<p>well, sakky that has caused grade inflation to occur at Cornell, b/c it was soooooo incredibly deflated back in the day, with the increase in grade inflation (at a higher rate than any other ivy supposedly according to some mothers on the parent's board who claim to know a thing or two), the median GPA at Cornell is STILL lower than any other ivy (~3.34)</p>
<p>If the Cornell median GPA is 3.34, I would say that that is unnervingly high. I'm fairly certain there are plenty of other students who would LOVE to go to a school that has that kind of a median GPA. </p>
<p>But like I've been saying, I think the real problem is not so much with inter-school grade inflation, but rather with INTRA-school inflation, meaning the different grading schemes that are used by different departments in the same school. Let's face it. Some majors are more difficult than others and some majors confer much higher grades than others do. This should stop, and stop immediately.</p>
<p>I think the problem with using GRE is that research which is what grad-school is all about requires creativity and long-term dedication, which are two things GREs really can't reflect at all. It would be sort of like only using SATs for college admissions. Sure, there is some correlation between SATs and performance in college, but it isn't a perfectly direct one.</p>
<p>Brown also has grade inflation in the sense that you can take as many courses as you want S/NC. Most students use this option for courses they would not get A's in, so probably, if this option were not allowed, their GPAs would probably be lower. However, this is not exactly hidden, since the S is right there on your external transcript. NC's (fails) are not though.</p>
<p>You might like to know that some PhD grad school application forms in electrical engineering ask for information not only about grades but also who your professors were and which textbooks you used. I presume they are trying to evaluate the level of difficulty/quality and content of your undergrad courses in your major. Examples of schools that do this: Cal Tech, Columbia, MIT.</p>
<p>Grades are a way of certifying how much you have learned but they are also a motivational device. If the goal is for the most students to learn the most information, then good grades should be difficult to attain but still within reasonable reach. If good grades are out of reach, human nature is to stop trying. If good grades are too easy, even brilliant individuals won't be challenged to put forth their best effort. Grade inflation leads to wasted human potential. </p>
<p>Yes, I can understand the appeal of easy grades from the standpoint of self interest. But, from a societal, human potential perspective, grade inflation is not in our overall best interest in the long run. I admire Cornell and Swarthmore and other colleges for their tough but fair grading policies. It is unfortunate that even elite colleges like Harvard have caved in to grade inflation. If the adcoms at grad schools and professional schools don't take into account the grading standards at undergraduate schools, then so much the worse for their graduate school or professional school. They are failing to admit the best and brightest applicants.</p>
<p>Why should colleges use high school grades, based on the same arguments as above?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think the problem with using GRE is that research which is what grad-school is all about requires creativity and long-term dedication, which are two things GREs really can't reflect at all. It would be sort of like only using SATs for college admissions. Sure, there is some correlation between SATs and performance in college, but it isn't a perfectly direct one.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I never said to use just GRE scores. I completely agree that one should also take into account prof rec's and research experience. If you have authored something, then you ought to be able to submit that as evidence of your research ability.</p>
<p>I furthermore never said to use the GRE (or MCAT or LSAT or GMAT or whatever) as it stands today. Like I said, if the present-day tests are lacking, then the best answer is to create a better test. </p>
<p>I would have no problem with schools using grades as yet another piece of information. I am well aware of the problems of information asymmetries when trying to determine who to admit. The problem is that in the specific case of grades, not only is that information inconsistent from school to school, but there are also strong incentives from magazine ranking publications to make distorted decisions. </p>
<p>Law schools and med schools are far and away the most guilty of this. They know full well that the rankings will judge their "selectivity" based in part on the GPA of the students they admit, regardless of how consistent that GPA information is, so they have an incentive to admit students with high grades, no matter how meaningful those grades are. </p>
<p>As was said above, certain classes are harder than others, but law schools and med schools don't seem to care about that. In fact, they may well know that certain classes are more difficult than others but they also know that if they admit some students who took difficult classes and thus have low grades, the school's "selectivity", and thus their overall ranking will fall. In other words, while law/med schools may SAY they are out to admit the best candidates, in reality, they are actually out to admit those with the best grades, who are not necessarily the best candidates. This therefore gives incentive for students to become GPA-whores by deliberately avoiding difficult classes, difficult majors, and difficult schools, which furthers the distortion to the market. </p>
<p>
[quote]
