Class record · PHIL · MCAS

PHIL 1088

Person and Social Responsibility I · 19 instructors on record · 69 sections

How the curve score is built

78Teaching88 raw · 52nd percentile of BC classes

−2Easiness adjustmenteasiness 69 · 61 raw workload · lighter than 22% of BC classes

76Curve 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 22% of BC classes.

What the course score is made of

88BC evaluations69 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

61stMore challenging than 61% of BC classesranked against every one we hold

92BC — “Intellectually Challenging”69 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

78thMore work than 78% of BC classesranked against every one we hold

61BC — “Workload”69 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.

Enrollment limited to freshmen, sophomores, and juniors The course requirements include ten to twelve hours per week of community service. In light of classic philosophical and theological texts, students in this course address the relationship of self and society, the nature of community, the mystery of suffering and the practical difficulties of developing a just society. PULSE students are challenged to investigate the insights offered by their readings in relationship to their service work. Places in the course are very limited.

The board

19 instructors · ranked on this class onlyCompare the top 3

Find an instructor among the 19Filters 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. 7 of the 19 rows carry a mark saying so.

Rank	Instructor	Curve	Easiness	Challenge	RMP overall
1	Mary TroxellPart-Time Faculty · Philosophy	9398 raw · 9 records	66−3 to the score	72nd	1006 ratings · all classes
2	Matthew KrugerAssociate Professor of the Practice; Director of Undergraduate Studies · Theology	8996 raw · 8 records	74−1 to the score	76th	988 ratings · all classes
3	Joshua SnyderAssociate Professor of the Practice · Theology fewer records	9498 raw · 4 records	75±0 to the score	84th	1002 ratings · all classes
4	Suzanne HeveloneAdjunct Faculty · Theology	8693 raw · 8 records	79+1 to the score	36th	1007 ratings · all classes
5	Charles FriedPhilosophy fewer records	9198 raw · 3 records	57−5 to the score	84th	—no page
6	Elizabeth AntusPhilosophy	8795 raw · 3 records	68−2 to the score	89th	—no page
7	Meghan SweeneyProfessor of the Practice · Theology	8295 raw · 4 records	58−5 to the score	53rd	1003 ratings · all classes
8	Nicholas HayesTheology fewer records	8394 raw · 3 records	68−2 to the score	52nd	—no page
9	Kenneth HimesTheology Provisional fewer records	97100 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	60th	—no page
10	Martin Maira SotomayorPhilosophy Provisional	9398 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	48th	1004 ratings · all classes
11	Micah LottAssociate Professor · Philosophy Provisional	8594 raw · 1 record	—	71st	—no page
12	Daniel MaryanovichPhilosophy Provisional	8492 raw · 1 record	84+2 to the score	21st	902 ratings · all classes
13	C FriedPhilosophy Provisional	7288 raw · 1 record	58−5 to the score	72nd	—no page
14	Jared HighlenPhilosophy Provisional fewer records	6577 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	51st	908 ratings · all classes
15	James WeissAssociate Professor · Theology	7286 raw · 4 records	68−2 to the score	62nd	8814 ratings · all classes
16	Eileen SweeneyPhilosophy Provisional fewer records	4951 raw · 1 record	—	41st	201 rating · all classes
17	Marina McCoyPhilosophy Provisional fewer records	6575 raw · 2 records	78±0 to the score	31st	—no page
18	Stanley AnoziePhilosophy	7083 raw · 7 records	74−1 to the score	32nd	—no page
19	Julia LegasPart-Time Faculty · Philosophy	6274 raw · 7 records	68−2 to the score	79th	727 ratings · all classes

All 19 instructors listed.

8 of 19 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 69 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

69 sections · newest first

Instructor	Term	Sec	Instr	Course	Work
Jared Highlen	Fall 2025	01	77	72	60
Martin Maira Sotomayor	Fall 2025	04	98	92	60
Micah Lott	Fall 2025	13	94	95	—
Marina McCoy	Fall 2025	25	70	72	60
Mary Troxell	Fall 2025	31	93	90	60
Stanley Anozie	Fall 2025	34	80	83	60
Daniel Maryanovich	Fall 2025	46	92	83	40
Mary Troxell	Fall 2022	01	100	93	60
Mary Troxell	Fall 2022	02	100	87	60
Mary Troxell	Fall 2022	03	100	96	—
Stanley Anozie	Fall 2022	04	88	80	60
Stanley Anozie	Fall 2022	05	95	90	—
Stanley Anozie	Fall 2022	06	87	77	60
Matthew Kruger	Fall 2022	07	96	94	60
Matthew Kruger	Fall 2022	08	91	80	60
Matthew Kruger	Fall 2022	09	98	98	60
Matthew Kruger	Fall 2022	10	98	96	—
Matthew Kruger	Fall 2022	11	100	100	—
Matthew Kruger	Fall 2022	12	100	100	40
Elizabeth Antus	Fall 2022	13	94	89	60
Elizabeth Antus	Fall 2022	14	95	90	60
Elizabeth Antus	Fall 2022	15	97	94	60
James Weiss	Fall 2022	16	88	89	—
James Weiss	Fall 2022	17	90	90	—
James Weiss	Fall 2022	18	83	87	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.