Harvard Faculty Caps Full A’s to Address Grade Inflation

Harvard University faculty members have taken a significant step. They voted to limit the number of full A’s awarded in each course. The decision came after years of discussion without implementation. The faculty introduced a ’20 plus four’ rule. It allows only about 20% of students in each course to receive full A’s. The rule adjusts for small, advanced seminars by adding four more students.

This change aims to improve educational quality. It goes beyond campus decisions. Easy A’s pose several issues. They reduce the incentive for learning. Students graduate with less knowledge and fewer skills. Distinguishing exceptional students becomes harder. Although inflated grades seem to ease student pressure, the opposite occurs. High grade-point averages meant a few A-minuses could prevent students from graduating summa cum laude.

Over seven years, the authors, who teach Harvard’s introductory economics class EC 10, awarded full A’s to more than 4,000 students. This represents 49% of their students. This rate is below the 60% average of other instructors in the 2024-2025 academic year. Despite the top EC 10 students mastering the material, not all reached the ‘extraordinary distinction’ a full A represents, according to the student handbook.

The desire for rigorous grading is common among faculty. However, concerns arise that stricter grading might disadvantage students or discourage them from pursuing certain fields. This is a classic collective-action problem discussed in EC 10. Individuals agree on societal benefits but pursue personal interests. Comparable issues are seen in overfishing, overgrazing public lands, and river pollution.

Grade inflation posed serious challenges, particularly for junior faculty. Their fear was honest grading could lead to poorer evaluations, lower enrollment, and diminished tenure prospects. This fear led to high and ever-increasing grades, indicating inflation.

Multiple deans urged faculty to curb excessive A’s. But change only occurred with collective action. Binding the community was necessary. When personal incentives clash with what benefits society, a collective mechanism is the solution. This concept is also covered in EC 10.