ADLP 7003
Leading Change from the Middle · 3 instructors on record · 6 sections
Boston College's ratings are bunched at the top — the median instructor averages about 88 out of 100 on the raw scale, and 44% of them clear 90 — so a raw score cannot separate anybody. Every figure here is ranked against BC classes and that rank is re-expressed out of 100, which is what turns a raw 88 — the middle of the university — into a figure that says where somebody actually stands. On this scale 77 is the median, 84 the top quarter and 91 the top tenth. Workload is then an adjustment on top of that, worth nothing at all for an ordinary one. Lighter work than 13% of BC classes.
The class itself, averaged across everyone who taught it — who taught it is the board below.
How is this worked out?
That is what a student picking a section is actually choosing between: the board carries each instructor's own score for this class, and the score above is the class averaged across all of them.
Boston College's own “intellectually challenging” question. It is not a measure of difficulty, grading or workload.
How is this worked out?
Boston College's own “intellectually challenging” question for this class only — students answer it positively about courses that stretched them, so it measures intellectual challenge and NOT grading, workload or quality. Almost every BC class scores high on it, which is why it is shown as a rank rather than a score.
One of Boston College's five workload bands, not a number of hours. Higher means more work, not worse.
How is this worked out?
Boston College reports workload for this class only as one of five bands, not as a number of hours, and it does not publish what the bands mean — so this site will not translate it into hours. Higher means more work, which is not the same as worse.
The contemporary business environment is constantly changing. Global and domestic markets are in flux, and the workforce is subject to the ebb and flow of generational dynamics. Whether Fortune 500 or small business, the ability to be nimble and strategically change in response to the fluidity of business trends is the key to success. Yet, leading and managing change in the corporate setting is extraordinarily challenging. Change is unsettling. Change challenges the security of how things have been done. Change tests the mettle of project implementation and teams. The prospect of change often impedes creativity rather than promotes innovation in the workplace. No one wants to be wrong or make a wrong decision in the face of change. Hence, managers and the workforce they oversee tend to be change resistant. In order for the organization to change, the people in the organization must be willing to change work/management styles, approaches, and attitudes. In todays highly competitive business environment, rapid and smooth decision-making and implementation is the basis for competitive edge. This course will be presented in three parts. First, students will gain a detailed understanding of change at the macro (organizational) and micro (individual) levels. We will identify the problems associated with anticipating, initiating and implementing change in both for profit and not for profit corporate settings. The second part of the course will explore various techniques in promoting sound analytical corporate response to change at the senior and mid-level managerial levels. The final part of the course is applied. Student teams will assume leadership roles in a fictional company needing change and present their change process in class. Students will also each prepare an analysis of a case studies of corporate change experience. Emphasis will be placed on the process of change in the business context. The class discussions will be grounded in empirical realities rather than theoretical suppositions.
Scores are real averages. The order also accounts for how many records back each one — the count is under every score — so one perfect review does not outrank a semester of them.
| Rank | Instructor | Curve | Easiness | Challenge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Erin SheehyAdvancing Studies Provisional | 8092 raw · 2 records | 63−3 to the score | 19th |
| 2 | Gary AroraAdvancing Studies Provisional | 7792 raw · 1 record | 58−5 to the score | 76th |
| 3 | Karen YeyinmenAdvancing Studies | 6884 raw · 3 records | 58−5 to the score | 55th |
2 of 3 rows are marked provisional: fewer than 3 records stand behind the number. That is thin evidence, not a bad instructor — the record count is in every row.
How this board is built and ordered
Positions account for how many records stand behind each number, so one perfect review does not outrank a semester of them. Every score shown is the real average — only the ordering is adjusted. The comparison here is the class itself: a thin record is read against how this class was rated overall, not against the university.
Every instructor with an evaluation record for this class is on this board — it is not a top ten, and nothing is hidden behind a “show more”. Curve is the instructor's score for THIS class only, ranked against every instructor we hold and printed back out of 100, with the raw BC average underneath it; nothing on this board is an average across the other things they teach. Easiness is an adjustment on top of it, worth up to about ±6 — BC's workload item, ranked and turned over, so a lighter section gains and a heavier one loses, while an ordinary one changes nothing — and each row prints the adjustment, signed. The board is ordered on the same figure it prints, adjusted for how many records back it. Challenge is BC's “intellectually challenging” item shown as a rank against every class we hold; students answer it positively about courses that stretched them, so it is not a measure of difficulty or grading, and it is never marked better or worse.
The line
All 13 items · means across 6 recordsBars are ranks, not raw scores. Nothing here is graded good or bad.
What each item asks
- Explains Clearly
- The instructor was effective at creating an understanding of difficult subject matter.
- Available
- The instructor was available for help outside of class.
- Motivating
- The instructor motivated me to do my best work.
- Sparks Interest
- The course stimulated my interest in the subject matter.
- Organized
- The course was well organized.
- Clear Goals
- The learning objectives for the course were clear.
- Useful Later
- What I learned is applicable beyond this course.
- Assignments
- Assignments and exams contributed to my learning.
- Fast Feedback
- I received feedback on my work in a timely manner.
- Useful Feedback
- The feedback I received on my work was meaningful.
- Workload
- How much work the course took outside class, on Boston College's five-band scale — the band boundaries are not published, so this is not a number of hours.
- Challenge
- The course was intellectually challenging.
- Attendance
- Attending class was necessary to do well in this course.
Why these numbers are curved
Both the number and the bar are the rank against every comparable record we hold, printed back out of 100. BC's questions all have a median around 4.5, so on the raw scale every cell here would read in the high eighties and every bar would be nearly full — thirteen numbers that tell you nothing. Each cell prints its raw BC figure and its percentile underneath, so nothing is hidden by the transform. Every bar is one ink colour — nothing here is graded green or red. The hatched bars are not ratings at all: a higher number on either describes a different course, not a better one.
Game log
6 sections · newest first| Instructor | Term | Sec | Instr | Course | Work |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Erin Sheehy | Spring 2026 | 01 | 91 | 83 | 80 |
| Erin Sheehy | Fall 2025 | 02 | 93 | 84 | 60 |
| Karen Yeyinmen | Summer 2025 | 01 | 87 | 76 | 80 |
| Karen Yeyinmen | Spring 2025 | 01 | 85 | 79 | 60 |
| Karen Yeyinmen | Spring 2025 | 02 | 81 | 77 | 100 |
| Gary Arora | Summer 2024 | 01 | 92 | 91 | 80 |
How to read this board
Instructors are ranked on their record in this class only, never on their average across everything they teach. Scores are out of 100 — Boston College's 1–5 agreement scale, ×20, the way these numbers were printed for years. Workload is BC's own five-band figure, not a number of hours, and is shown as a rank. A dash means the question was not reported, and is never a zero.