Course record MCEN

MCEN 5228

Special Topics in Mechanical Engineering

University of Colorado Boulder

199 grades51 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score63/100
Strong

Professors 51 of 51

Derek T Reamon 31 grades · 1 term 3.90GPA
93.5% A
6.5% B
0.0% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

31 letter grades

Compare with the course
Reamon vs. the course average
A +17.2
B −14.7
C −2.5
D same
F same

Difference in percentage points.

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 31 enrolled.

Sarah Calve 25 grades · 1 term 3.81GPA
80.0% A
20.0% B
0.0% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

25 letter grades

Compare with the course
Calve vs. the course average
A +3.6
B −1.1
C −2.5
D same
F same

Difference in percentage points.

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 25 enrolled.

Jana Milford 28 grades · 1 term 3.79GPA
85.7% A
14.3% B
0.0% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

28 letter grades

Compare with the course
Milford vs. the course average
A +9.3
B −6.8
C −2.5
D same
F same

Difference in percentage points.

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 28 enrolled.

James Sean Humbert 28 grades · 1 term 3.73GPA
89.3% A
3.6% B
7.1% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

28 letter grades

Compare with the course
Humbert vs. the course average
A +12.9
B −17.5
C +4.6
D same
F same

Difference in percentage points.

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 28 enrolled.

Rong Long 35 grades · 1 term 3.66GPA
71.4% A
28.6% B
0.0% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

35 letter grades

Compare with the course
Long vs. the course average
A −5.0
B +7.5
C −2.5
D same
F same

Difference in percentage points.

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 35 enrolled.

Robert Bruce Maccurdy 10 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 4.00GPA
100.0% A
0.0% B
0.0% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

10 letter grades · Limited sample

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 10 enrolled.

Gregory Brian Rieker 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.48GPA
47.1% A
47.1% B
5.9% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

17 letter grades · Limited sample

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 17 enrolled.

Kaushik Jayaram 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.36GPA
53.3% A
33.3% B
13.3% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

15 letter grades · Limited sample

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.

John Pellegrino 10 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.27GPA
30.0% A
70.0% B
0.0% C
0.0% D
0.0% F

10 letter grades · Limited sample

0.0% withdrew · 0 of 10 enrolled.

Jean R Hertzberg 3 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5

3 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.30
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.70
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.30
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Franck J. Vernerey 17 reported responses 3.96Eval / 5
Overall3.96 / 5

17 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.91
Technology1.40
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration1.37
Connection3.17
Contribution2.21
Discussion4.04
Inclusivity1.39
Grading1.28
Reflection4.01
Respect4.86
Creativity4.91
Feedback2.23
Interaction2.25
Challenge3.14
Questions4.01
Alaa Abdalla Ahmed 24 reported responses 4.35Eval / 5
Overall4.35 / 5

24 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.83
Technology4.51
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration3.05
Connection4.03
Contribution3.54
Discussion4.22
Inclusivity3.52
Grading4.22
Reflection4.22
Respect4.80
Creativity4.21
Feedback3.24
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.80
Questions4.79
Xiaoyun Ding 23 reported responses 4.07Eval / 5
Overall4.07 / 5

23 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.05
Technology4.83
Synthesis3.30
Collaboration4.86
Connection4.38
Contribution4.16
Discussion4.27
Inclusivity2.01
Grading3.91
Reflection3.76
Respect4.41
Creativity3.10
Feedback3.72
Interaction4.33
Challenge3.74
Questions4.52
Shalom D Ruben 66 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5

66 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.74
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.89
Contribution4.72
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.77
Grading4.29
Reflection4.76
Respect4.95
Creativity4.77
Feedback4.43
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.80
Questions4.70
Daniel W Knight 16 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5

16 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.28
Technology4.79
Synthesis4.47
Collaboration4.97
Connection4.75
Contribution4.89
Discussion4.74
Inclusivity4.19
Grading3.99
Reflection4.48
Respect4.90
Creativity4.89
Feedback4.37
Interaction4.97
Challenge4.64
Questions4.70
Debanjan Mukherjee 52 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5

52 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.56
Technology4.96
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.16
Connection4.75
Contribution4.66
Discussion4.79
Inclusivity4.17
Grading4.39
Reflection4.84
Respect4.89
Creativity4.64
Feedback4.47
Interaction4.86
Challenge4.62
Questions4.87
Carmen Pacheco-Borden 60 reported responses 4.44Eval / 5
Overall4.44 / 5

