Course record PSYC
PSYC 4145
Advanced Cognitive Psychology
University of Colorado Boulder
516 grades19 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score41/100
Mixed record
Lei Yuan 126 grades · 1 term 3.55GPA
126 letter grades
Compare with the course
Yuan vs. the course average
A
+10.1
B
−6.8
C
−2.6
D
−0.4
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
2.3% withdrew · 3 of 129 enrolled.
Overall4.40 / 5
135 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.16
Technology4.23
Synthesis4.13
Collaboration4.53
Connection4.10
Contribution4.23
Discussion4.36
Inclusivity3.90
Grading3.87
Reflection4.12
Respect4.39
Creativity4.18
Feedback3.90
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.13
Questions4.19
Eliana Colunga 118 grades · 1 term 3.39GPA
118 letter grades
Compare with the course
Colunga vs. the course average
A
+0.4
B
−6.7
C
+5.3
D
−0.4
F
+1.4
Difference in percentage points.
7.1% withdrew · 9 of 127 enrolled.
Overall4.41 / 5
37 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.62
Technology4.57
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.83
Connection4.66
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.55
Grading3.98
Reflection4.83
Respect4.88
Creativity4.54
Feedback3.76
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.81
Questions4.67
Shaw L. Ketels 272 grades · 1 term 3.38GPA
272 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ketels vs. the course average
A
−4.9
B
+6.1
C
−1.1
D
+0.3
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
1.8% withdrew · 5 of 277 enrolled.
Overall4.04 / 5
519 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.32
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.37
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity3.97
Grading3.91
Reflection4.35
Respect4.48
Creativity4.02
Feedback3.92
Interaction4.44
Challenge4.33
Questions4.24
Jennifer Marie Ellis 27 reported responses 4.75Eval / 5
Overall4.75 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.57
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.73
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.47
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity4.63
Grading4.63
Reflection4.63
Respect4.83
Creativity4.77
Feedback4.77
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.87
Questions4.70
Chelsea Brown 70 reported responses 4.66Eval / 5
Overall4.66 / 5
70 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.79
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.55
Contribution4.64
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.19
Grading4.46
Reflection4.79
Respect4.56
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.32
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.56
Questions4.65
Balbir Singh 9 reported responses 4.67Eval / 5
Overall4.67 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.30
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.40
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.70
Questions4.90
Shannon Marie Mcknight 18 reported responses 4.73Eval / 5
Overall4.73 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.55
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.55
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.70
Reflection4.55
Respect4.95
Creativity4.85
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.75
Questions5.00
Madeleine Gilliatt Wade 18 reported responses 4.14Eval / 5
Overall4.14 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration4.80
Connection3.85
Contribution4.15
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity3.85
Grading3.70
Reflection3.90
Respect4.25
Creativity4.25
Feedback4.05
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.15
Questions4.05
Andrew Joseph Mertens 41 reported responses 4.67Eval / 5
Overall4.67 / 5
41 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.48
Technology4.82
Synthesis4.33
Collaboration4.72
Connection4.45
Contribution4.57
Discussion4.69
Inclusivity4.46
Grading4.47
Reflection4.58
Respect4.75
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.82
Questions4.67
Jennifer Marie Weber 34 reported responses 4.58Eval / 5
Overall4.58 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.37
Technology4.53
Synthesis4.53
Collaboration4.87
Connection4.37
Contribution4.53
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity3.93
Grading4.37
Reflection4.47
Respect4.83
Creativity4.53
Feedback4.63
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.57
Questions4.67
Jacob Thomas Derosa 6 reported responses 4.86Eval / 5
Overall4.86 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.50
Questions5.00
Alex Rogers 21 reported responses 4.82Eval / 5
Overall4.82 / 5
21 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.99
Technology4.99
Synthesis4.83
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.67
Contribution4.73
Discussion4.87
Inclusivity4.78
Grading4.68
Reflection4.74
Respect4.99
Creativity4.91
Feedback4.86
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.83
Questions4.87
Emil Bansemer 22 reported responses 4.36Eval / 5
Overall4.36 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.05
Collaboration4.90
Connection3.60
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.25
Inclusivity3.70
Grading4.50
Reflection3.85
Respect4.55
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.20
Questions4.55
Emily Brown 20 reported responses 4.58Eval / 5
Overall4.58 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.25
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity3.85
Grading4.75
Reflection4.65
Respect4.50
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.60
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.35
Questions4.75
Cindy Villanueva 24 reported responses 4.53Eval / 5
Overall4.53 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.15
Contribution4.45
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.45
Reflection4.35
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.75
Challenge4.65
Questions4.55
Mikaela Ann Rowe 20 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.75
Connection3.95
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.65
Reflection4.10
Respect4.60
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.65
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.55
Questions4.80
Noah Berley 17 reported responses 3.01Eval / 5
Overall3.01 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence2.85
Technology3.05
Synthesis3.25
Collaboration4.45
Connection2.80
Contribution3.40
Discussion2.20
Inclusivity3.05
Grading2.45
Reflection3.30
Respect2.90
Creativity3.45
Feedback2.20
Interaction4.25
Challenge3.15
Questions2.25
Justin Gluck 25 reported responses 4.68Eval / 5
Overall4.68 / 5
25 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.75
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.10
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.65
Reflection4.25
Respect4.85
Creativity4.85
Feedback4.85
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.50
Questions4.70
Jacqui Fallon 22 reported responses 4.39Eval / 5
Overall4.39 / 5
22 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.60
Connection3.80
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.65
Inclusivity4.25
Grading4.40
Reflection4.25
Respect4.75
Creativity4.15
Feedback4.55
Interaction4.20
Challenge4.40
Questions4.75
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.