Course record SOCY
SOCY 2031
Social Problems
University of Colorado Boulder
1,069 grades29 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score37/100
Below average
Amanda Stewart 200 grades · 1 term 3.68GPA
200 letter grades
Compare with the course
Stewart vs. the course average
A
+19.0
B
−8.9
C
−6.3
D
−3.3
F
−0.5
Difference in percentage points.
0.5% withdrew · 1 of 201 enrolled.
Overall4.73 / 5
87 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.73
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.63
Collaboration4.34
Connection4.85
Contribution4.49
Discussion4.74
Inclusivity4.83
Grading4.74
Reflection4.64
Respect4.85
Creativity4.74
Feedback4.31
Interaction4.68
Challenge4.72
Questions4.71
Michael Haffey 51 grades · 1 term 3.62GPA
51 letter grades
Compare with the course
Haffey vs. the course average
A
+18.4
B
−11.6
C
−2.9
D
−3.3
F
−0.6
Difference in percentage points.
8.9% withdrew · 5 of 56 enrolled.
Don Sherman Grant Ii 331 grades · 1 term 3.43GPA
331 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ii vs. the course average
A
+2.6
B
+0.5
C
−0.3
D
−1.8
F
−1.0
Difference in percentage points.
6.2% withdrew · 22 of 353 enrolled.
Overall4.22 / 5
85 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.70
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.20
Reflection4.30
Respect4.70
Creativity4.20
Feedback3.50
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.50
Questions4.50
Mathieu Desan 96 grades · 1 term 3.26GPA
96 letter grades
Compare with the course
Desan vs. the course average
A
+3.6
B
−6.7
C
−5.7
D
+11.3
F
−2.5
Difference in percentage points.
2.0% withdrew · 2 of 98 enrolled.
Overall4.44 / 5
40 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration3.40
Connection4.80
Contribution4.30
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.60
Reflection4.60
Respect4.80
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.70
Eric Allen Reiff 96 grades · 1 term 3.19GPA
96 letter grades
Compare with the course
Reiff vs. the course average
A
−19.3
B
+19.3
C
+2.7
D
−2.2
F
−0.4
Difference in percentage points.
3.0% withdrew · 3 of 99 enrolled.
Laurent Cilia 96 grades · 1 term 3.18GPA
96 letter grades
Compare with the course
Cilia vs. the course average
A
−13.1
B
+9.9
C
+1.6
D
+3.0
F
−1.5
Difference in percentage points.
3.0% withdrew · 3 of 99 enrolled.
Overall4.35 / 5
63 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.36
Technology4.53
Synthesis4.14
Collaboration4.37
Connection4.45
Contribution4.15
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.76
Grading4.49
Reflection4.36
Respect4.67
Creativity4.66
Feedback4.04
Interaction4.29
Challenge3.86
Questions3.88
Earle Jay Watterworth 54 grades · 1 term 3.12GPA
54 letter grades
Compare with the course
Watterworth vs. the course average
A
−13.9
B
+8.1
C
+4.2
D
+0.4
F
+1.2
Difference in percentage points.
5.3% withdrew · 3 of 57 enrolled.
Overall3.97 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.78
Technology3.27
Synthesis4.68
Collaboration3.78
Connection4.82
Contribution4.82
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.72
Grading2.12
Reflection4.37
Respect4.03
Creativity3.82
Feedback2.96
Interaction4.21
Challenge4.50
Questions4.02
Alaina Iacobucci 62 grades · 1 term 3.09GPA
62 letter grades
Compare with the course
Iacobucci vs. the course average
A
−15.2
B
+2.4
C
+10.6
D
+3.2
F
−0.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 62 enrolled.
Overall4.53 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.80
Contribution4.40
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.60
Reflection4.70
Respect4.60
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.50
Questions4.70
Liane G Pedersen-Gallegos 83 grades · 1 term 2.83GPA
83 letter grades
Compare with the course
Pedersen-Gallegos vs. the course average
A
−13.8
B
−6.5
C
+9.3
D
+0.3
F
+10.7
Difference in percentage points.
5.7% withdrew · 5 of 88 enrolled.
