Harvard’s Grade Inflation Policy and the STEM vs. Humanities Divide, According to Daniela Andrade

In a recent LinkedIn post, Daniela Andrade discusses Harvard University’s new policy to cap the number of ‘A’ grades awarded, analyzing its potential impact and the underlying debate about grade inflation across different academic disciplines.

Andrade, who holds a joint degree in neuroscience and philosophy, offers a unique perspective shaped by her experiences in both STEM and humanities fields at Harvard. She highlights that the policy, approved by Harvard faculty in May, aims to restore the meaning of top grades amid concerns that an excessive number of ‘A’s were diminishing their value. Citing a Harvard report, Andrade notes that approximately two-thirds of all letter grades were ‘A’s, with nearly 85% falling within the A-range.

“Not all Harvard A’s are graded equally.”

The core of Andrade’s analysis centers on the long-standing question of how grade inflation differs between STEM and humanities courses. She points out that Harvard’s own 2023 grading report revealed a notable disparity: 73% of grades in Arts and Humanities were in the A range, compared to 60% in Engineering and Applied Sciences. This data, according to Andrade, supports the notion that the perception and reality of grading standards vary significantly between these academic areas.

The STEM Experience: Rigor and Unforgiving Grading

Reflecting on her neuroscience studies, Andrade describes an environment characterized by intense competition and a demanding assessment structure. She explains that students in STEM fields, particularly those on a pre-med track, faced a rigorous evaluation process.

“You were graded on mandatory lectures, sections, lab attendance, weekly problem sets, lab assignments, and exams – and if you were wrong, you were just wrong. There was no well-reasoned argument saving you on a chemistry exam.”

In Andrade’s view, the objective nature of STEM assessments leaves little room for subjective interpretation. Success is often tied to factual accuracy and the correct application of principles, making the grading process, in her experience, feel inherently less prone to the kind of variability seen in other disciplines.

The Humanities Perspective: Subjectivity and Argumentation

Conversely, Andrade contrasts this with her experience in philosophy, a field she greatly enjoyed but where grading felt more subjective. She characterizes advanced philosophy classes as having less frequent, often optional, lectures, a single seminar per week, and only a few major papers per semester.

“Whether you got an A depended heavily on your TF, your writing style, and how your argument landed.”

According to Andrade, the emphasis on written arguments and the interpretation of those arguments by teaching fellows (TFs) introduces a layer of subjectivity that can influence final grades. She recalls questioning whether all students in her humanities courses were truly performing at an A-level, suggesting that the grading criteria might have been more lenient or open to interpretation than in her STEM classes.

Analyzing the Impact of the New Policy

Andrade argues that Harvard’s new grade inflation policy will not uniformly affect all majors. Instead, she posits that its impact will be most keenly felt in disciplines where ‘A’ grades were historically awarded more liberally.

“My honest take is this: Harvard’s new grade inflation policy is not going to make every major harder. It is going to make things harder in the majors where A’s were being handed out too casually in the first place,” Andrade writes in her post. This suggests that the policy is intended to recalibrate expectations and grading standards in fields that may have contributed more significantly to the overall perception of grade inflation.

By sharing her personal experience and analysis, Daniela Andrade provides a nuanced perspective on Harvard’s controversial grading policy, underscoring the complex relationship between academic rigor, grading subjectivity, and the perceived value of top academic achievements across different fields of study.