You might like to know that some PhD grad school application forms in electrical engineering ask for information not only about grades but also who your professors were and which textbooks you used. I presume they are trying to evaluate the level of difficulty/quality and content of your undergrad courses in your major. Examples of schools that do this: Cal Tech, Columbia, MIT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Like I said, the problem seems to be most acute with the law and med-schools. I agree that PhD program admissions are largely immune to these problems, probably because PhD department know that they aren't going to be judged on the GPA's of the students that they admit. </p>
<p>
[quote]
They are failing to admit the best and brightest applicants.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yep, true indeed, but it all gets down to mismatched incentives, especially in incentives that are CHRONOLOGICALLY mismatched. A law/med-school admissions officer may know full well that by fixating so much on grades, the school isn't really admitting the best and brightest. But he figures that it will be decades before the world realizes this and the ***** hits the fan, and by that time, he'll be retired, so what does he care? </p>
<p>In fact, this is a general problem with modern-day admissions in general. If an admissions staff is simply incompetent and denying people that ought to be admitted, how would anybody ever know? It might take decades before the world started to notice that the quality of graduates from that school is not as high as it used to be, and by that time, the staff members no longer work there anyway. Hence, there really is no effective way for the school to monitor its admissions staff. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, I can understand the appeal of easy grades from the standpoint of self interest. But, from a societal, human potential perspective, grade inflation is not in our overall best interest in the long run. I admire Cornell and Swarthmore and other colleges for their tough but fair grading policies. It is unfortunate that even elite colleges like Harvard have caved in to grade inflation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's a case of local optimization creating macro distortions. Each individual university has an incentive to inflate its grades to help its graduates, but of course when many schools do it, grades tend to lose meaning. But then no individual school benefits by being the first to clamp down on its grade inflation. They would all have to do it in tandem, which is impossible from a coordination standpoint as every individual school would have an incentive to cheat (by saying that they are going to join the other schools in clamping down, but not actually do it). If you know game theory, you will recognize that this is basically the prisoner's dilemma game. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Why should colleges use high school grades, based on the same arguments as above?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yep, that's exactly right. Ideally, I don't think colleges should use high school grades either. Again, I think a really good test is in order. Not necesarily the SAT or the ACT. Something better. Back in the old days, i.e. 100 years ago, all schools, including Harvard and MIT, ran their own admissions exams. Admissions was simple - you showed up to the college on their admissions exam day, took the exam, if you scored high enough, you were admitted, if not, you weren't. No muss, no fuss. Everything is completely fair. Either you know the stuff, or you don't. In fact that is how admissions is run today in many foreign countries.</p>
<p>But what would such a test look like? Personally I'm having a hard time imagining any question that could measure grad school qualities (ability to analyze information in new ways, composition, teaching ability). If any test-proponents here have examples of such questions, it might be helpful to post a few so readers can get a sense of what you are looking for in an exam.</p>
<p>Even if a test could be developed to measure these abilities, though, it cannot measure the patience and resolve that are arguably the most important factors in research potential. Reading and writing ability by themselves will not create a dissertation. Despite the flaws, undergrad GPA is just a better measure of these traits than a test could be.</p>
<p>Professional recommendations were suggested as a partial substitute for GPA in admissions decisions, but it is hard to see how this would improve the situation; inflation and variation are at least as great a problem in recommendations as in college grades.</p>
<p>Also, academics are aware of variation in various grading schemes. Medical and law schools may ignore the variation, but everyone is aware of it (that a high GPA for physics courses is different from a high GPA in sociology, or that grades at the University of Chicago cannot be directly compared to grades at the University of Maryland).</p>
<p>"In fact, this is a general problem with modern-day admissions in general. If an admissions staff is simply incompetent and denying people that ought to be admitted, how would anybody ever know? It might take decades before the world started to notice that the quality of graduates from that school is not as high as it used to be, and by that time, the staff members no longer work there anyway. Hence, there really is no effective way for the school to monitor its admissions staff. "</p>
<p>That, and the process is extremely opaque. No one can with any certainty tell you why they got into Brown or Penn and not Chicago or some such thing.</p>
