Course record PMUS
PMUS 1726
Voice
University of Colorado Boulder
Grade distribution unavailable23 professors
Evaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score71/100
Strong
Jennifer Bird-Arvidsson 17 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.91
Technology4.39
Synthesis4.56
Collaboration4.52
Connection4.93
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.45
Inclusivity4.44
Grading4.07
Reflection4.78
Respect4.78
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.98
Interaction4.77
Challenge4.96
Questions4.76
Andrew B Garland 24 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.85
Technology4.98
Synthesis4.66
Collaboration4.64
Connection3.33
Contribution4.15
Discussion4.17
Inclusivity4.55
Grading4.13
Reflection4.96
Respect4.92
Creativity4.72
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.94
Challenge4.20
Questions5.00
Paul Jeffrey Wolf 5 reported responses 4.71Eval / 5
Overall4.71 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.94
Collaboration4.02
Connection4.23
Contribution4.79
Discussion4.64
Inclusivity1.92
Grading4.23
Reflection4.79
Respect3.92
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.94
Challenge5.00
Questions4.79
Christine Marie Li 1 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Kelly E Riordan 3 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.50
Contribution4.70
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity3.00
Grading4.00
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.70
Questions5.00
Jennifer Marie De Dominici 23 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology4.99
Synthesis4.97
Collaboration4.77
Connection4.80
Contribution4.89
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.49
Grading4.99
Reflection4.98
Respect5.00
Creativity4.98
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Abigail Andrews Nims 4 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.95
Synthesis4.95
Collaboration3.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.95
Discussion4.97
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.95
Reflection4.97
Respect4.97
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.95
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Alex Joseph King 1 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Synthesis5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Feedback5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Melissa Lubecke 1 reported responses 4.88Eval / 5
Overall4.88 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Connection3.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity3.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Julie Simson 6 reported responses 4.78Eval / 5
Overall4.78 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.93
Synthesis4.96
Collaboration4.46
Connection4.56
Contribution4.56
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.98
Grading4.11
Reflection5.00
Respect4.98
Creativity4.52
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.93
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Benjamin Boskoff 3 reported responses 4.81Eval / 5
Overall4.81 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.70
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.30
Reflection5.00
Respect4.70
Creativity4.30
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.70
Seth Mcclain Tack 3 reported responses 4.91Eval / 5
Overall4.91 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.65
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion4.88
Inclusivity4.65
Grading4.77
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.88
Matthew Wren Chellis 4 reported responses 4.70Eval / 5
Overall4.70 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.64
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.87
Connection4.94
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.28
Reflection4.94
Respect4.94
Creativity4.75
Feedback4.64
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.94
Questions5.00
Ben Boskoff 3 reported responses 4.51Eval / 5
Overall4.51 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.77
Collaboration3.77
Connection5.00
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.54
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.15
Challenge4.77
Questions5.00
Thomas Bocchi 4 reported responses 4.21Eval / 5
Overall4.21 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.62
Technology4.38
Synthesis4.15
Collaboration3.46
Connection3.77
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.00
Grading4.00
Reflection4.77
Respect4.12
Creativity4.50
Feedback5.00
Interaction2.46
Challenge4.77
Questions4.50
John Seesholtz 3 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Nicholas Perna 3 reported responses 4.92Eval / 5
Overall4.92 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.88
Reflection4.88
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Alice Jeanne Del Simone 1 reported responses 5.00Eval / 5
Overall5.00 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Alleigh Watson 3 reported responses 4.67Eval / 5
Overall4.67 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.00
Contribution4.77
Discussion5.00
Grading4.54
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity3.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Miguel Ortega Ba<F1>Ales 1 reported responses 4.80Eval / 5
Overall4.80 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.00
Synthesis5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Grading4.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Feedback5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Benjamin South 3 reported responses 4.92Eval / 5
Overall4.92 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.92
Synthesis4.92
Collaboration4.75
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.72
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Kailyn Marie Martino 2 reported responses 4.77Eval / 5
Overall4.77 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.00
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Whitney Robinson 4 reported responses 4.29Eval / 5
Overall4.29 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.46
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.38
Collaboration2.62
Connection3.00
Contribution4.46
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity3.54
Grading3.69
Reflection4.23
Respect4.23
Creativity3.08
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.38
Challenge4.77
Questions4.77
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.