Course record PHIL
PHIL 2160
Ethics and Information Technology
University of Colorado Boulder
858 grades19 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score47/100
Mixed record
Kathryn Elizabeth Brophy 39 grades · 1 term 3.80GPA
39 letter grades
Compare with the course
Brophy vs. the course average
A
+23.4
B
−10.5
C
−8.4
D
−1.5
F
−3.0
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 39 enrolled.
Overall4.19 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.50
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect4.30
Creativity3.60
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.10
Questions4.80
Eric C Brown 36 grades · 1 term 3.51GPA
36 letter grades
Compare with the course
Brown vs. the course average
A
+10.8
B
−0.7
C
−8.4
D
−1.5
F
−0.3
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 36 enrolled.
Overall4.18 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.60
Contribution3.70
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.90
Reflection4.30
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.60
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.30
Questions4.10
Daniel Douglas Carr 127 grades · 1 term 3.46GPA
127 letter grades
Compare with the course
Carr vs. the course average
A
+2.0
B
+3.8
C
−3.7
D
−0.7
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
0.8% withdrew · 1 of 128 enrolled.
Overall4.69 / 5
162 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.51
Collaboration4.74
Connection4.89
Contribution4.79
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.59
Grading4.69
Reflection4.73
Respect4.86
Creativity4.37
Feedback4.28
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.73
Questions4.87
Zak Alexander Kopeikin 100 grades · 1 term 3.44GPA
100 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kopeikin vs. the course average
A
+0.4
B
−5.4
C
+8.6
D
−0.5
F
−3.0
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 4 of 104 enrolled.
Overall4.75 / 5
55 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration3.85
Connection4.85
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.90
Reflection4.85
Respect4.85
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.85
Edward Barnett Shear 72 grades · 1 term 3.43GPA
72 letter grades
Compare with the course
Shear vs. the course average
A
+6.7
B
−4.8
C
−2.8
D
−0.1
F
+1.1
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 72 enrolled.
Overall4.67 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.75
Reflection4.75
Respect4.85
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.90
Questions4.60
Erich Mark Riesen 63 grades · 1 term 3.43GPA
63 letter grades
Compare with the course
Riesen vs. the course average
A
+3.3
B
+0.1
C
−0.5
D
−1.5
F
−1.4
Difference in percentage points.
3.1% withdrew · 2 of 65 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
37 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.87
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.77
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.53
Reflection4.70
Respect4.87
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.37
Interaction4.47
Challenge4.60
Questions4.73
Caleb M Pickard 114 grades · 1 term 3.42GPA
114 letter grades
Compare with the course
Pickard vs. the course average
A
+12.4
B
−15.3
C
+1.3
D
+1.1
F
+0.5
Difference in percentage points.
1.7% withdrew · 2 of 116 enrolled.
Overall4.63 / 5
100 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.92
Technology4.82
Synthesis4.66
Collaboration4.01
Connection4.80
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.54
Grading4.74
Reflection4.79
Respect4.90
Creativity4.64
Feedback4.31
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.76
Questions4.80
Gail E. Linsenbard 37 grades · 1 term 3.41GPA
37 letter grades
Compare with the course
Linsenbard vs. the course average
A
−1.9
B
+4.0
C
+2.4
D
−1.5
F
−3.0
Difference in percentage points.
5.1% withdrew · 2 of 39 enrolled.
Overall4.34 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.86
Synthesis4.86
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.87
Discussion4.73
Inclusivity4.53
Grading4.60
Reflection4.90
Respect4.80
Creativity4.23
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.23
Challenge4.47
Questions4.60
Merily Salura 71 grades · 1 term 3.35GPA
71 letter grades
Compare with the course
Salura vs. the course average
A
−3.7
B
+2.5
C
+1.5
D
−0.1
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
4.1% withdrew · 3 of 74 enrolled.
Overall4.53 / 5
26 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.75
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.80
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.35
Reflection4.75
Respect4.80
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.15
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.65
Questions4.65
Edward Andrew Greetis 69 grades · 1 term 3.16GPA
69 letter grades
Compare with the course
Greetis vs. the course average
A
−10.8
B
+10.7
C
−2.6
D
−0.1
F
+2.8
Difference in percentage points.
4.2% withdrew · 3 of 72 enrolled.
Overall4.68 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.75
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.95
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.25
Reflection4.90
Respect4.95
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.95
Questions4.75
Derek Baker 72 grades · 1 term 2.96GPA
72 letter grades
Compare with the course
Baker vs. the course average
A
−22.5
B
+17.4
C
−1.4
D
−0.1
F
+6.7
Difference in percentage points.
4.0% withdrew · 3 of 75 enrolled.
Overall4.20 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.55
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration2.85
Connection4.45
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.15
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity3.95
Feedback3.85
Interaction4.15
Challenge4.30
Questions4.35
Alexander Evan Wolf-Root 58 grades · 1 term 2.94GPA
58 letter grades
Compare with the course
Wolf-Root vs. the course average
A
−17.2
B
+4.3
C
+7.1
D
+5.4
F
+0.4
Difference in percentage points.
6.5% withdrew · 4 of 62 enrolled.
Paige Massey 65 reported responses 4.50Eval / 5
Overall4.50 / 5
65 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.55
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration3.85
Connection4.80
Contribution4.55
Discussion4.75
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.60
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.55
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.45
Questions4.65
Joseph Wilson 23 reported responses 3.74Eval / 5
Overall3.74 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.89
Technology3.26
Synthesis3.19
Collaboration2.99
Connection3.69
Contribution4.11
Discussion3.48
Inclusivity3.54
Grading2.79
Reflection3.59
Respect3.72
Creativity2.85
Feedback2.56
Interaction4.48
Challenge3.25
Questions3.06
Colton Kunzeman 20 reported responses 4.67Eval / 5
Overall4.67 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.77
Technology4.57
Synthesis4.67
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.70
Contribution4.63
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.63
Grading4.57
Reflection4.83
Respect4.87
Creativity4.33
Feedback4.63
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.57
Questions4.90
Derick Hughes 21 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.89
Technology4.54
Synthesis4.57
Collaboration4.37
Connection4.62
Contribution4.06
Discussion4.25
Inclusivity4.12
Grading4.55
Reflection4.68
Respect4.69
Creativity4.38
Feedback4.44
Interaction4.67
Challenge4.61
Questions4.45
Tyler Porter 40 reported responses 4.72Eval / 5
Overall4.72 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.90
Contribution4.85
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.55
Reflection4.80
Respect4.70
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.90
Questions4.85
Adam Joseph Shriver 20 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.68
Synthesis4.74
Collaboration4.59
Connection4.91
Contribution4.84
Discussion4.76
Inclusivity4.82
Grading4.62
Reflection4.79
Respect4.88
Creativity4.71
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.82
Questions4.60
Shane Bodhi Melnitzer 43 reported responses 4.47Eval / 5
Overall4.47 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.35
Connection4.70
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.45
Reflection4.60
Respect4.75
Creativity3.90
Feedback3.95
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.50
Questions4.75
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.