<p>I read that Ivies had classical education requirements, requirements met mostly by prep schools. They even expanded the school as was necessary to enroll all qualifying applicants. The short history is, they relaxed these requirements, Jews start "flooding" the schools (20% at Harvard, 10% at Yale, maybe 40% at Columbia, if I remember correctly), administrators get irked, and introduce today's admissions policies to reduce the number of Jews.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But what would such a test look like? Personally I'm having a hard time imagining any question that could measure grad school qualities (ability to analyze information in new ways, composition, teaching ability). If any test-proponents here have examples of such questions, it might be helpful to post a few so readers can get a sense of what you are looking for in an exam.</p>
<p>Even if a test could be developed to measure these abilities, though, it cannot measure the patience and resolve that are arguably the most important factors in research potential. Reading and writing ability by themselves will not create a dissertation. Despite the flaws, undergrad GPA is just a better measure of these traits than a test could be.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you've managed to contradict yourself. </p>
<p>You've listed a bunch of traits like the ability to analyze new information, composition, teaching ability, patience/resolve, and you've noted that these traits cannot be properly measured by a test. True enough. However, it's hard for me to see how they can be properly measured any better by grades. Just because a person has top grades doesn't mean that he has good teaching ability, nor has he necessarily demonstrated patience/resolve, nor the ability to compose, nor the ability to analyze new information. </p>
<p>However, I do not propose that PhD admissions programs be changed. At least, not at this time. What needs to be changed first are med/law school admissions and this is because that is where the use of GPA is abused the most, probably for ranking purposes. Med/law schools know they will be ranked on their "selectivity", meaning the GPA of the students they admit, which provides the strongly perverse incentive to admit students with high grades regardless of how meaningful those grades are. PhD programs for the most part do not engage in these sorts of shenanigans and so that is why I do not propose to reform their admissions, at least not at this time. Med and law schools are the real culprits. They either don't know, or they don't WANT to know about the variability of grading standards. </p>
<p>I would further point out that pure exam-based admissions is precisely how college admissions used to be run in the past. 100 years ago, if you wanted to get into Harvard or MIT, you took a test. Score high enough, and you were in. Simple as that. As ashernm has pointed out, the reason why this was stopped was due to simple anti-Semitism - college administrators discovered that too many Jews were getting in by scoring highly on the test, so they decided to implement 'comprehensive' admissions policies which was really just code words for saying "we want to admit fewer Jews". Via comprehensive admissions, you can always make up a reason for why you are going to reject somebody and nobody can ever challenge you. You can always say that somebody is just not 'well-rounded enough'. Hence, comprehensve admissions is really just a license for the admissions staff to do anything it wants to do, including whatever racist or discriminatory desire you wish to indulge. </p>
<p>Let's keep in mind that the elite colleges did not just discriminate against Jews. They also heavily discriminated against blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Catholics (especially the Irish and Italians), and basically everybody who wasn't a male WASP. At least in the old days, if an African-American wanted to go to Harvard, all he had to do was score highly on the Harvard exam. Even if the Harvard administration didn't want him around, the fact that he had a high test score meant that Harvard had to admit him. With the comprehensive admissions policies of the early 1900's, the administration now had the perfect excuse to refuse admission to any African-American it wanted. </p>
<p>I would also point out that pure exam-based admissions are how college admissions are still run today in many countries. Wanna go to IIT? Simple. You gotta score well on the JEE test. No fuss, no muss about trying to weigh different grading standards of different schools. The game is simple. You either get a high test score, or you don't. It is for this reason that IIT is considered to be extremely meritocratic and has gotten so much respect throughout the world. IIT has managed to devise a rigorous testing system that works extremely well for them. If IIT can do it, I'm sure the US law and med-schools can do it too.</p>
<p>Here's the study on Cornell's grade inflation:</p>
<p>If you took out the engineering school, you'd likely find that Cornell has the highest median GPA among the Ivies.</p>
<p>LOL! Funny how heresay and reality differ so much. I didn't know Cornell has grade inflation until now!</p>
<p>"However, it's hard for me to see how they can be properly measured any better by grades. Just because a person has top grades doesn't mean that he has good teaching ability, nor has he necessarily demonstrated patience/resolve, nor the ability to compose, nor the ability to analyze new information."</p>
<p>I'm curious as to what kind of class could fail to measure these qualities. Except for a few math courses, every one of my undergrad classes assessed research, writing, patience in completing long-term projects, and several measured teaching ability as well. In fact, the graduate courses I've taken in my major are virtually identical to the upper-division undergrad courses except for quantity of work assigned (longer reading lists, etc.). The problem with GPA is variation in the grade curve - between colleges, between fields of study, between individual teachers - but it seems odd to argue that grades do not measure grad-school-relevant qualities.</p>
