Carney Curve

Boston College course evaluations · Fall 2021 through Spring 2026, ranked class by class

Top of the board1.PRTO 3300982.UNAS 3348903.MUSP 1670944.COMM 1060925.MUSP 1660926.ECON 9902887.BSLW 2299918.PHIL 4932939.COMM 19029010.UGMG 10109311.MUSP 26009912.TMPS 803495
How this list is 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.

Class record · APSY · LSOE

APSY 7661

Practicum and Internship Seminar II · 13 instructors on record · 43 sections

How the curve score is built
80Teaching90 raw · 60th percentile of BC classes
+5Easiness adjustmenteasiness 97 · 36 raw workload · lighter than 97% of BC classes
85Curve scorethe teaching curve +5 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 97% of BC classes.

What the course score is made of
90BC evaluations43 records · weight ×1.0 · Spring 2022 – Spring 2026
—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
16thMore challenging than 16% of BC classesranked against every one we hold
84BC — “Intellectually Challenging”43 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
3rdMore work than 3% of BC classesranked against every one we hold
36BC — “Workload”43 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.

This seminar-based course is designed to promote counseling skill development, integrative reflection and professional development of mental health counseling students currently completing their required practicum and internship experiences.

The board

13 instructors · ranked on this class onlyCompare the top 3
Filters the rows below. Positions are always against the whole class, so a rank does not change when the list is narrowed.

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. 4 of the 13 rows carry a mark saying so.

RankInstructorCurveEasinessChallenge
1Ryan RivardCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology9999 raw · 5 records97+5 to the score36th
2Raoul RobertCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology9193 raw · 6 records99+6 to the score33rd
3Amanda LawsCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology8995 raw · 5 records84+2 to the score30th
4Katherine RicheyCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology fewer records9997 raw · 3 records99+6 to the score26th
5Amanda ReyomeCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology8892 raw · 4 records99+6 to the score5th
6Gayatri KhoslaCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional fewer records9396 raw · 2 records84+2 to the score43rd
7Yota GikasCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology8492 raw · 5 records84+2 to the score2nd
8Emily MayernikEducation Provisional fewer records97100 raw · 1 record68−2 to the score9th
9Kelly Andrews-DuffyCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional9698 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score48th
10Maria SwansonCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional8391 raw · 2 records84+2 to the score4th
11Susan AdairCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional7784 raw · 2 records97+5 to the score25th
12James AronsonCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology Provisional fewer records7180 raw · 2 records84+2 to the score9th
13Damon PryorCounseling, Developmental, and Educational Psychology7383 raw · 5 records82+1 to the score17th

All 13 instructors listed.

6 of 13 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 43 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

43 sections · newest first
InstructorTermSecInstrCourseWork
James AronsonSpring 202601———
Yota GikasSpring 2026029090—
Raoul RobertSpring 2026039491—
Ryan RivardSpring 20260410010040
Amanda LawsSpring 2026059595—
Damon PryorSpring 2026068073—
Amanda ReyomeSpring 202607959020
Gayatri KhoslaSpring 202608979140
Kelly Andrews-DuffySpring 202609989840
Maria SwansonSpring 2026109810040
Raoul RobertSpring 202611909040
James AronsonSpring 202501808040
Yota GikasSpring 202502979740
Raoul RobertSpring 202503888020
Ryan RivardSpring 202504958820
Amanda LawsSpring 20250510010040
Damon PryorSpring 202506738060
Amanda ReyomeSpring 2025077773—
Katherine RicheySpring 20250810010040
Maria SwansonSpring 202510857040
Raoul RobertSpring 202511949120
Gayatri KhoslaSpring 202512969640
Yota GikasSpring 202402878240
Raoul RobertSpring 202403979020
Ryan RivardSpring 20240410010040

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.