Course record PHIL
PHIL 3160
Bioethics
University of Colorado Boulder
1,388 grades31 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score52/100
Mixed record
Adam Joseph Shriver 154 grades · 1 term 3.85GPA
154 letter grades
Compare with the course
Shriver vs. the course average
A
+32.6
B
−20.0
C
−10.9
D
−1.7
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
1.3% withdrew · 2 of 156 enrolled.
Overall4.54 / 5
44 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.80
Questions4.40
Pamela J Lomelino 39 grades · 1 term 3.63GPA
39 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lomelino vs. the course average
A
+12.8
B
−3.4
C
−5.8
D
−1.7
F
−1.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 39 enrolled.
Overall4.90 / 5
31 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.97
Technology4.93
Synthesis4.91
Collaboration4.64
Connection4.94
Contribution4.97
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.94
Grading4.91
Reflection4.93
Respect4.98
Creativity4.93
Feedback4.82
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.93
Questions4.84
Gail E. Linsenbard 158 grades · 1 term 3.58GPA
158 letter grades
Compare with the course
Linsenbard vs. the course average
A
+9.9
B
−0.5
C
−7.7
D
−1.7
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 6 of 164 enrolled.
Overall4.30 / 5
52 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.59
Technology4.33
Synthesis4.49
Collaboration3.46
Connection4.90
Contribution4.27
Discussion4.17
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.40
Reflection4.37
Respect4.77
Creativity4.56
Feedback3.22
Interaction4.39
Challenge4.61
Questions4.41
Edward Andrew Greetis 150 grades · 1 term 3.42GPA
150 letter grades
Compare with the course
Greetis vs. the course average
A
−2.3
B
+5.4
C
−2.2
D
−0.4
F
−0.5
Difference in percentage points.
3.2% withdrew · 5 of 155 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
32 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.95
Technology4.71
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration3.98
Connection4.85
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.45
Reflection4.85
Respect4.90
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.78
Challenge4.68
Questions4.53
Tim Burkhardt 244 grades · 1 term 3.39GPA
244 letter grades
Compare with the course
Burkhardt vs. the course average
A
−1.4
B
+1.5
C
+0.6
D
−0.5
F
−0.2
Difference in percentage points.
2.4% withdrew · 6 of 250 enrolled.
Overall4.76 / 5
254 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.94
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.87
Collaboration4.04
Connection4.94
Contribution4.71
Discussion4.85
Inclusivity4.85
Grading4.79
Reflection4.84
Respect4.98
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.71
Interaction4.67
Challenge4.88
Questions4.89
Zak Alexander Kopeikin 463 grades · 1 term 3.29GPA
463 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kopeikin vs. the course average
A
−7.0
B
+0.5
C
+5.1
D
+1.1
F
+0.3
Difference in percentage points.
1.9% withdrew · 9 of 472 enrolled.
Overall4.65 / 5
567 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.81
Technology4.68
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.43
Connection4.79
Contribution4.58
Discussion4.52
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.78
Reflection4.79
Respect4.78
Creativity4.75
Feedback4.71
Interaction4.28
Challenge4.79
Questions4.66
Julia Levin 34 grades · 1 term 3.26GPA
34 letter grades
Compare with the course
Levin vs. the course average
A
−20.4
B
+23.1
C
−2.1
D
+1.2
F
−1.9
Difference in percentage points.
2.9% withdrew · 1 of 35 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology3.50
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.10
Connection4.80
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.30
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Matthew Lawrence Ray 109 grades · 1 term 3.16GPA
109 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ray vs. the course average
A
−13.9
B
+3.6
C
+8.4
D
+2.9
F
−1.0
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 109 enrolled.
Derek Baker 37 grades · 1 term 2.96GPA
37 letter grades
Compare with the course
Baker vs. the course average
A
−26.5
B
+19.3
C
+2.6
D
−1.7
F
+6.2
Difference in percentage points.
7.5% withdrew · 3 of 40 enrolled.