<p>I am genuinely interested in the substitute test you propose, though. Posting a sample question might be helpful in getting a sense of this alternative.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm curious as to what kind of class could fail to measure these qualities. Except for a few math courses, every one of my undergrad classes assessed research, writing, patience in completing long-term projects, and several measured teaching ability as well. In fact, the graduate courses I've taken in my major are virtually identical to the upper-division undergrad courses except for quantity of work assigned (longer reading lists, etc.). The problem with GPA is variation in the grade curve - between colleges, between fields of study, between individual teachers - but it seems odd to argue that grades do not measure grad-school-relevant qualities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The final sentence is what I meant to say - that the current situation of grading variability vitiates the ability to consistently judge who has the capability and who doesn't. Certain students in certain school and in certain classes manage to demonstrate no ability whatsoever... and still get A's. A test may not be able to measure those attributes particularly well either, but it has the eminent benefit of consistency. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I am genuinely interested in the substitute test you propose, though. Posting a sample question might be helpful in getting a sense of this alternative.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Examples of such tests already exist. Think of the PhD quals, but obviously decreased in difficulty to reflect what graduating seniors would know (as opposed to 1st or 2nd year doctoral students). </p>
<p>For example, here is a set of Stanford's Physics PhD quals. I wouldn't make my proposed exam this hard, but it would be something like it. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/publications/oldquals/Qual2004.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/publications/oldquals/Qual2004.pdf</a>
<a href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/publications/oldquals/Qual2003.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/publications/oldquals/Qual2003.pdf</a></p>
<p>I would propose that an exam like this would serve to replace the use of grades. After all, if you can answer these questions, you clearly know a lot about physics, so who cares what your physics grades are? Combine that with the quality of your rec's, your research experience, and that should be enough information for an adcom to make a good decision about who to admit into a Physics PhD program. Or at least, it's better than trying to normalize for all these differences in grading schemes.</p>
<p>the whole issue of grade inflation is sort of moot and completely inconsequential. at a place like brown, you still have to work hard for your grades. maybe it's grade inflated, maybe it's not--but nobody can even agree what that means. </p>
<p>at the end of the day, brown does signficantly better than schools that are thought to be grade-stingy (like MIT, cornell, chigago, swarthmore, etc.) in placing students into top medical schools--and believe me, nobody cares more about grades than medical schools.</p>
<p>even, take a place like harvard, notorious for the most egregious grade inflation. they still beat the pants off of every other school in job and grad school placement. it doesn't seem to matter</p>
<p>
[quote]
the whole issue of grade inflation is sort of moot and completely inconsequential. at a place like brown, you still have to work hard for your grades. maybe it's grade inflated, maybe it's not--but nobody can even agree what that means. </p>
<p>at the end of the day, brown does signficantly better than schools that are thought to be grade-stingy (like MIT, cornell, chigago, swarthmore, etc.) in placing students into top medical schools--and believe me, nobody cares more about grades than medical schools.</p>
<p>even, take a place like harvard, notorious for the most egregious grade inflation. they still beat the pants off of every other school in job and grad school placement. it doesn't seem to matter
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, it seems to me that your post contains an inherent. You say that grade inflation is moot and inconsequential and that it doesn't matter. But then you say that Brown and Harvard are grade inflated schools that do very well in placing students into top medical students. Well, isn't that the whole point - that Brown and Harvard may be doing so well BECAUSE of grade inflation? And if that's the case, then isn't the issue of grade inflation extremely relevant and consequential, especially to students who go to schools that are not inflated, like MIT? </p>
<p>To me, grade inflation, like money, is one of those things that you care about the most when you don't have it. It is precisely those students who go to difficult schools like MIT who get shafted in med/law school admissions by the lack of grade inflation. </p>
<p>That's why I think grade ought to be removed from the equation entirely, replaced by a highly comprehensive test. If those Brown students are really that good, then they will do well on that test and nothing will change. If they don't, well, then we will know why they have been able to boast of such high premed and prelaw placement rates for so long.</p>
