Students in Introductory Physics Laboratory I and II rate those courses an average of 2.9 out of 5.
The average course at Boston College scores 4.1. The labs are the starkest example of a pattern running through BC’s course evaluations.
Physics, computer science, and chemistry have the lowest ratings of any major academic departments, according to a Heights analysis of 29,947 course sections evaluated over the past five academic years. Physics averages 3.3 out of 5, computer science 3.6, and chemistry 3.7.
At the end of each semester, students are asked to evaluate their courses, giving professors a chance to see what worked and what didn’t. The Heights analyzed all available course evaluation data, which covers about 507,000 student responses from the 2021–22 through 2025–26 academic years, an overall response rate of 76 percent.
Each department’s rating is the average of the “overall course” scores for its sections. These scores were prompted with “How would you rate this course overall?” and used a five-point scale from “Excellent” to “Poor.”
Response rates in the three departments are in line with the University in general, so low participation does not explain the gap. Faculty say the numbers are hard to interpret.
“I have always had the feeling that there are multiple factors contributing to the score, and it’s a little hard to disentangle all of them,” said Kenneth Burch, chair of the physics department.
The Gap Lives in the Introductory Courses
In all three departments, courses numbered below 3000 rate far lower than courses numbered 3000 and above—indicating that introductory courses contribute to their low rankings.
Most of each department’s gap traces to a handful of courses.
Four introductory physics courses, the two labs and the calculus-based Introduction to Physics I and II, make up 260 of the department’s 420 evaluated sections and average 3.03. The rest of physics rate much higher, at an average of 3.85.
Similarly, Computer Science I and II account for 285 of 583 sections, averaging 3.51, compared with 3.74 for the department’s other courses.
In chemistry, General Chemistry I and II make up 225 of 668 sections and average 3.28, versus 3.85 for the rest.
The two introductory physics labs, which enroll about 15 students per section, are the lowest-rated of the department’s introductory courses at 2.9. Nearly a third of all physics sections score below 3.0, compared with 5 percent of sections university-wide.
Yet, even outside introductory courses, the three departments average below the University’s 4.1, showing that there are other factors involved.
Why Introductory Courses Rate Lower
One factor is that introductory courses are often not a student’s choice. Students take them to fulfill major requirements rather than out of personal interest or prior experience.
“A lot of students take CS I or Calc I and Calc II because they’re required to do so by their major, not necessarily because they’re really interested in it, and that, I think, can exacerbate the problem,” said Charles Wiseman, a computer science professor at BC.
In physics, the larger introductory courses are taken mostly by non-majors, including many biology, neuroscience, and pre-med students who need them to fulfill a requirement, according to Brian Zhou, a physics professor.
“Those are generally lower evaluated,” he said.
Upper-level physics courses, Zhou added, are “very highly evaluated.”
The data bear that out only partly: Physics courses numbered 3000 and above average 4.04, near the University average of 4.1 but a little below the 4.2 that other upper-level courses average.
“That certainly speaks to this idea that when students take a course because they want to, then they tend to rank it better,” Burch said.
Introductory courses also draw students with widely different abilities. Wiseman, who teaches Computer Science I, thinks low preparation can contribute to low ratings.
“Those of us that teach intro courses like Computer Science I really try to make sure that we make it welcoming and open to students who have no experience,” Wiseman said. “But we do ultimately have to sort of get everyone up to speed quickly. So I think the expectations coming in compared to the level we’re looking for in achievement don’t always line up correctly.”
Physics has its own sources of friction. Zhou said one of students’ biggest complaints is that practice problems don’t align with exam problems.
“Part of that is that we should do a better job,” he said. “But part of that is unavoidable by the nature of the evaluation process in physics. It’s more of a quantitative sort of evaluation.”
The introductory labs, Zhou said, are taught by graduate teaching assistants rather than faculty.
“There is a spectrum of teaching abilities, and that probably actually weighs our total score down,” Zhou said.
Class size is another commonly cited factor, and across BC, the data support it. Sections with fewer than 20 students average 4.20, while sections of 100 to 199 students average 3.69. Within chemistry, ratings do fall with size, from 3.80 in sections under 20 students to 3.28 in sections of 100 to 199.
“I think across all departments, just that bigger class sizes correlate with less student satisfaction,” Zhou said.
Do Lower Ratings Mean Worse Teaching?
A difficult exam, a disorganized professor, and irrelevant course material are common experiences nearly everyone has had in a course they didn’t enjoy.
Zhou said a course students find hard is not necessarily a worse one.
“Being challenged in the course and being sort of pushed out of your comfort zone to really improve a spot where you maybe have some weakness,” he said. “That’s a positive actually because it means you’re sort of growing.”
Burch pointed to grades. He said average grades in some departments rose during and after the pandemic while physics stayed flat.
“It’s not proof, but I think it shows that what students expect to get in their course does affect how they evaluate the course,” Burch said.
What Departments Are Doing in Response
Student feedback can give departments valuable insight into how courses can improve, according to Burch.
“We read all the evaluations, and if we notice a specific problem with a specific professor, we go and talk to them about it,” Burch said. “And I will say I’ve been pretty pleased with my faculty taking feedback well, and I think I’m trying to improve.”
The numbers suggest that physics, at least, has improved its standing among students. Its average rose from 3.09 in 2021–22 to 3.67 in 2025–26 (fall and spring semesters), the steepest improvement of any department with enough data to measure.
Physics was the lowest-rated department for three straight years, from 2022–23 through 2024–25. In 2025–26 it ranked third-lowest, ahead of chemistry.
Much of the improvement came in the labs. Ratings for the two introductory physics labs rose from 2.46 in 2021–22 to 3.37 in 2025–26, while the rest of the department moved from 3.66 to 3.92.
Burch and Zhou offered several possible explanations.
Zhou said both the previous chair, Mike Graf, and Burch are partly responsible for the uptick.
“Both of them have placed stronger emphasis on teaching in addition to just research excellence,” he said.
Burch said the department has hired two people “whose only job is teaching,” allowing them to focus more directly on students, instead of research.
He also said the department has increased its number of majors, helped by a new, more flexible applied physics major.
Zhou said the department’s internal data show assistant professors receive the highest evaluations, associate professors next, and full professors last, and that the department has been hiring more assistant professors.
Computer science has also improved, from 3.48 to 3.74 over the same period.
Wiseman said this is important to retain enrollment in the department, which has fallen in recent years.
“We want to make sure we’re not in some way excluding students from these courses or from the major,” he said.
Chemistry’s ratings have moved between 3.5 and 3.8 without a clear trend, and in 2025–26 it ranked second-lowest among departments.
Burch called evaluations “useful tools” and emphasized that faculty read them closely.
“When you give constructive feedback, that’s really helpful,” Burch said. “Not just complaining about X, but saying this is how I think you could improve it.”
Use the tool below to look up any department’s ratings, courses, and trends.