They would need to assign some extremely difficult work in order to create a normal curve, basically graduate school level depth and breadth.
The supposed duck symdrome suggests that these students are already working very for hard for their grades.
They know their students need high GPA to go on to grad school and they know that a student at Harvard or Stanford expects to go on to a good grad school. Their parents aren’t paying $300 thousand for their kids to get Cs and get rejected by their own med/law schools.
A friend – a tenured professor at a top LAC – taught a couple classes at Harvard. He also taught a couple classes at Stanford. Both, within the past 5-7 years. At both schools he says most of the kids got As and a few Bs,but mosly in the A- range… because they deserved these good grades. They were smart kids who worked hard and took their classes seriously. He had no reason to exaggerate – HE had no skin in the game, it was just his observation and his experience.
Anecdotal evidence I know. But it says something by someone who should know.
Also, a tenured Harvard professor who taught at Stanford for a couple of years as part of a program he was invited to had this observation about the difference between the average Harvard student and the average Stanford student.
He says the Harvard kids are more nakedly ambitious. The Stanford kids are just… more naked 
Top kids are top kids no matter where they find themselves. Obviously there are a few exceptions (for every top kid there is a GW Bush or an athlete on an “easier” track) but overall they’re good-to-very-good students used to succeess and willing to make it happen at their college, too.
I asked this question to my boss, who thought at Stanford for a few years. His reply: “Uhm… You have to really screw up to get a B there.” Nothing new to anyone, I guess.
@VickiSoCal: Your argument has some merits, and may partially explain why average GPA increases over time. But the same argument (with less $) can also be applies to many public flagship universities as well; after all, not getting into their own med/law schools are equally upsetting for all parents.
If you look at the average ACT score of incoming freshmen you will also find a very significant increase. Those GPA trends do not take into account that the ‘average’ student of today at a top 25 university is far better qualified than the average student of 30 years ago, and might be easily explained by better students producing better work rather than grade inflation.
Is it not possible that students have just gotten “better” over the last several years? I was admitted to the university that I’m a grad student in when I applied (for undergrad) as a high school student and I’m not entirely sure my scores would get me in today. Likewise, the school I went to was a solid safety for me without any effort… I don’t think it would be the same if I was applying now.
And I graduated high school in '09.
(x-post with TO4S)
What grades mean varies from institution to institution. A’s at H and S may simply reflect the brilliance of the students, but at other institutions, they are just grade inflation. I teach at a decent, not great, state university. I recently found out that 51% of the grades given in my department are A’s. This was a revelation to me in several ways. (1) When I moved to this university from another, my teaching evaluations dropped. I was puzzled, but now I know that I am a hard grader, giving only about 25% As. I had thought I was easy. (2) I was surprised by how much I had to push university students, but of course, if most were being given As for modest amounts of work, they would see little reason to study harder and harder. (3) I feel as if there is little point in grading anymore. Perhaps we should make it all pass/fail if no one wants to differentiate work in meaningful ways.
I had thought grades were for motivation and evaluation on a scale that went from slacker to star. The world has changed.
@prof2dad I’m interested to know what state flagships give A+ grades. Maybe UVA? I thought the college A+ was limited to private schools. The colleges my children attended (private) did not allow A+ grades but the professor could add a letter to their file.
IN RE: What is true though is that at least into the 1980s, Stanford was a good, but largely regional school.
I still think of Stanford as regional since 36% of its freshman class is from California. Yes, it is now elite rather than good.
Harvard takes at least 36% of its freshman class from an area the same size as California. Someone did a study a few years ago which basically showed that ALL colleges take a huge chunk of students from within a 200 mile or so radius. There was a great interactive graphic in The Chronicle of Higher Education which showed with circles where the freshman class came from for various colleges, I’d link it but for some reason it will only take me to the NYU page.
My D got several A+'s at UC Berkeley.
Still counted as 4.0/4.0, however.
http://records.ureg.virginia.edu/content.php?catoid=28&navoid=746#grad_syst
http://guide.berkeley.edu/academic-policies/#gradestext
https://registrar.uoregon.edu/current-students/grading-system
https://registrar.illinois.edu/explanation-of-grades
https://lsa.umich.edu/lsa/academics/degrees-requirements/academic-policies/credits-and-grade-point-average/computing-your-grade-point-average.html
https://catalog.ua.edu/undergraduate/about/academic-regulations/records/grades-grade-points-gpa/
http://www.uvm.edu/~rgweb/?Page=gradesandtranscripts/g_grades.html&SM=g_menu.html
Pre-law students may want to consider that law schools give 4.33 for an A+ grade when recalculating GPA for law school application purposes. So the possibility of A+ grades in one’s undergraduate school can be an advantage for a pre-law student.
http://www.lsac.org/jd/applying-to-law-school/academic-record#grade-table
UC Irvine also does A+ but counts them at 4.0
Letter Grade: Grade points: Credit Allowed:
A+, A, A- …excellent 4.0, 4.0, 3.7 Yes Yes Yes
B+, B, B- …good 3.3, 3.0, 2.7 Yes Yes Yes
C+, C, C- …average 2.3, 2.0, 1.7 Yes Yes Yes
D+, D, D- …barely passing 1.3, 1.0, 0.7 Yes Yes Yes
F …failure 0 No
I don’t think it’s just the brilliance of the students. It’s partly the academic culture. In 1975, the average grade awarded at Princeton was 3.04, and at Harvard 3.05—basically indistinguishable, a solid B at both schools.
By 1995, the average grade at Harvard had shot up to 3.36, a B+, while at Princeton it had crept up to 3.26, also a B+ but with Princeton at that point lagging Harvard by 0.10.
By 2015, the average grade at Harvard was 3.65, an A-, while at Princeton it lagged at 3.39, still a B+ and now fully 0.26 behind Harvard.
No doubt Harvard became more selective over this period and its students in 2015 were on average better qualified than those in 1975 and 1995, but the same was true at Princeton.
Still it’s worth noting that, assuming the median Harvard student has a GPA approximating the average (mean) Harvard undergraduate grade of 3.65, that median Harvard student will not have the credentials for admission to Harvard Law School (median undergraduate GPA 3.86; LSAT score discrepancy is similar, though I don’t have immediate access to the LSAT data).
@bclintonk The difference over time between Harvard and Princeton you noted above was largely due to a grade distribution policy imposed by Princeton. There is a long debate in education about whether such distribution restriction yields more benefits or damages. This is the reason why most universities, schools, and departments do not have such a distribution policy.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
I think the question has been answered; yes, many colleges have grade inflation. Wandering into which schools give A+'s leads me to believe that the original topic has been exhausted. Closing.