<p>no, that's not what i'm saying. brown may or may not be grade inflated--on average GPA's have risen at universities across the board over the past few decades. but so have SAT's. apparent inflation could be due to many factors, one of which is that student bodies are stronger. is it inconceivable that the smartest students in the country would go to college and get a bunch of A's?</p>
<p>also, an applicant from a place like MIT isn't at a disadvantage in applying to med school any more than an applicant from an "easier" state school is at an advantage. grad schools and employers are very good at viewing grades in context--moreso than you would think. a 4.0 GPA at MIT on their 5.0 scale (the equivalent of a B average), is considered very respectable. (my fiance was an undergrad and now grad student at MIT).</p>
<p>brown doesn't boast a higher acceptance rate to med school because brown students have better GPA's. lot's of great schools have lots of great students with good grades. brown gets more students into med school because med school's view them as more desirable for a variety of reasons (broad liberal education, high MCATs, extracurriculars, etc.)</p>
<p>Cornell is "deflated" when it comes to honors but, over time, it has suffered from gpa inflation like other schools, although it is less gpa inflated than other Ivies. A different question is how much work is required to earn an A, B, or C grade. I am not sure how to verify or refute this but there is a perception that Cornell requires a LOT of work for an A, B, or C grade. I can only say with certainty that Cornell engineering is extremely demanding. Nobody coasts. In some disciplines, the grading and the courses get easier as students progress from 200 level to 400 level courses. In engineering, the grading and the courses seem to get more difficult and more demanding.</p>
<p>I have heard and read remarks from alumni who say that Cornell is easier now than it was in the 50s and 60s. </p>
<p>I read that the percent of A and A-minus grades is a little lower at Cornell than other Ivies. I think there was an article in the Princetonian about it.</p>
<p>There is a distinction between student gpas, which are based on courses taken in many disciplines, and median grade awarded by a college, a department, a professor, or in a particular course. Median grades are generated by the faculty while gpas are earned by students. The difference in student gpas between science and engineering students and other majors might not be as great as you would think. Science and engineering curricula are probably more demanding in some ways than in other disciplines but I would respectfully suggest that the difficult coursework is offset by a the kind of intelligence and motivation needed by the science and engineering students. </p>
<p>At Cornell, students can submit questions to "Uncle Ezra", the pen-name for Cornell's anonymous "answer man" (or woman?). Here is Uncle Ezra's candid reply to a student who asked a question about grade "deflation" at Cornell. I think the 2 links to the Cornell Daily Sun articles are broken. The link to gradeinflation.com should work. The link to the Cornell Career Services postgraduate surveys should work. When you get to Career Services page, click on "Surveys and Salaries".</p>
<p>Dear UE:
Does the academic world know that Cornell practices grade <code>deflation'? In other words does a Cornell GPA get some</code>respect'? Unlike, Harvard grade `inflation'? Thank you, in advance, for your answer. Uncle Ezra, I've heard that Cornell is hard, really really hard as compaired to the other ivys. Grade inflation is not as big at Cornell and the professors also assign a lot more work I'm told. How true is this?</p>
<p>Dear Deflated and Tough,</p>
<p>The issues of grade and honors inflation have been hot topics on campus and across the nation. Isaac Kramnick, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education explained "Cornell has had comparable grade inflation to the other Ivies. Where it is different, however, is in honors inflation. For a variety of reasons, not necessarily because we are tougher, the rate of Cornell students graduating with honors is much lower than the rest of the Ivies, especially Harvard." To learn more about grade inflation, you might be interested in the following sites:</p>
<p>-<a href="http://www.cornelldailysun.com/articles/5320/dailysun.com/articles/5320/">http://www.cornelldailysun.com/articles/5320/dailysun.com/articles/5320/</a> is about grade inflation at Cornell which documents that the number of As awarded at Cornell (relative to other grades) has grown over time. </p>
<p>-<a href="http://www.cornelldailysun.com/articles/3549">http://www.cornelldailysun.com/articles/3549</a> is about honors inflation among the Ivies (most notably that an average of 8% of Cornell students versus 91% of Harvard students graduate with honors). The staggering numbers at Harvard has received much national attention.</p>
<p>-<a href="http://www.hostcompany100.com/goneforg/gradeinflation.html">http://www.hostcompany100.com/goneforg/gradeinflation.html</a> contains statistical grade information for universities across the country, compiled by Duke University Professor Stuart Rojstaczer. Cornell is not included in these studies, but fellow Ivies, including Harvard, Columbia, and Princeton are. He was recently quoted in the Chronicle of Higher Education, explaining that grade inflation has occurred nationwide regardless of type, competitiveness, or size of school. </p>
<p>The issue of workload and what merits a certain grade is slightly different than "grade deflation." The perception that Cornell is more difficult than some of our peer institutions is present among some students and faculty on campus. Judy Jensvold, the Sr. Associate Director of Health Careers for Career Services advises and interacts with many premed students and graduates. These graduates are periodically surveyed, and many have responded that medical school is not as difficult as their Cornell experience. Although Cornell is a tough place the advantage is that it prepares students well for future challenges. </p>