Overall4.76 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.90
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.70
Challenge5.00
Questions4.90
Eric Juneghon Lee 18 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.81
Synthesis4.61
Collaboration4.91
Connection4.99
Contribution4.99
Discussion4.43
Inclusivity4.95
Grading4.78
Reflection4.79
Respect4.99
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.47
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.77
Questions4.56
Brandon Michael Price 59 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
59 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.90
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.45
Reflection4.65
Respect4.85
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.65
Questions4.65
Pamela Jean Fierer 19 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.80
Reflection4.40
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.50
Questions4.90
Erich Mark Riesen 38 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
38 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.72
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.98
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.98
Grading4.88
Reflection4.88
Respect4.98
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.59
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.98
Questions4.82
Emily Jean Slome 11 reported responses 4.77Eval / 5
Overall4.77 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.90
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.60
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions4.90
Marshall Wayne Jarrell Jr 27 reported responses 4.56Eval / 5
Overall4.56 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.90
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.30
Challenge4.70
Questions5.00
Ajene Nicar Robinson-Figuereo 10 reported responses 3.68Eval / 5
Overall3.68 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.26
Technology3.65
Synthesis4.06
Collaboration3.86
Connection4.42
Contribution4.72
Discussion3.77
Inclusivity4.35
Grading3.09
Reflection4.32
Respect4.48
Creativity3.86
Feedback3.22
Interaction4.48
Challenge4.08
Questions2.91
Gabriel Amar Kaul 30 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.20
Connection5.00
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.80
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Amanda Michelle Loeffelholz 21 reported responses 4.82Eval / 5
Overall4.82 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.50
Connection5.00
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.30
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.90
Questions4.90
Zelda Kieser 84 reported responses 4.58Eval / 5
Overall4.58 / 5
84 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.60
Anthony Neal Sharra 84 reported responses 4.60Eval / 5
Overall4.60 / 5
84 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.70
Connection4.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.70
Questions4.60
Gabe Kaul 60 reported responses 4.61Eval / 5
Overall4.61 / 5
60 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.72
Technology4.72
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.95
Connection4.78
Contribution4.65
Discussion4.62
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.42
Reflection4.55
Respect4.98
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.32
Interaction4.45
Challenge4.78
Questions4.55
Matt Ray 37 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
37 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.70
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.80
Questions4.50
Megan Louise Kitts 6 reported responses 4.85Eval / 5
Overall4.85 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.75
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.90
Contribution4.85
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.60
Reflection5.00
Respect4.60
Creativity4.90
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.85
Challenge5.00
Questions4.75
Xingzhu Chen 27 reported responses 4.34Eval / 5
Overall4.34 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration3.20
Connection4.70
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.40
Reflection4.60
Respect4.50
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.50
Questions4.40
Katie Mccabe 23 reported responses 4.52Eval / 5
Overall4.52 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.20
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.70
Questions4.60
Charlie Roberts 19 reported responses 4.76Eval / 5
Overall4.76 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.80
Reflection4.90
Respect5.00
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.90
Questions4.70
Gift Nwaozor 23 reported responses 4.63Eval / 5
Overall4.63 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.90
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.50
Interaction3.70
Challenge4.80
Questions4.20
Thomas Anthony Bonn 23 reported responses 4.28Eval / 5
Overall4.28 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration3.30
Connection4.40
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.40
Reflection4.40
Respect4.40
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.40
Questions4.50
Apostolos Pittas 57 reported responses 4.21Eval / 5
Overall4.21 / 5
57 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.13
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration3.00
Connection4.57
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.17
Inclusivity4.67
Grading4.33
Reflection4.50
Respect4.37
Creativity4.27
Feedback4.33
Interaction3.60
Challenge4.27
Questions4.23
Eric C Brown 29 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology3.10
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.30
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.70
Questions4.50
Evan Jaymes Frook 25 reported responses 3.91Eval / 5
Overall3.91 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology3.80
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration2.30
Connection4.40
Contribution4.10
Discussion3.50
Inclusivity4.40
Grading4.20
Reflection4.20
Respect4.00
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.20
Interaction3.00
Challenge4.00
Questions4.00
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.