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.50
Questions4.95
Tiffany Marina Blanchet 19 reported responses 4.35Eval / 5
Overall4.35 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.70
Synthesis3.45
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.50
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.00
Reflection4.60
Respect4.95
Creativity4.15
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.55
Questions4.80
Maureen Kosse 41 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
41 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.39
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.43
Collaboration3.84
Connection4.78
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.68
Inclusivity4.63
Grading4.81
Reflection4.65
Respect4.93
Creativity4.58
Feedback3.92
Interaction4.61
Challenge4.70
Questions4.85
Ayden Marzelle Parish 15 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.05
Connection4.60
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.55
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.60
Questions4.60
Emma Bornheimer 117 reported responses 4.22Eval / 5
Overall4.22 / 5
117 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.18
Technology4.43
Synthesis3.97
Collaboration3.19
Connection4.49
Contribution4.13
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.13
Grading4.24
Reflection4.52
Respect4.49
Creativity4.06
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.28
Challenge4.51
Questions4.44
Daniel Witness Chen 28 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.70
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.20
Reflection4.55
Respect4.60
Creativity4.20
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.40
Questions4.55
Imani Allen 13 reported responses 3.98Eval / 5
Overall3.98 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.85
Technology4.41
Synthesis4.04
Collaboration3.77
Connection4.51
Contribution3.83
Discussion4.64
Inclusivity3.97
Grading4.18
Reflection4.28
Respect4.75
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.07
Interaction4.36
Challenge4.06
Questions4.45
Kanupriya Kale 36 reported responses 4.21Eval / 5
Overall4.21 / 5
36 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.86
Technology4.36
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration3.99
Connection4.32
Contribution4.04
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.49
Grading4.21
Reflection4.22
Respect4.74
Creativity4.06
Feedback4.05
Interaction4.46
Challenge4.14
Questions4.54
Creola Djarlo 8 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.45
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.45
Connection4.95
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.90
Reflection4.95
Respect5.00
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.90
Questions4.60
Sarah Marie Adams 39 reported responses 4.84Eval / 5
Overall4.84 / 5
39 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.86
Technology4.73
Synthesis4.98
Collaboration4.44
Connection4.86
Contribution4.93
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.97
Grading4.86
Reflection4.84
Respect4.86
Creativity4.96
Feedback4.94
Interaction4.62
Challenge4.82
Questions4.95
Yana Gudakova 21 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.67
Collaboration4.73
Connection4.87
Contribution4.77
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.87
Grading4.53
Reflection4.83
Respect4.83
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.87
Challenge4.77
Questions4.80
Myron C Stephens 10 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.67
Collaboration4.80
Connection5.00
Contribution4.77
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity4.77
Grading4.47
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.67
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.77
Questions4.90
Martino Mangano 1 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.