<p>Graduate and professional schools and employers do evaluate grade point average, and many understand Cornells rigor and take this into account when evaluating each applicant. The name "Cornell" is highly weighted . Standardized test scores, interviews, extra-curricular activities, and reference letters help in the overall evaluation of the application.</p>
<p>A look through the Cornell Career Services website (<a href="http://career.cornell.edu%5B/url%5D">http://career.cornell.edu</a>) demonstrates our placement and our students GPAs and standardized test scores. Many graduates agree that Cornell is not always an easy place to be, but that what they gained was invaluable in preparing them for the next stages of their life. Graduating from Cornell, whether you got straight As or Cs is a great accomplishment! Be proud of what you are achieving! There is nothing quite like the pride and joy that radiates among grads, families and friends on Commencement day!</p>
<p>Uncle Ezra</p>
<p>
[quote]
also, an applicant from a place like MIT isn't at a disadvantage in applying to med school any more than an applicant from an "easier" state school is at an advantage. grad schools and employers are very good at viewing grades in context--moreso than you would think. a 4.0 GPA at MIT on their 5.0 scale (the equivalent of a B average), is considered very respectable. (my fiance was an undergrad and now grad student at MIT).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nice try. Yet the truth is, MIt suffers from an unusually low premed placement rate, relative to peer schools. Moreoever, the GPA's of admitted MIT premeds shows little difference between that of admitted premeds nationwide. You would think that if med-schools were really viewing MIT grades in the proper contest, then they would realize that MIT is a tough school and would therefore provide 'grade compensation'. No such evidence exists that this occurs, and in fact much evidence exists that this does NOT occur.</p>
<p>
[quote]
brown doesn't boast a higher acceptance rate to med school because brown students have better GPA's. lot's of great schools have lots of great students with good grades. brown gets more students into med school because med school's view them as more desirable for a variety of reasons (broad liberal education, high MCATs, extracurriculars, etc.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Even if that were true, then that only changes my thesis somewhat. It just basicaly means that premed are better off going to Brown than going to MIT. Whether it's because of the grade inflation at Brown or whether it's because of something else at Brown, it doesn't matter. Whatever it is, Brown seems to be better. </p>
<p>It's a sad thing for me to say, because for personal reasons, I happen to like MIT a lot. But if MIT doesn't fare well in the premed war, I have to call it the way I see it.</p>
<p>I simply happen to think that the culprit is grade inflation. After all, think of it this way. You talk about how Brown students have lots of EC's and can pursue a broad liberal education. I would argue that all of that is inherently dependent on grade inflation. For example, a student at a difficult school has no choice but to spend a lot of time studying in order to keep his grades up, which clearly cuts down on the EC's he can do. Such a student may also want to take a bunch fo broad liberal arts classes, but simply doesn't have the time, again, because the grade deflation forces him to study hard for the classes he does have. Hence, again, it's the grade deflation that is the central issue. Without grade deflation, that student would have a lot more time to pursue EC's, to pursue a broad education, in short to make himself a "better " candidate. But the med-schools don't care about that. If what you are saying is true, then the med-schools just see that this person didn't pursue the EC's and broad education that they want. They don't care WHY that student didn't. They just see that he didn't. </p>
<p>However, even if grade deflation, is not the direct culprit, it is still a 'fellow traveller'. In other words, you still would rather go to a grade inflated school like Brown instead of a grade deflated school like MIT in order to maximize your chances of getting into med-school, even if grade deflation is itself only a correlating factor and not the true source of the problem. Yet the advice is still the same - you should avoid grade deflated schools. It doesn't really matter WHY you should avoid grade deflated schools, it only matters that you should avoid them.</p>
<p>Mini, a great demonstration of something I just learned: Epstean's law, conceived (somewhat) by Albert Jay Nock, a early 20th century social critic. As stated by one website: "Man tends always to satisfy his needs and desires with the least possible exertion."
Another of Nock's fundamental laws (the other two were not his creations, although he may have been the first to apply them to society) applicable here: Gresham's law, that bad money drives out the good. (His last law is that of diminishing returns.)</p>
<p>I think that the best solution is for the Ivy League as a group, to decide on a certain model or curve. Unilateral action is not effective. Most plausible is Harvard deciding to take on grade inflation, and calling on the other Ivies to follow suit, with other schools following. It's quite ironic (at least from what I've seen, true or not) that colleges seem conformist, notably in grade inflation, a universal trend.</p>