Supporters say the change restores meaning to transcripts and counters the 'tyranny of the perfect transcript' by providing clearer signals to employers and graduate schools.

The reform is framed as a demonstration of university self-governance aimed at restoring meaningful grading signals across higher education.

Harvard faculty approved a cap on A grades to combat grade inflation, allowing up to 20% A’s with an allowance for up to four additional A’s; the policy will take effect in the 2027 academic year and be reviewed after three years.

The plan shifts to using average percentile rank rather than GPA when determining honors and awards.

There was vocal campus debate, with criticism that reforms could be racially harmful and place pressure on instructors, reflected in petitions and protests.

The reform follows evidence that over 60% of undergraduate grades were in the A range, raising concerns that grades no longer reliably signal achievement.

Support and criticism were both strong, with some faculty worried about academic freedom and effectiveness, while many students opposed the proposal.

Student views were mixed: some praised recognizing hard work, others worried the cap would discourage risk-taking and critical course choices.

Some academics and external scholars argued that lacking grading rigor harms learning and signaling quality to employers and graduate programs.

The decision followed a faculty vote earlier in the month, with Amanda Claybaugh and a subcommittee playing key roles in proposing the changes.

Greene and colleagues co-authored the proposal, citing input from graduate admissions about transcript comparability and clearer signals of student performance.

A faculty subcommittee developed the policy, supported by staff and proponents who call it a pro-student reform and a signal of university self-governance.