Harvard Faculty Awards Fewer A Grades After Institutional Push Against Grade Inflation
Harvard College has witnessed a substantial decline in top academic marks during the fall term following institutional efforts to address persistent grade inflation. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences reported a notable reduction in flat A grades, signaling a shift toward more rigorous academic evaluation standards across undergraduate courses.
Significant Reduction in Top Academic Marks
According to internal data obtained by the Harvard Crimson, the percentage of flat A grades awarded to students dropped from 60.2 percent during the 2024-2025 academic year to 53.4 percent in the subsequent fall term. This seven-point reduction represents one of the most significant single-term declines in recent Harvard history and reflects the institution's deliberate efforts to restore academic rigor to its grading practices.
The internal assessment, which specifically tracked flat A grades while excluding A-minus marks, demonstrates the immediate impact of Harvard's anti-inflation initiative. College administrators have been monitoring these trends closely as part of their comprehensive review of grading policies and academic standards.
Administrative Support for Stricter Grading Standards
The push for more stringent grading originated from Dean of Undergraduate Education Amanda Claybaugh, who communicated directly with faculty members about the need to address grade inflation. In an email to Faculty of Arts and Sciences instructors, Claybaugh acknowledged that implementing tougher grading standards had raised legitimate concerns among teaching staff regarding student evaluations and course enrollment numbers.
Claybaugh sought to reassure faculty that the College would provide institutional backing for stricter academic measures, writing specifically about supporting instructors who experienced lower Q scores (teaching evaluation metrics). She emphasized that the review process considers multiple factors beyond simple evaluation numbers, including course difficulty scores and median grade distributions.
Faculty Autonomy Maintained Despite Institutional Direction
Despite the clear institutional direction toward stricter grading, Harvard officials have maintained that faculty retain ultimate control over evaluation in their individual courses. Faculty of Arts and Sciences spokesperson James M. Chisholm clarified in a statement that while the College encouraged addressing grade inflation, it had not issued explicit instructions to instructors regarding specific grade reductions.
This balance between institutional guidance and faculty autonomy represents a careful approach to academic reform at one of the world's most prestigious universities. The administration's strategy appears focused on creating cultural change through encouragement and support rather than through top-down mandates.
Comprehensive Report Outlines Grading Concerns
The fall grading shift followed the October 2025 release of a substantial 25-page report authored by Dean Claybaugh, which detailed how grade inflation had gradually eroded Harvard's ability to perform essential academic functions. The document presented a compelling case for tighter academic measures and more meaningful differentiation in student evaluation.
The comprehensive report identified several concerning trends in grading practices over recent decades and called for immediate corrective actions to restore the integrity of Harvard's academic credentials.
Potential Policy Changes Under Active Consideration
Claybaugh's report outlined multiple potential reforms currently under review by faculty committees. These include implementing standardized grading practices across different course sections, reintroducing in-person final examinations, limiting the availability of A+ grades, displaying course median grades on official transcripts, and developing variance-based grading systems for internal academic assessment.
According to communications reviewed by the Harvard Crimson, a dedicated faculty committee has been actively reviewing these grading policy proposals throughout the academic year. The committee is expected to release formal recommendations early in the spring semester, with a Faculty of Arts and Sciences vote anticipated before the term concludes.
Student Engagement in Grading Reform Process
Harvard administration has simultaneously engaged undergraduate students in the grading reform conversation, inviting them to share perspectives on potential changes to evaluation systems. Dean Claybaugh has committed to organizing town hall meetings once specific proposals are finalized, ensuring student voices contribute meaningfully to the decision-making process.
Student feedback has already influenced committee discussions according to administrative communications, reflecting Harvard's commitment to inclusive policy development. This engagement is particularly important given student concerns about how grading reforms might affect graduate school admissions and employment prospects.
Undergraduate Concerns About Academic Changes
While Harvard's grading reforms aim to strengthen academic standards, they have generated understandable anxiety among undergraduate students who worry about competitive disadvantages in postgraduate admissions and job markets. These concerns, documented in Claybaugh's October report and echoed in student conversations, highlight the delicate balance institutions must maintain between academic integrity and student success outcomes.
The current data represents only initial findings from Harvard's anti-inflation initiative, with final decisions about specific policy changes yet to be determined. As the faculty committee prepares its spring recommendations and the broader academic community considers these proposals, Harvard stands at a pivotal moment in its ongoing effort to preserve the value and meaning of its academic credentials.
