Class record · APSY · LSOE

APSY 7440

Foundations of Counseling I · 11 instructors on record · 64 sections

How the curve score is built

75Teaching85 raw · 41st percentile of BC classes

−2Easiness adjustmenteasiness 68 · 65 raw workload · lighter than 20% of BC classes

73Curve scorethe teaching curve −2 for the workload · at most ±6 either way

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 20% of BC classes.

What the course score is made of

85BC evaluations64 records · weight ×1.0 · Fall 2021 – Fall 2025

—Student reviewsno reviews — does not contribute

—RateMyProfessorsno ratings — does not contribute

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.

What the challenge rank is made of

29thMore challenging than 29% of BC classesranked against every one we hold

87BC — “Intellectually Challenging”64 records · raw score out of 100

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.

What the workload rank is made of

80thMore work than 80% of BC classesranked against every one we hold

65BC — “Workload”64 records · raw score out of 100

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.

Summer course is intended for non-counseling majors only. Provides an introduction to counseling principles and techniques with an emphasis on interviewing skills. The areas of communication skills involving the use of role playing, observation, and practice components are emphasized. Training consists of peer role-plays and laboratory experiences with individual and group supervision.Section .01 is for Mental Health Counseling students ONLYSection .02 is for School Counseling students ONLY

The board

11 instructors · ranked on this class onlyCompare the top 3

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. 3 of the 11 rows carry a mark saying so.

Rank	Instructor	Curve	Easiness	Challenge	RMP overall
1	Maria TheodorakakisCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology	9197 raw · 4 records	68−2 to the score	41st	—no page
2	Emma Highsmith RichCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional fewer records	99100 raw · 2 records	—	100th	—no page
3	Jonathan WolffCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional	99100 raw · 2 records	78±0 to the score	48th	—no page
4	Ryan RivardCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology	8391 raw · 3 records	84+2 to the score	15th	—no page
5	Mauricio MontesCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional fewer records	9298 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	90th	—no page
6	Beth WatermanCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional	9197 raw · 1 record	—	69th	—no page
7	Amanda ReyomeCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional	8194 raw · 2 records	58−5 to the score	69th	—no page
8	Emily ZhangCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional	7083 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	9th	—no page
9	Damon PryorCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional	6780 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	9th	—no page
10	Elizabeth LouisCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional fewer records	4949 raw · 2 records	—	0th	201 rating · all classes
11	Sidney TranthamCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology	7186 raw · 45 records	65−3 to the score	27th	—no page

8 of 11 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. The RateMyProfessors column is an instructor's overall figure across everything they teach, not a figure about this class.

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.

That site has no course dimension, so its figure is shown for information and kept out of the ranking.

The line

All 13 items · means across 64 records

Instructor4

Course3

Feedback3

Workload & Challengenot ratings

Bars 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

64 sections · newest first

Instructor	Term	Sec	Instr	Course	Work
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	01	88	82	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	02	100	100	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	03	92	92	60
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	04	75	88	100
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	05	76	76	60
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	06	88	84	60
Mauricio Montes	Fall 2025	07	98	93	60
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	07	95	93	60
Beth Waterman	Fall 2025	08	97	90	—
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	08	90	90	—
Amanda Reyome	Fall 2025	09	92	87	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	09	88	87	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	10	95	85	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2025	11	80	65	60
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	01	91	87	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	02	92	96	80
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	03	87	100	—
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	04	93	93	60
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	05	93	90	—
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	06	96	92	—
Emma Highsmith Rich	Fall 2024	07	100	100	—
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	07	84	100	—
Jonathan Wolff	Fall 2024	08	100	97	40
Sidney Trantham	Fall 2024	08	100	97	40
Emily Zhang	Fall 2024	09	83	73	60

Showing the first 25.

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.