Course record PHIL
PHIL 1350
Knowledge, Mind, and Reality
University of Colorado Boulder
725 grades25 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2021–2026
Flunk Score18/100
Needs work
Michael James Bevan 38 grades · 1 term 3.53GPA
38 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bevan vs. the course average
A
+44.8
B
−25.9
C
−15.6
D
−5.5
F
+2.2
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 38 enrolled.
Overall4.04 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology3.33
Synthesis4.61
Collaboration2.92
Connection4.20
Contribution3.74
Discussion4.32
Inclusivity3.86
Grading4.26
Reflection4.13
Respect4.41
Creativity3.92
Feedback3.70
Interaction3.83
Challenge4.51
Questions4.50
Amanda Michelle Loeffelholz 57 grades · 1 term 3.36GPA
57 letter grades
Compare with the course
Loeffelholz vs. the course average
A
+29.0
B
−19.8
C
−3.3
D
−3.8
F
−2.1
Difference in percentage points.
3.4% withdrew · 2 of 59 enrolled.
Overall4.89 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.95
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.95
Contribution4.85
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.90
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.95
Questions5.00
Alexander Evan Wolf-Root 75 grades · 1 term 3.35GPA
75 letter grades
Compare with the course
Wolf-Root vs. the course average
A
+21.9
B
−8.5
C
−10.3
D
−0.2
F
−3.0
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 75 enrolled.
Overall4.63 / 5
28 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.65
Technology4.52
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.52
Connection4.37
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.32
Grading4.01
Reflection4.65
Respect4.75
Creativity4.52
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.55
Questions4.80
Alan G Sumler 73 grades · 1 term 3.10GPA
73 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sumler vs. the course average
A
+23.6
B
−20.1
C
−6.0
D
same
F
+2.6
Difference in percentage points.
3.9% withdrew · 3 of 76 enrolled.
Overall3.04 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.48
Technology3.89
Synthesis3.19
Collaboration1.23
Connection3.19
Contribution2.68
Discussion2.28
Inclusivity2.78
Grading2.36
Reflection3.82
Respect3.39
Creativity3.48
Feedback2.55
Interaction1.69
Challenge3.12
Questions2.35
Gail E. Linsenbard 82 grades · 1 term 2.82GPA
82 letter grades
Compare with the course
Linsenbard vs. the course average
A
−9.0
B
+4.0
C
+7.6
D
−1.9
F
−0.8
Difference in percentage points.
1.2% withdrew · 1 of 83 enrolled.
Overall4.46 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.30
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.40
Reflection4.60
Respect4.50
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.50
Questions4.30
Michael Huemer 256 grades · 1 term 2.73GPA
256 letter grades
Compare with the course
Huemer vs. the course average
A
−16.0
B
+10.7
C
+4.7
D
+0.7
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
7.2% withdrew · 20 of 276 enrolled.
Overall3.64 / 5
99 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.05
Technology3.29
Synthesis3.79
Collaboration2.64
Connection4.22
Contribution3.27
Discussion3.64
Inclusivity3.93
Grading3.24
Reflection3.96
Respect4.01
Creativity3.33
Feedback2.59
Interaction3.75
Challenge3.87
Questions3.66
Kristin Demetriou 124 grades · 1 term 2.57GPA
124 letter grades
Compare with the course
Demetriou vs. the course average
A
−21.7
B
+11.4
C
+3.8
D
+4.2
F
+2.4
Difference in percentage points.
12.1% withdrew · 17 of 141 enrolled.
Sharon Mar Adams 20 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.79GPA
20 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 20 enrolled.