60 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.52
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.26
Collaboration4.82
Connection4.79
Contribution4.37
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.15
Reflection4.68
Respect4.91
Creativity4.70
Feedback3.86
Interaction4.88
Challenge4.41
Questions4.52
Francisco Castro 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
Maureen Ellen Lynch 14 reported responses 4.58Eval / 5
Overall4.58 / 5

14 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.78
Collaboration4.71
Connection4.82
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.79
Grading4.18
Reflection4.60
Respect4.85
Creativity4.78
Feedback3.48
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.82
Questions4.82
Michael P. Hannigan 22 reported responses 4.63Eval / 5
Overall4.63 / 5

22 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.38
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.44
Collaboration4.99
Connection4.84
Contribution4.87
Discussion4.71
Inclusivity4.21
Grading4.38
Reflection4.51
Respect4.61
Creativity4.85
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.97
Challenge4.59
Questions4.83
Gregory James Hampson 32 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5

32 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.78
Collaboration4.73
Connection4.99
Contribution4.86
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.76
Reflection4.89
Respect4.97
Creativity4.87
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.68
Challenge4.87
Questions4.70
Massimo Ruzzene 4 reported responses 3.60Eval / 5
Overall3.60 / 5

4 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.00
Technology4.30
Synthesis3.30
Collaboration2.00
Connection3.80
Contribution3.00
Discussion3.50
Inclusivity1.00
Grading3.00
Reflection4.30
Respect5.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.30
Interaction3.30
Challenge4.30
Questions2.80
Daven Ker Henze 10 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5

10 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.70
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.70
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.90
Questions4.80
Travis Rick Rupp 8 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5

8 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.50
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.80
Reflection4.60
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Wei Tan 11 reported responses 4.28Eval / 5
Overall4.28 / 5

11 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.21
Technology4.36
Synthesis3.93
Collaboration4.48
Connection4.98
Contribution4.02
Discussion4.71
Inclusivity4.06
Grading4.32
Reflection4.38
Respect4.95
Creativity4.55
Feedback3.77
Interaction4.66
Challenge4.25
Questions4.01
Yifu Ding 13 reported responses 4.04Eval / 5
Overall4.04 / 5

13 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.86
Technology4.49
Synthesis3.82
Collaboration2.47
Connection4.72
Contribution3.96
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.76
Grading3.95
Reflection4.05
Respect4.82
Creativity3.77
Feedback3.26
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.37
Questions4.82
Janet Tsai 36 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5

36 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.87
Technology4.91
Synthesis4.88
Collaboration4.94
Connection4.94
Contribution4.91
Discussion4.94
Inclusivity4.96
Grading4.30
Reflection4.93
Respect4.92
Creativity4.89
Feedback4.67
Interaction4.72
Challenge4.87
Questions4.92
Chunmei Ban 10 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5

10 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.51
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.22
Collaboration3.99
Connection4.80
Contribution4.23
Discussion4.52
Inclusivity4.02
Grading4.03
Reflection4.80
Respect5.00
Creativity4.22
Feedback4.02
Interaction4.03
Challenge4.80
Questions4.22
Jianliang Xiao 15 reported responses 4.12Eval / 5
Overall4.12 / 5

15 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.85
Technology4.40
Synthesis3.74
Collaboration3.49
Connection4.10
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.64
Inclusivity3.78
Grading3.91
Reflection4.29
Respect4.65
Creativity3.89
Feedback3.51
Interaction4.69
Challenge4.09
Questions4.34
Jenifer L Blacklock 7 reported responses 3.44Eval / 5
Overall3.44 / 5

7 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.30
Technology3.40
Synthesis3.00
Collaboration2.10
Connection4.00
Contribution3.10
Discussion3.30
Inclusivity3.20
Grading3.90
Reflection3.90
Respect4.40
Creativity3.30
Feedback2.70
Interaction3.70
Challenge3.30
Questions4.30
Longji Cui 61 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5

61 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.37
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration4.13
Connection4.01
Contribution3.81
Discussion4.34
Inclusivity3.93
Grading3.30
Reflection4.12
Respect4.63
Creativity4.29
Feedback3.54
Interaction4.58
Challenge4.37
Questions4.51
Xudong Chen 2 reported responses 3.82Eval / 5
Overall3.82 / 5

