Grade inflation didn’t just corrupt transcripts. It corrupted curiosity
And it corrupts the choices faculty make about what to demand.
Editor’s note: Below is a preview of an opinion piece authored by Sam Abrams and John Tomasi published Friday, May 29, 2026 in the Washington Examiner. To read the full article, click here.
Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences voted to cap “A” grades in undergraduate courses at roughly 20 percent of enrollment beginning in fall 2027. Nearly 70 percent of voting faculty backed the measure. It’s one of the most aggressive reversals of grade inflation in modern American higher education.
The coverage has, predictably, focused on signaling. When two-thirds of letter grades are straight “A’s” and roughly 85 percent fall in the “A” range, the credential collapses under its own weight. Harvard’s report, written by Dean of Undergraduate Education Amanda Claybaugh, called the system “failing” and described grade inflation as a “race to the bottom.”
The signaling argument is correct as far as it goes. But it misses the more important consequence of capping “A’s,” the one that should matter most to anyone concerned about the intellectual culture of American higher education.
Grade inflation does not only corrupt transcripts. It corrupts the choices students make about what to learn and how to learn it. And it corrupts the choices faculty make about what to demand…
 | A guest post by
|
No conversation on grade inflation is complete without incorporating the role of student course evaluations- which directly incentivize grade inflation due to the established relationship known of how instructor ratings correalte significantly with the grade that students are expecting to get in the course.
“Grade inflation does not only corrupt transcripts. It corrupts the choices students make about what to learn and how to learn it.” This is an excellent point. I also believe that it lowers academic standards.