Course record THTR
THTR 1003
Acting 1
University of Colorado Boulder
703 grades27 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score58/100
Mixed record
Nolan Kelly Carey 33 grades · 1 term 4.00GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Carey vs. the course average
A
+25.6
B
−15.8
C
−6.3
D
−1.6
F
−2.0
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 33 enrolled.
Overall4.23 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.60
Technology4.10
Synthesis3.90
Collaboration4.60
Connection3.70
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.30
Grading3.60
Reflection4.10
Respect4.70
Creativity3.90
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.40
Questions4.60
Kevin M Rich 52 grades · 1 term 3.87GPA
52 letter grades
Compare with the course
Rich vs. the course average
A
+14.1
B
−4.3
C
−6.3
D
−1.6
F
−2.0
Difference in percentage points.
3.7% withdrew · 2 of 54 enrolled.
Overall4.75 / 5
36 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.15
Technology3.79
Synthesis4.41
Collaboration4.93
Connection3.71
Contribution4.84
Discussion4.80
Inclusivity4.14
Grading4.71
Reflection4.79
Respect4.95
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.95
Interaction4.85
Challenge4.77
Questions4.85
Heather Marie Kelley 141 grades · 1 term 3.61GPA
141 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kelley vs. the course average
A
+1.5
B
+1.2
C
−1.3
D
−0.9
F
−0.6
Difference in percentage points.
2.8% withdrew · 4 of 145 enrolled.
Overall4.70 / 5
47 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.07
Synthesis4.51
Collaboration4.96
Connection3.79
Contribution4.67
Discussion4.67
Inclusivity4.65
Grading4.46
Reflection4.34
Respect4.93
Creativity4.37
Feedback4.88
Interaction4.96
Challenge4.62
Questions4.90
Kaitlin Rose Moore Nabors 88 grades · 1 term 3.59GPA
88 letter grades
Compare with the course
Nabors vs. the course average
A
+5.2
B
−5.6
C
+0.6
D
−0.4
F
+0.3
Difference in percentage points.
4.3% withdrew · 4 of 92 enrolled.
Overall4.75 / 5
51 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.23
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.65
Collaboration4.91
Connection4.17
Contribution4.93
Discussion4.89
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.79
Reflection4.67
Respect4.95
Creativity4.58
Feedback4.89
Interaction4.99
Challenge4.62
Questions4.92
Cecilia J Pang 50 grades · 1 term 3.58GPA
50 letter grades
Compare with the course
Pang vs. the course average
A
+1.6
B
+4.2
C
−6.3
D
+0.4
F
same
Difference in percentage points.
3.8% withdrew · 2 of 52 enrolled.
Overall4.33 / 5
20 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.77
Technology2.37
Synthesis3.86
Collaboration4.86
Connection4.05
Contribution4.35
Discussion4.22
Inclusivity4.59
Grading2.59
Reflection4.01
Respect4.58
Creativity4.45
Feedback3.59
Interaction4.84
Challenge3.79
Questions4.58
Jacob Dresch 48 grades · 1 term 3.36GPA
48 letter grades
Compare with the course
Dresch vs. the course average
A
−7.7
B
+3.0
C
+4.2
D
+0.5
F
+0.1
Difference in percentage points.
5.9% withdrew · 3 of 51 enrolled.
Overall4.63 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.07
Technology4.27
Synthesis4.67
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.50
Contribution4.63
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.70
Reflection4.47
Respect4.83
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.53
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.83
Questions4.67
Erin Rachel Kaplan 28 grades · 1 term 3.23GPA
28 letter grades
Compare with the course
Kaplan vs. the course average
A
−24.4
B
+19.9
C
+0.9
D
+2.0
F
+1.6
Difference in percentage points.
6.7% withdrew · 2 of 30 enrolled.
Overall4.42 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.65
Technology4.23
Synthesis4.19
Collaboration4.77
Connection3.96
Contribution4.23
Discussion4.42
Inclusivity4.38
Grading4.15
Reflection4.54
Respect4.85
Creativity4.65
Feedback4.50
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.54
Questions4.69
Charles Howard Persons 35 grades · 1 term 3.16GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Persons vs. the course average
A
−28.7
B
+18.5
C
+10.9
D
−1.6
F
+0.9
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 35 enrolled.
Overall3.97 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.06
Technology3.96
Synthesis3.26
Collaboration4.38
Connection3.19
Contribution3.55
Discussion3.65
Inclusivity3.28
Grading3.18
Reflection3.42
Respect3.92
Creativity3.62
Feedback4.07
Interaction4.08
Challenge3.42
Questions4.49
Jashodhara Sen 35 grades · 1 term 2.88GPA
35 letter grades
Compare with the course
Sen vs. the course average
A
−20.1
B
−7.2
C
+13.7
D
+7.0
F
+6.6
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 35 enrolled.
Richard Jay Long 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 4.00GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
6.3% withdrew · 1 of 16 enrolled.
