NURS 3170
Principles of Evidence-Based Nursing · 7 instructors on record · 19 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 97% 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.
Learners apply evidence-based practice principles to inform practice recommendations. Through engagement with the research process and evaluation of multiple sources of evidence, learners develop competencies in research appraisal, synthesis, and application of findings to clinical and population-based contexts. By the end of the course, learners demonstrate competency in critically evaluating and applying research evidence to support high-quality, ethically grounded, evidence-based and person-centered nursing care.
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 | Jennifer CahillNursing | 8993 raw · 4 records | 97+5 to the score | 9th |
| 2 | Anna-Helena KlarareNursing | 8593 raw · 4 records | 84+2 to the score | 12th |
| 3 | Soojung AhnNursing Provisional | 8391 raw · 2 records | 84+2 to the score | 11th |
| 4 | Jinhee ParkNursing | 7686 raw · 3 records | 84+2 to the score | 4th |
| 5 | Richard RossNursing Provisional | 6979 raw · 1 record | 84+2 to the score | 20th |
| 6 | Tam NguyenNursing Provisional | 6979 raw · 1 record | 84+2 to the score | 1st |
| 7 | Sabianca DelvaNursing | 6059 raw · 4 records | 97+5 to the score | 3rd |
3 of 7 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 19 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
19 sections · newest first| Instructor | Term | Sec | Instr | Course | Work |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sabianca Delva | Spring 2026 | 01 | 69 | 61 | 40 |
| Anna-Helena Klarare | Fall 2025 | 01 | 95 | 80 | 40 |
| Soojung Ahn | Fall 2025 | 01 | 92 | 80 | 40 |
| Anna-Helena Klarare | Fall 2025 | 02 | 89 | 69 | 40 |
| Soojung Ahn | Fall 2025 | 02 | 90 | 69 | 40 |
| Anna-Helena Klarare | Spring 2025 | 01 | 97 | 92 | 40 |
| Anna-Helena Klarare | Fall 2024 | 01 | 90 | 70 | 40 |
| Jennifer Cahill | Fall 2024 | 01 | 86 | 70 | 40 |
| Sabianca Delva | Fall 2024 | 02 | 65 | 64 | 40 |
| Jennifer Cahill | Spring 2024 | 01 | 99 | 59 | 20 |
| Sabianca Delva | Spring 2024 | 01 | 52 | 59 | 20 |
| Sabianca Delva | Fall 2023 | 01 | 52 | 49 | — |
| Jennifer Cahill | Fall 2023 | 02 | 91 | 59 | — |
| Jennifer Cahill | Spring 2023 | 01 | 96 | 81 | 40 |
| Richard Ross | Spring 2023 | 01 | 79 | 81 | 40 |
| Jinhee Park | Fall 2022 | 01 | 89 | 65 | 40 |
| Jinhee Park | Spring 2022 | 01 | 77 | 51 | 40 |
| Tam Nguyen | Fall 2021 | 01 | 79 | 58 | 40 |
| Jinhee Park | Fall 2021 | 02 | 92 | 64 | 40 |
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.