Overall4.42 / 5
79 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.38
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.66
Collaboration4.04
Connection4.68
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.53
Grading4.02
Reflection4.41
Respect4.89
Creativity4.44
Feedback4.45
Interaction4.63
Challenge4.61
Questions4.66
Paige Massey 14 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.27
Synthesis4.17
Collaboration3.93
Connection4.47
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.53
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.47
Reflection4.70
Respect4.87
Creativity4.00
Feedback4.27
Interaction4.87
Challenge4.77
Questions4.93
Dj Arends 17 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.40
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.40
Reflection4.60
Respect4.60
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.40
Ethan Chapman 17 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.40
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.40
Reflection4.60
Respect4.50
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.70
Questions4.40
Carl Alan Huber 12 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.33
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.23
Connection4.60
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.57
Reflection4.83
Respect4.37
Creativity3.90
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.43
Questions4.67
Kristin Marie Mickelson 56 reported responses 3.21Eval / 5
Overall3.21 / 5
56 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.64
Technology2.81
Synthesis3.36
Collaboration2.15
Connection3.04
Contribution3.23
Discussion3.10
Inclusivity2.77
Grading2.75
Reflection3.25
Respect3.58
Creativity3.20
Feedback2.25
Interaction3.46
Challenge3.26
Questions2.94
Kyle Nathaneal York 45 reported responses 4.33Eval / 5
Overall4.33 / 5
45 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.73
Technology4.27
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.07
Connection4.43
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.63
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.97
Reflection4.70
Respect4.63
Creativity3.93
Feedback3.83
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.63
Questions4.57
Xingzhu Chen 16 reported responses 3.03Eval / 5
Overall3.03 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology3.20
Synthesis3.40
Collaboration2.20
Connection2.90
Contribution3.40
Discussion2.90
Inclusivity2.80
Grading2.80
Reflection3.60
Respect3.10
Creativity2.80
Feedback2.60
Interaction3.20
Challenge3.50
Questions3.10
Travis Rebello 26 reported responses 4.42Eval / 5
Overall4.42 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.83
Technology3.60
Synthesis4.27
Collaboration4.20
Connection3.97
Contribution4.33
Discussion4.47
Inclusivity4.17
Grading4.13
Reflection4.50
Respect4.73
Creativity3.97
Feedback4.23
Interaction4.73
Challenge4.73
Questions4.67
Amirhossein Ajalloeian 67 reported responses 4.08Eval / 5
Overall4.08 / 5
67 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.06
Synthesis3.97
Collaboration3.02
Connection3.88
Contribution3.99
Discussion4.29
Inclusivity4.48
Grading3.95
Reflection4.03
Respect4.78
Creativity3.76
Feedback3.46
Interaction4.21
Challenge4.49
Questions4.49
David Mghanga Mwakima 15 reported responses 3.71Eval / 5
Overall3.71 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology3.05
Synthesis3.95
Collaboration2.60
Connection3.80
Contribution3.55
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.45
Grading3.60
Reflection3.50
Respect4.50
Creativity3.40
Feedback3.25
Interaction3.80
Challenge3.85
Questions4.20
Rebecca Bailey 16 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.64
Technology4.27
Synthesis4.51
Collaboration3.27
Connection4.45
Contribution4.16
Discussion4.53
Inclusivity4.19
Grading4.70
Reflection4.49
Respect4.73
Creativity4.15
Feedback4.30
Interaction3.65
Challenge4.67
Questions4.64
Levi Smith 1 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback3.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.00
Edward Barnett Shear 71 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
71 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.54
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.49
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.47
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.73
Inclusivity4.62
Grading4.36
Reflection4.59
Respect4.84
Creativity4.32
Feedback4.03
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.69
Questions4.58
Haley Brigitte Gill 26 reported responses 4.06Eval / 5
Overall4.06 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.63
Technology4.28
Synthesis4.31
Collaboration3.18
Connection4.30
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.34
Inclusivity4.63
Grading4.23
Reflection4.43
Respect4.46
Creativity4.17
Feedback3.17
Interaction3.81
Challenge4.34
Questions4.20
Jason Timothy Potter 15 reported responses 3.47Eval / 5
Overall3.47 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.90
Technology3.40
Synthesis3.70
Collaboration2.50
Connection4.30
Contribution3.20
Discussion3.70
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.20
Reflection3.90
Respect3.90
Creativity3.40
Feedback2.80
Interaction3.70
Challenge3.80
Questions3.90
James Marks 16 reported responses 4.18Eval / 5
Overall4.18 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.67
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.43
Collaboration2.70
Connection4.33
Contribution4.17
Discussion4.43
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.23
Reflection4.37
Respect4.57
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.83
Interaction3.80
Challenge4.67
Questions4.40
Paige Adzema 3 reported responses 4.60Eval / 5
Overall4.60 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.30
Grading5.00
Reflection4.70
Respect4.70
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.70
Interaction3.30
Challenge5.00
Questions4.70
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.