Class record · PHIL · MCAS

PHIL 1089

Person and Social Responsibility II · 20 instructors on record · 104 sections

How the curve score is built

78Teaching88 raw · 55th percentile of BC classes

±0Easiness adjustmenteasiness 78 · 59 raw workload · lighter than 52% of BC classes

78Curve scorethe teaching curve ±0 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 52% of BC classes.

What the course score is made of

88BC evaluations104 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

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

92BC — “Intellectually Challenging”104 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

48thMore work than 48% of BC classesranked against every one we hold

59BC — “Workload”104 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.

The board

20 instructors · ranked on this class onlyCompare the top 3

Find an instructor among the 20Filters 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 20 rows carry a mark saying so.

Rank	Instructor	Curve	Easiness	Challenge	RMP overall
1	Mary TroxellPart-Time Faculty · Philosophy	8896 raw · 15 records	68−2 to the score	81st	1006 ratings · all classes
2	Suzanne HeveloneAdjunct Faculty · Theology fewer records	9498 raw · 6 records	68−2 to the score	60th	1007 ratings · all classes
3	Joshua SnyderAssociate Professor of the Practice · Theology fewer records	9599 raw · 5 records	68−2 to the score	86th	1002 ratings · all classes
4	Matthew KrugerAssociate Professor of the Practice; Director of Undergraduate Studies · Theology	8595 raw · 10 records	68−2 to the score	80th	988 ratings · all classes
5	Meghan SweeneyProfessor of the Practice · Theology fewer records	8896 raw · 5 records	68−2 to the score	71st	1003 ratings · all classes
6	Kenneth HimesTheology Provisional fewer records	9297 raw · 2 records	78±0 to the score	58th	—no page
7	Charles FriedPhilosophy	8093 raw · 7 records	61−4 to the score	85th	—no page
8	Daniel MaryanovichPhilosophy Provisional fewer records	8794 raw · 1 record	84+2 to the score	18th	902 ratings · all classes
9	Elizabeth AntusPhilosophy	7990 raw · 7 records	74−1 to the score	72nd	—no page
10	Nicholas HayesTheology	7889 raw · 3 records	78±0 to the score	64th	—no page
11	Micah LottAssociate Professor · Philosophy Provisional	7786 raw · 1 record	84+2 to the score	13th	—no page
12	Brett OneillTheology Provisional	7587 raw · 2 records	78±0 to the score	58th	801 rating · all classes
13	Patrick ByrnePhilosophy Provisional	7389 raw · 1 record	58−5 to the score	100th	—no page
14	Martin Maira SotomayorPhilosophy Provisional	7284 raw · 2 records	78±0 to the score	31st	1004 ratings · all classes
15	Jared HighlenPhilosophy Provisional fewer records	6579 raw · 1 record	68−2 to the score	31st	908 ratings · all classes
16	Marina McCoyPhilosophy	7286 raw · 5 records	68−2 to the score	58th	—no page
17	James WeissAssociate Professor · Theology	6883 raw · 5 records	64−3 to the score	53rd	8814 ratings · all classes
18	Eileen SweeneyPhilosophy fewer records	4948 raw · 3 records	78±0 to the score	5th	201 rating · all classes
19	Stanley AnoziePhilosophy	6980 raw · 14 records	77±0 to the score	22nd	—no page
20	Julia LegasPart-Time Faculty · Philosophy	6580 raw · 9 records	66−3 to the score	76th	727 ratings · all classes

All 20 instructors listed.

7 of 20 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 104 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

104 sections · newest first

Instructor	Term	Sec	Instr	Course	Work
Jared Highlen	Spring 2026	01	79	84	60
Martin Maira Sotomayor	Spring 2026	04	85	89	60
Micah Lott	Spring 2026	13	86	88	40
Marina McCoy	Spring 2026	25	87	91	60
Mary Troxell	Spring 2026	31	98	94	80
Patrick Byrne	Spring 2026	31	89	94	80
Stanley Anozie	Spring 2026	34	90	91	—
Daniel Maryanovich	Spring 2026	46	94	97	40
Mary Troxell	Spring 2025	01	97	93	60
Charles Fried	Spring 2025	04	94	92	60
Marina McCoy	Spring 2025	13	83	84	100
Martin Maira Sotomayor	Spring 2025	22	83	80	40
Mary Troxell	Spring 2025	31	96	98	60
Stanley Anozie	Spring 2025	34	77	83	40
Mary Troxell	Spring 2023	01	97	96	60
Mary Troxell	Spring 2023	02	100	100	60
Mary Troxell	Spring 2023	03	94	93	60
Stanley Anozie	Spring 2023	04	76	73	60
Stanley Anozie	Spring 2023	05	73	73	60
Stanley Anozie	Spring 2023	06	70	76	60
Matthew Kruger	Spring 2023	07	97	99	40
Matthew Kruger	Spring 2023	08	97	100	—
Matthew Kruger	Spring 2023	09	100	100	40
Matthew Kruger	Spring 2023	10	97	92	60
Matthew Kruger	Spring 2023	11	80	80	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.