2 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.50
Technology3.00
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration2.50
Connection2.50
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.00
Grading2.50
Reflection3.50
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback3.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.00
Peter Paul Mitrano 2 reported responses 4.70Eval / 5
Overall4.70 / 5

2 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Grading3.50
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.50
Francois Barthelat 20 reported responses 4.16Eval / 5
Overall4.16 / 5

20 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.03
Technology4.06
Synthesis3.87
Collaboration4.16
Connection4.64
Contribution3.84
Discussion4.32
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.21
Reflection4.37
Respect4.57
Creativity3.95
Feedback2.86
Interaction4.25
Challenge4.23
Questions3.68
Lucy Y Pao 7 reported responses 4.38Eval / 5
Overall4.38 / 5

7 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.10
Synthesis3.70
Collaboration4.40
Connection3.90
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity2.70
Grading4.10
Reflection4.40
Respect4.90
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.40
Questions5.00
Leo Beuken 18 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5

18 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.40
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.90
Questions4.80
Rishi Raj 3 reported responses 3.41Eval / 5
Overall3.41 / 5

3 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.70
Technology3.00
Synthesis3.70
Collaboration2.70
Connection3.70
Contribution3.30
Discussion3.30
Inclusivity2.00
Grading3.00
Reflection3.70
Respect4.00
Creativity3.70
Feedback2.70
Interaction4.00
Challenge3.70
Questions3.30
Nathalie Maria Vriend 2 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5

2 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
Garrett Mathews 8 reported responses 4.40Eval / 5
Overall4.40 / 5

8 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.10
Technology4.50
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.40
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.40
Reflection4.80
Respect4.60
Creativity3.90
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.60
William George Newhall 16 reported responses 4.47Eval / 5
Overall4.47 / 5

16 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.18
Collaboration4.62
Connection4.67
Contribution4.13
Discussion4.52
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.58
Reflection4.58
Respect4.92
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.03
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.66
Questions4.90
Sam Rubaker 2 reported responses 4.77Eval / 5
Overall4.77 / 5

2 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.50
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Daniel J. Riffell 30 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5

30 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.74
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.54
Connection4.82
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.71
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.45
Reflection4.69
Respect4.87
Creativity4.84
Feedback4.71
Interaction4.74
Challenge4.62
Questions4.65
Mark A Borden 11 reported responses 4.94Eval / 5
Overall4.94 / 5

11 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.99
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.99
Collaboration4.55
Connection4.99
Contribution4.99
Discussion4.97
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.96
Reflection5.00
Respect4.97
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.97
Interaction4.99
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Chahat Singh 15 reported responses 4.24Eval / 5
Overall4.24 / 5

15 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.72
Technology4.33
Synthesis3.75
Collaboration4.77
Connection4.79
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity2.19
Grading3.83
Reflection4.52
Respect4.88
Creativity4.32
Feedback4.56
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.56
Questions4.36
Kelvin Bates 12 reported responses 4.54Eval / 5
Overall4.54 / 5

12 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.90
Contribution4.75
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.35
Grading3.75
Reflection4.75
Respect4.85
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Grace Ellen Burleson 23 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5

23 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.68
Synthesis4.71
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.60
Contribution4.98
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.82
Reflection4.90
Respect4.98
Creativity4.71
Feedback4.73
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.75
Questions4.80
Nicole Xu 33 reported responses 4.23Eval / 5
Overall4.23 / 5

33 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.17
Technology4.18
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.72
Connection3.58
Contribution4.32
Discussion3.86
Inclusivity3.31
Grading3.72
Reflection3.98
Respect4.55
Creativity4.27
Feedback3.88
Interaction4.42
Challenge4.12
Questions4.25
Hope Andrea Michelsen 13 reported responses 4.28Eval / 5
Overall4.28 / 5

13 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.50
Reflection4.20
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.50
Questions4.80
Max Saccone 10 reported responses 4.61Eval / 5
Overall4.61 / 5

10 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.70
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.90
Carmen Consuelo Pacheco 3 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5

3 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.70
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.00
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.30
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Jun Li 11 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5

11 reported responses

Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.70
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.40
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
Show fewer
Find a course or professor

Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.