Overall3.98 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.50
Technology2.50
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration4.00
Connection4.50
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.20
Inclusivity2.50
Grading2.50
Reflection4.00
Respect3.80
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.50
Interaction4.00
Challenge4.80
Questions4.50
Jessica Campbell Robblee 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.93GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 18 enrolled.
Overall5.00 / 5
2 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
Amanda Beth Giguere 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.85GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 13 enrolled.
Sylvia Gregory 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.83GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 16 enrolled.
Overall5.00 / 5
3 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology4.30
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
Amanda Rose Hartley Villarreal 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.81GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 17 enrolled.
Overall4.93 / 5
4 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence5.00
Technology5.00
Synthesis5.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection5.00
Contribution4.30
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity5.00
Grading5.00
Reflection5.00
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.80
Julia Anderson 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.67GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 18 enrolled.
Overall3.23 / 5
14 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence2.21
Technology1.44
Synthesis2.05
Collaboration2.97
Connection2.17
Contribution2.67
Discussion2.02
Inclusivity2.65
Grading1.57
Reflection1.46
Respect2.71
Creativity2.21
Feedback1.75
Interaction2.52
Challenge1.92
Questions2.36
Ashlyn King Barnett 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.59GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.54 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.20
Synthesis4.50
Collaboration4.60
Connection4.10
Contribution4.50
Discussion4.60
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.50
Reflection4.40
Respect4.60
Creativity4.50
Feedback4.80
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.40
Questions4.80
Justin Andrew Johnson 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.58GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
12.5% withdrew · 2 of 16 enrolled.
Overall4.71 / 5
16 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.93
Technology4.94
Synthesis4.96
Collaboration4.95
Connection4.00
Contribution4.97
Discussion4.98
Inclusivity4.95
Grading4.96
Reflection4.98
Respect4.96
Creativity4.96
Feedback4.96
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.93
Questions4.95
Sarah Alaaeldin Fahmy 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.47GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
13.3% withdrew · 2 of 15 enrolled.
Overall4.19 / 5
10 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology3.50
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.20
Connection4.60
Contribution4.00
Discussion4.00
Inclusivity4.90
Grading3.80
Reflection4.40
Respect4.60
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.50
Challenge4.10
Questions4.40
Gillian Riley Nogeire 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.34GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
12.5% withdrew · 2 of 16 enrolled.
Stephen H Weitz 16 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.23GPA
16 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 16 enrolled.
Overall4.20 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology3.40
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.60
Connection3.50
Contribution4.10
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity3.30
Grading4.30
Reflection4.30
Respect4.00
Creativity4.40
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.40
Challenge4.00
Questions4.30
Emily K. Harrison 24 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.05GPA
24 letter grades · Limited sample
11.1% withdrew · 3 of 27 enrolled.
Overall4.57 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.20
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.45
Grading4.20
Reflection4.70
Respect4.55
Creativity4.55
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.90
Challenge4.55
Questions4.70
Ben Stasny 12 reported responses 4.14Eval / 5
Overall4.14 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Technology3.50
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.50
Connection3.90
Contribution4.20
Discussion4.10
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.00
Reflection4.30
Respect4.30
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.70
Challenge3.80
Questions4.30
Kevin Finkelstein 27 reported responses 4.77Eval / 5
Overall4.77 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.32
Technology4.31
Synthesis4.87
Collaboration4.97
Connection4.54
Contribution4.82
Discussion4.71
Inclusivity4.65
Grading4.84
Reflection4.68
Respect4.98
Creativity4.99
Feedback4.89
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.89
Questions4.70
Kasra Mirfattahi 18 reported responses 4.38Eval / 5
Overall4.38 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.68
Technology3.91
Synthesis4.08
Collaboration4.72
Connection3.45
Contribution4.21
Discussion4.31
Inclusivity4.03
Grading4.69
Reflection3.77
Respect4.66
Creativity4.09
Feedback4.17
Interaction4.68
Challenge4.01
Questions4.78
Sam Collier 5 reported responses 4.59Eval / 5
Overall4.59 / 5
5 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.80
Technology4.00
Synthesis4.80
Collaboration5.00
Connection3.80
Contribution5.00
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.00
Grading3.80
Reflection4.60
Respect5.00
Creativity5.00
Feedback5.00
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.40
Questions4.80
Aaron Klass 11 reported responses 4.61Eval / 5
Overall4.61 / 5
11 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.25
Technology4.07
Synthesis4.45
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.00
Contribution4.38
Discussion4.38
Inclusivity4.15
Grading4.68
Reflection4.52
Respect4.98
Creativity4.22
Feedback4.48
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.75
Questions5.00
James Early 12 reported responses 4.79Eval / 5
Overall4.79 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.54
Technology4.27
Synthesis4.95
Collaboration4.77
Connection4.49
Contribution4.95
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.91
Grading4.86
Reflection4.91
Respect4.80
Creativity4.91
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge4.80
Questions4.71
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.