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 · SCWK · SSW

SCWK 9921

Field Education I · 39 instructors on record · 41 sections

How the curve score is built
64Teaching74 raw · 11th percentile of BC classes
±0Easiness adjustmenteasiness 78 · 59 raw workload · lighter than 52% of BC classes
64Curve 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
74BC evaluations41 records · weight ×1.0 · 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
6thMore challenging than 6% of BC classesranked against every one we hold
79BC — “Intellectually Challenging”41 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”41 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.

Required of all students. Supervised learning and practice in the development of a generalist approach focusing on professional values, ethics, and micro and macro interventions based on theories of human behavior and the social environment. Two days per week in the first semester.

The board

39 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. 2 of the 39 rows carry a mark saying so.

RankInstructorCurveEasinessChallengeRMP overall
1Amy SaundersSocial Work Provisional99100 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score0th—no page
2Danielle MetzgerSocial Work Provisional99100 raw · 1 record—0th—no page
3Melissa HalliseySocial Work Provisional99100 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score9th—no page
4Stephanie SaundersSocial Work Provisional99100 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score0th—no page
5Ginnelle VasquezSocial Work Provisional97100 raw · 1 record68−2 to the score100th—no page
6Sarah HoodSocial Work Provisional9296 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score84th—no page
7Ximena SotoSocial Work Provisional92100 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score48th—no page
8Julia MacMahonSocial Work Provisional8793 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score29th401 rating · all classes
9Brian GonsalvesSocial Work Provisional8590 raw · 1 record99+6 to the score48th—no page
10Tatiana SchettiniSocial Work Provisional8190 raw · 2 records84+2 to the score9th—no page
11Alexandra MillerSocial Work Provisional fewer records8489 raw · 1 record99+6 to the score9th—no page
12Don CamelioSocial Work Provisional8190 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score0th—no page
13Erika HamelSocial Work Provisional8195 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score9th—no page
14Keavy SmithSocial Work Provisional8190 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score48th—no page
15Vannasang Pelletier SoukasavathSocial Work Provisional8190 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score3rd—no page
16Kara Rendzia WilliamsSocial Work Provisional7790 raw · 1 record68−2 to the score21st—no page
17Stacy KaplanSocial Work Provisional7788 raw · 1 record—2nd—no page
18Cecilia Jokisch DouglasSocial Work Provisional7587 raw · 1 record—9th—no page
19Kali BostonSocial Work Provisional7486 raw · 1 record—4th—no page
20Carrie JohnsonSocial Work Provisional7385 raw · 1 record—17th—no page
21Aliese LashSocial Work Provisional7290 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score48th—no page
22Linda Doucette-RosaSocial Work Provisional7283 raw · 1 record—36th—no page
23Erin McSherrySocial Work Provisional7189 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score69th—no page
24Lisa Avanzato-UshkurnisSocial Work Provisional7180 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score36th—no page
25Anne HernandezSocial Work Provisional6980 raw · 1 record—9th—no page
26Jennifer ShawSocial Work Provisional6980 raw · 1 record—0th—no page
27Kathryn ColthartSocial Work Provisional6980 raw · 1 record—48th—no page
28Marie MathieuSocial Work Provisional6980 raw · 1 record—9th—no page
29Pamela WeissmanSocial Work Provisional6980 raw · 1 record—1st—no page
30Karli BresnahanSocial Work Provisional6776 raw · 1 record84+2 to the score9th—no page
31Felicia Rodney-OsbourneSocial Work Provisional6578 raw · 1 record68−2 to the score56th—no page
32Nicole DowningSocial Work Provisional6483 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score12th—no page
33Karalyn HardimanSocial Work Provisional6280 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score9th—no page
34Sherry EllisSocial Work Provisional6280 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score29th—no page
35Jonathan BaumSocial Work Provisional5774 raw · 1 record49−7 to the score1st—no page
36Damen KeltonSocial Work Provisional5536 raw · 1 record99+6 to the score0th—no page
37Jennifer Roman-MartinSocial Work Provisional5560 raw · 1 record68−2 to the score0th—no page
38Patricia BirchSocial Work Provisional fewer records5548 raw · 1 record99+6 to the score0th—no page
39Sandee TisdaleSocial Work Provisional6379 raw · 2 records58−5 to the score41st—no page

All 39 instructors listed.

39 of 39 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 41 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

41 sections · newest first
InstructorTermSecInstrCourseWork
Lisa Avanzato-UshkurnisFall 202503808840
Jonathan BaumFall 2025047469100
Patricia BirchFall 202505485520
Kali BostonFall 2025088660—
Karli BresnahanFall 202510766040
Don CamelioFall 202511906040
Kathryn ColthartFall 2025128070—
Linda Doucette-RosaFall 2025158380—
Nicole DowningFall 2025168376100
Sherry EllisFall 2025188067100
Damen KeltonFall 202519364020
Brian GonsalvesFall 202520908020
Melissa HalliseyFall 2025221008040
Erika HamelFall 2025239580100
Karalyn HardimanFall 2025248090100
Anne HernandezFall 2025258087—
Sarah HoodFall 202526969240
Carrie JohnsonFall 2025288572—
Cecilia Jokisch DouglasFall 2025298787—
Stacy KaplanFall 2025308876—
Aliese LashFall 2025329080100
Danielle MetzgerFall 20253410060—
Marie MathieuFall 2025358050—
Erin McSherryFall 2025368977100
Alexandra MillerFall 202537898020

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.