Course record PHIL
PHIL 3260
Philosophy and the International Order
University of Colorado Boulder
616 grades18 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score39/100
Below average
Eric C Brown 36 grades · 1 term 3.62GPA
36 letter grades
Compare with the course
Brown vs. the course average
A
+19.8
B
−10.1
C
−7.8
D
−2.4
F
+0.5
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 36 enrolled.
Overall4.40 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology3.30
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading3.90
Reflection4.70
Respect4.60
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.50
Questions4.70
Alan G Sumler 38 grades · 1 term 3.50GPA
38 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sumler vs. the course average
A
+23.8
B
−21.8
C
−7.8
D
+2.8
F
+3.0
Difference in percentage points.
2.6% withdrew · 1 of 39 enrolled.
Overall4.10 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration2.40
Connection4.80
Contribution3.80
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.80
Reflection4.20
Respect4.50
Creativity4.30
Feedback3.30
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.20
Questions4.70
Daniel Sturgis 34 grades · 1 term 3.48GPA
34 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sturgis vs. the course average
A
+6.6
B
+3.0
C
−7.8
D
−2.4
F
+0.7
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 34 enrolled.
Stephen Patrick Mcandrew 41 grades · 1 term 3.35GPA
41 letter grades
Compare with the course
Mcandrew vs. the course average
A
−4.0
B
+6.7
C
−0.5
D
−2.4
F
+0.2
Difference in percentage points.
2.4% withdrew · 1 of 42 enrolled.
Overall4.77 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.40
Connection5.00
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.90
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.90
Questions4.90
Donna Reeves 35 grades · 1 term 3.29GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Reeves vs. the course average
A
−20.9
B
+27.7
C
−2.1
D
−2.4
F
−2.3
Difference in percentage points.
5.4% withdrew · 2 of 37 enrolled.
Overall4.68 / 5
15 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.90
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.30
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.60
Questions4.80
Hye-Ryoung Kang 135 grades · 1 term 3.27GPA
135 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kang vs. the course average
A
−2.6
B
+7.0
C
−4.8
D
−2.4
F
+2.9
Difference in percentage points.
6.9% withdrew · 10 of 145 enrolled.
Overall4.14 / 5
55 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.44
Technology3.22
Synthesis4.29
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.47
Contribution4.48
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.24
Grading3.62
Reflection4.39
Respect4.49
Creativity3.99
Feedback3.70
Interaction4.55
Challenge4.07
Questions3.91
Pamela J Lomelino 297 grades · 1 term 3.21GPA
297 letter grades
Compare with the course
Lomelino vs. the course average
A
−2.0
B
−3.7
C
+5.3
D
+1.9
F
−1.6
Difference in percentage points.
0.7% withdrew · 2 of 299 enrolled.
Overall4.47 / 5
151 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.51
Technology4.29
Synthesis4.61
Collaboration3.42
Connection4.49
Contribution4.59
Discussion4.33
Inclusivity4.68
Grading4.44
Reflection4.47
Respect4.54
Creativity4.42
Feedback4.32
Interaction4.52
Challenge4.44
Questions4.24
Hye Ryoung Hye Kang 21 reported responses 4.26Eval / 5
Overall4.26 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology3.30
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.50
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.50
Grading3.40
Reflection4.30
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.60
Questions4.00
Austin James Silberberg 19 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
19 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.70
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.30
Respect4.60
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
David Ian Valencia 18 reported responses 4.69Eval / 5
Overall4.69 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration3.90
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.80
Reflection4.30
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.80
Questions4.60
August Silberberg 4 reported responses 4.74Eval / 5
Overall4.74 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.30
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.30
Grading5.00
Reflection4.70
Respect4.30
Creativity4.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.70
Questions4.30
Henry Campbell 11 reported responses 4.31Eval / 5
Overall4.31 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.50
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.90
Reflection4.10
Respect4.20
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.20
Questions4.50
Marshall Jarrell 9 reported responses 4.65Eval / 5
Overall4.65 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.42
Technology4.42
Synthesis4.42
Collaboration4.42
Connection4.18
Contribution4.42
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.42
Grading4.72
Reflection4.42
Respect4.72
Creativity4.95
Feedback4.42
Interaction4.42
Challenge4.72
Questions4.72
Zelda Kieser 20 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.10
Connection4.60
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect4.40
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.40
Questions4.50
Apostolos Pittas 21 reported responses 4.72Eval / 5
Overall4.72 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.80
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.90
Maya Tschappat 20 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.80
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.80
Chuyue Zhu 20 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.40
Connection4.80
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.80
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.90
Questions4.90
Ritam Chakraborty 2 reported responses 4.45Eval / 5
Overall4.45 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration3.50
Connection4.50
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.50
Reflection4.50
Respect4.50
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.50
Questions4.50
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.