Course record SPAN
SPAN 3100
Literary and Cultural Analysis in Spanish
University of Colorado Boulder
584 grades15 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score50/100
Mixed record
Nuria Silleras-Fernandez 66 grades · 1 term 3.53GPA
66 letter grades
Compare with the course
Silleras-Fernandez vs. the course average
A
−4.5
B
+11.9
C
−4.8
D
−1.4
F
−1.2
Difference in percentage points.
1.5% withdrew · 1 of 67 enrolled.
Overall4.82 / 5
33 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.82
Technology4.72
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.82
Connection4.42
Contribution4.82
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.88
Reflection4.80
Respect4.90
Creativity4.68
Feedback4.59
Interaction4.92
Challenge4.88
Questions4.92
Andres Ignacio Prieto 83 grades · 1 term 3.50GPA
83 letter grades
Compare with the course
Prieto vs. the course average
A
+3.6
B
+0.8
C
−4.3
D
−1.4
F
+1.2
Difference in percentage points.
1.2% withdrew · 1 of 84 enrolled.
Overall4.51 / 5
56 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.67
Synthesis4.54
Collaboration4.27
Connection4.33
Contribution4.31
Discussion4.82
Inclusivity4.72
Grading3.73
Reflection4.70
Respect4.97
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.61
Interaction4.93
Challenge4.72
Questions4.56
Yohainna Abdala Mesa 56 grades · 1 term 3.49GPA
56 letter grades
Compare with the course
Mesa vs. the course average
A
+8.8
B
−3.7
C
−7.9
D
+2.2
F
+0.6
Difference in percentage points.
9.7% withdrew · 6 of 62 enrolled.
Overall4.42 / 5
32 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology4.72
Synthesis4.93
Collaboration4.78
Connection4.92
Contribution4.78
Discussion4.77
Inclusivity4.94
Grading4.13
Reflection4.92
Respect4.97
Creativity4.94
Feedback4.46
Interaction4.53
Challenge4.94
Questions4.88
Elika Ortega-Guzman 109 grades · 1 term 3.48GPA
109 letter grades
Compare with the course
Ortega-Guzman vs. the course average
A
+5.1
B
−7.5
C
+2.2
D
+0.5
F
−0.3
Difference in percentage points.
1.8% withdrew · 2 of 111 enrolled.
Overall4.70 / 5
127 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology4.62
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.61
Connection4.54
Contribution4.67
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.78
Grading4.63
Reflection4.77
Respect4.85
Creativity4.73
Feedback4.56
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.65
Questions4.74
Peter Michael Elmore 63 grades · 1 term 3.26GPA
63 letter grades
Compare with the course
Elmore vs. the course average
A
−11.5
B
+9.2
C
+3.2
D
+0.2
F
−1.2
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 63 enrolled.
Overall4.28 / 5
53 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.66
Technology3.72
Synthesis4.36
Collaboration4.23
Connection4.36
Contribution4.56
Discussion4.74
Inclusivity4.47
Grading4.10
Reflection4.85
Respect4.60
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.56
Interaction4.77
Challenge4.39
Questions4.55
Juan Pablo Dabove 63 grades · 1 term 3.16GPA
63 letter grades
Compare with the course
Dabove vs. the course average
A
−11.5
B
+1.3
C
+8.0
D
+1.8
F
+0.4
Difference in percentage points.
8.7% withdrew · 6 of 69 enrolled.
Overall4.21 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.06
Technology3.96
Synthesis4.21
Collaboration4.04
Connection3.91
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.26
Grading3.66
Reflection4.31
Respect4.16
Creativity4.00
Feedback3.71
Interaction4.45
Challenge4.26
Questions4.01
Nina L Molinaro 38 grades · 1 term 3.13GPA
38 letter grades
Compare with the course
Molinaro vs. the course average
A
−11.7
B
+3.7
C
+7.9
D
−1.4
F
+1.4
Difference in percentage points.
7.3% withdrew · 3 of 41 enrolled.
Overall4.20 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.10
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration3.90
Connection3.90
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.20
Grading3.20
Reflection4.40
Respect4.70
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.30
Questions4.30
Brittany Frodge 21 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.94GPA
21 letter grades · Limited sample
4.5% withdrew · 1 of 22 enrolled.
Overall4.86 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.80
Technology4.90
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.50
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.90
Reflection4.60
Respect5.00
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Margaret Herland 22 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.67GPA
22 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 22 enrolled.
Overall4.44 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.30
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.50
Reflection4.50
Respect4.60
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.70
Challenge4.40
Questions4.50
Javier Krauel 20 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.36GPA
20 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 20 enrolled.
Overall4.66 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.00
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.70
Reflection4.60
Respect4.90
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.70
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.70
Julio Baena 19 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.31GPA
19 letter grades · Limited sample
13.6% withdrew · 3 of 22 enrolled.
Overall3.56 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology2.80
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration2.30
Connection3.80
Contribution2.50
Discussion3.20
Inclusivity4.20
Grading2.70
Reflection3.90
Respect4.10
Creativity4.10
Feedback3.90
Interaction3.30
Challenge4.30
Questions4.50
Juan Herrero-Senes 24 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.17GPA
24 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 24 enrolled.
Overall4.90 / 5
2 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology5.00
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading4.50
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions5.00
Carrie Chorba Fross 12 reported responses 4.37Eval / 5
Overall4.37 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.30
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.10
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.10
Reflection4.60
Respect4.70
Creativity4.10
Feedback4.00
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Patricia Sicouly 8 reported responses 3.03Eval / 5
Overall3.03 / 5
8 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.40
Technology2.60
Synthesis3.40
Collaboration3.60
Connection2.80
Contribution3.40
Discussion3.60
Inclusivity3.50
Grading1.90
Reflection3.10
Respect3.60
Creativity2.50
Feedback2.40
Interaction3.80
Challenge3.50
Questions2.60
John William Kennedy 18 reported responses 4.88Eval / 5
Overall4.88 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.90
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.80
Contribution4.90
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.90
Grading4.90
Reflection4.90
Respect4.90
Creativity4.70
Feedback4.90
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.