Liane G P Gallegos 34 reported responses 4.06Eval / 5
Overall4.06 / 5
34 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration2.30
Connection4.70
Contribution4.30
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect5.00
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.30
Interaction3.70
Challenge4.40
Questions3.80
Andrew S Gutierrez 35 reported responses 3.96Eval / 5
Overall3.96 / 5
35 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology3.80
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration2.30
Connection4.70
Contribution4.30
Discussion3.20
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.10
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.20
Interaction3.70
Challenge4.30
Questions4.10
Austin Fitzgerald 30 reported responses 4.73Eval / 5
Overall4.73 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.83
Technology4.57
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.83
Contribution4.83
Discussion4.93
Inclusivity4.93
Grading4.70
Reflection4.83
Respect5.00
Creativity4.57
Feedback4.53
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.73
Questions4.90
Alison Hatch 120 reported responses 4.62Eval / 5
Overall4.62 / 5
120 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.67
Synthesis4.52
Collaboration4.18
Connection4.95
Contribution4.82
Discussion4.84
Inclusivity4.87
Grading4.52
Reflection4.66
Respect4.79
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.47
Interaction4.83
Challenge4.70
Questions4.87
Matthew Sean Bravo 162 reported responses 4.14Eval / 5
Overall4.14 / 5
162 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.42
Technology4.02
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration3.29
Connection4.78
Contribution3.98
Discussion4.35
Inclusivity4.47
Grading3.97
Reflection4.38
Respect4.60
Creativity3.89
Feedback3.50
Interaction4.17
Challenge4.40
Questions4.32
Tracy Fehrsardone 30 reported responses 4.47Eval / 5
Overall4.47 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.35
Technology4.45
Synthesis4.35
Collaboration3.95
Connection4.65
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.45
Reflection4.70
Respect4.70
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.25
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.60
Questions4.40
Katherine Mercer 1 reported responses 3.25Eval / 5
Overall3.25 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology4.00
Synthesis3.00
Collaboration1.00
Connection5.00
Contribution3.00
Discussion1.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading3.00
Reflection4.00
Respect5.00
Creativity2.00
Feedback4.00
Interaction1.00
Challenge4.00
Questions4.00
Jeanne Kaufman 6 reported responses 4.55Eval / 5
Overall4.55 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.78
Technology4.35
Synthesis4.78
Collaboration3.61
Connection5.00
Contribution4.57
Discussion4.04
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.35
Reflection4.91
Respect4.91
Creativity4.35
Feedback4.35
Interaction4.26
Challenge4.91
Questions4.78
Don Sherman Grant 175 reported responses 4.08Eval / 5
Overall4.08 / 5
175 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.41
Technology4.12
Synthesis4.37
Collaboration3.60
Connection4.69
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.47
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.07
Reflection4.40
Respect4.75
Creativity4.26
Feedback4.08
Interaction4.27
Challenge4.40
Questions4.44
Francis R Naylor 51 reported responses 3.67Eval / 5
Overall3.67 / 5
51 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology3.40
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration3.20
Connection4.60
Contribution3.80
Discussion3.80
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.20
Reflection4.20
Respect4.40
Creativity3.50
Feedback2.80
Interaction4.10
Challenge3.70
Questions3.80
Zoe Lefkowitz 41 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5
41 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.80
Contribution4.50
Discussion3.90
Inclusivity4.80
Grading4.00
Reflection4.40
Respect4.30
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.20
Questions4.10
Ashley Myrtle Blinkhorn 30 reported responses 4.69Eval / 5
Overall4.69 / 5
30 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.73
Technology4.77
Synthesis4.77
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.93
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.70
Reflection4.80
Respect4.80
Creativity4.47
Feedback4.43
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.77
Questions4.70
Katie Mercer 9 reported responses 4.90Eval / 5
Overall4.90 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.99
Technology4.99
Synthesis4.98
Collaboration4.25
Connection4.98
Contribution4.99
Discussion4.99
Inclusivity4.99
Grading4.99
Reflection5.00
Respect4.99
Creativity4.96
Feedback4.89
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.99
Questions4.99
Jasmine Suryawan Buenviaje 3 reported responses 4.89Eval / 5
Overall4.89 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration4.70
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.70
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.70
Questions5.00
Hannah L Edwards 17 reported responses 4.23Eval / 5
Overall4.23 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology3.90
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.80
Connection4.60
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.20
Reflection4.40
Respect4.80
Creativity4.30
Feedback3.50
Interaction4.10
Challenge4.40
Questions4.40
Tracy Danielle Fehr 8 reported responses 4.83Eval / 5
Overall4.83 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.98
Collaboration3.85
Connection4.99
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.99
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity4.22
Feedback4.99
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.98
Questions4.99
Suleyman Kiroglu 23 reported responses 4.64Eval / 5
Overall4.64 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.40
Connection5.00
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.60
Reflection4.70
Respect4.90
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.70
Questions4.50
Jason Downing 4 reported responses 3.43Eval / 5
Overall3.43 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology3.70
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration3.00
Connection4.80
Contribution4.20
Discussion2.70
Inclusivity4.50
Grading2.20
Reflection4.00
Respect3.20
Creativity4.50
Feedback2.20
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.00
Questions2.50
Paige Massey 20 reported responses 3.97Eval / 5
Overall3.97 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.80
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.50
Grading3.50
Reflection4.20
Respect4.30
Creativity3.80
Feedback3.70
Interaction4.20
Challenge3.80
Questions3.70
Sydney Nemetz 63 reported responses 4.34Eval / 5
Overall4.34 / 5
63 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.83
Technology4.76
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.61
Connection4.59
Contribution4.41
Discussion4.76
Inclusivity4.87
Grading4.17
Reflection4.81
Respect4.58
Creativity4.44
Feedback2.84
Interaction4.79
Challenge4.46
Questions4.52
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.