Course record MUSC
MUSC 1131
Aural Skills Lab, Semester 2
University of Colorado Boulder
316 grades18 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2021–2026
Flunk Score39/100
Below average
Benjamin Jacob Morris 27 grades · 1 term 3.47GPA
27 letter grades
Compare with the course
Morris vs. the course average
A
+6.1
B
+7.9
C
−8.6
D
−4.1
F
−1.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 27 enrolled.
John Harrington Boggs 27 grades · 1 term 3.29GPA
27 letter grades
Compare with the course
Boggs vs. the course average
A
+2.4
B
+0.5
C
−1.2
D
−0.4
F
−1.3
Difference in percentage points.
6.9% withdrew · 2 of 29 enrolled.
Overall4.71 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.27
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration4.63
Connection4.83
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.73
Inclusivity4.83
Grading4.63
Reflection4.87
Respect4.93
Creativity3.97
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.77
Challenge4.93
Questions4.93
Mark L Arnett 41 grades · 1 term 3.12GPA
41 letter grades
Compare with the course
Arnett vs. the course average
A
+0.5
B
−9.6
C
+2.3
D
+8.1
F
−1.3
Difference in percentage points.
2.4% withdrew · 1 of 42 enrolled.
Overall4.37 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.59
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.37
Connection4.65
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.78
Inclusivity3.49
Grading4.40
Reflection4.50
Respect4.79
Creativity4.29
Feedback4.78
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.89
Questions4.88
Karin Buer 81 grades · 1 term 3.07GPA
81 letter grades
Compare with the course
Buer vs. the course average
A
−8.7
B
+5.5
C
+2.5
D
−1.6
F
+2.4
Difference in percentage points.
2.4% withdrew · 2 of 83 enrolled.
Overall4.52 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.12
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.49
Connection4.18
Contribution4.05
Discussion4.37
Inclusivity3.71
Grading4.60
Reflection4.47
Respect4.82
Creativity4.08
Feedback4.76
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.95
Questions4.83
Lauren Renee Lier 30 grades · 1 term 2.92GPA
30 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lier vs. the course average
A
−19.8
B
+4.2
C
+14.3
D
+2.6
F
−1.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.47 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.85
Technology4.80
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration4.15
Connection3.20
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity2.65
Grading4.55
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.55
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.75
Questions4.95
Samuel Falotico 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.76GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
7.1% withdrew · 1 of 14 enrolled.
Overall4.51 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis3.50
Collaboration4.05
Connection3.55
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.05
Grading4.70
Reflection4.10
Respect4.70
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.85
Questions4.85
Kevin Gunia 23 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.69GPA
23 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 23 enrolled.
Overall4.75 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.65
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.75
Connection4.40
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity3.90
Grading5.00
Reflection4.65
Respect4.75
Creativity4.65
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.75
Questions5.00
John Jacob Eichhorn 11 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.69GPA
11 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 11 enrolled.
Devin Ariel Guerrero 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.61GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.
Philip C Chang 24 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.09GPA
24 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 24 enrolled.
Overall4.06 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.95
Technology4.18
Synthesis4.02
Collaboration3.72
Connection3.91
Contribution4.03
Discussion4.49
Inclusivity3.45
Grading4.33
Reflection4.18
Respect4.23
Creativity3.61
Feedback4.22
Interaction4.49
Challenge3.77
Questions4.69
Blake Clawson 12 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.00GPA
12 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 12 enrolled.
Overall3.68 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.85
Technology3.55
Synthesis3.35
Collaboration3.30
Connection3.75
Contribution3.25
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity3.85
Grading3.55
Reflection3.75
Respect4.40
Creativity3.65
Feedback3.35
Interaction3.50
Challenge3.85
Questions3.85
Abigail Kellems 12 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.92GPA
12 letter grades · Limited sample
14.3% withdrew · 2 of 14 enrolled.
Abby Kellems 10 reported responses 4.53Eval / 5
Overall4.53 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.20
Connection3.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.20
Reflection4.60
Respect5.00
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.80
Questions4.70
Julia Grace Sills 6 reported responses 4.46Eval / 5
Overall4.46 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration3.80
Connection2.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity3.30
Grading5.00
Reflection3.70
Respect4.50
Creativity4.20
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.30
Questions4.80
Leah Renee Porter Tracy 18 reported responses 4.42Eval / 5
Overall4.42 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.60
Synthesis3.85
Collaboration3.55
Connection3.30
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.35
Inclusivity3.75
Grading4.40
Reflection4.60
Respect4.95
Creativity3.70
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.55
Questions4.75
Ben Work 10 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.40
Synthesis3.65
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.20
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.35
Inclusivity3.50
Grading4.80
Reflection4.65
Respect4.75
Creativity3.35
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Indigo Farmer 5 reported responses 2.34Eval / 5
Overall2.34 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence2.35
Technology2.75
Synthesis2.00
Collaboration3.00
Connection2.25
Contribution2.15
Discussion1.75
Inclusivity1.00
Grading1.50
Reflection2.40
Respect3.25
Creativity3.50
Feedback1.75
Interaction3.60
Challenge2.00
Questions2.50
Noah Nussbaum 15 reported responses 4.82Eval / 5
Overall4.82 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.25
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.65
Contribution4.85
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.95
Reflection4.65
Respect5.00
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.95
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.95
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.