Grade inflation—that Loch Ness monster of Harvard perennially sighted by those who recall the days of the “Gentleman’s C”—has yet again reared its head. In a letter to the Faculty of Arts and Science last week, Dean of Harvard College Benedict H. Gross ’71 provided updated statistics that drew him to the conclusion that “grade compression continues to be a concern.” His evidence: Over half of the grades awarded to undergraduates were in the “A” range, a small increase from last year. Twenty years ago, only a third of grades were A’s or A-minuses.

Before beginning a tirade about the need to reduce the average grade, however, one must consider the causes and consequences of grade inflation and the costs of reducing grades, all of which indicate that we do not face a critical problem. Beyond the serious consequences and complications of reforming the grading system, the Faculty has more pressing concerns on which to focus its energy.

Any means of reducing grades would unnecessarily add tension to Harvard’s already hyper-competitive environment. Many classes foster a culture of antagonism by basing the standard of grading on the collective student average; the key to great grades in such classes is not working hard, but working harder than one’s classmates. This discourages cooperation. When students are measured against an absolute standard, which is often set very high, they are encouraged to work collaboratively and think creatively, better serving the overall end of education.

The most obvious solution would be a quota system similar to Princeton’s, which caps A-range grades at 35 percent of all grades given. If such a solution were implemented, however, students would likely shy away from competitive courses and become hypercompetitive when taking such a class is unavoidable. The situation would escalate into an arms race, with students trying constantly to outdo each other in quality and quantity for the few coveted top grades. While academics are one of Harvard’s many strengths, life outside the classroom is often more rewarding and educational, not to mention a welcome change of pace. Furthermore, enforcing grade deflation would undermine the autonomy of professors to dole out grades in accordance with the peculiarities of the classes and students they teach. Classes are not created equal: They have different expectations, difficulty levels, and requirements. Upper level classes and seminars that are notoriously difficult attract students who look forward to working with each other to overcome extraordinarily difficult material. In extreme cases like the notorious Mathematics 55, “Honors Advanced Calculus and Linear Algebra,” all of the students may deserve A’s simply for making it past the first few “weed out” weeks. On the other hand, in a large Core class, it would be more reasonable to enforce a regular grade distribution.

To try to create some administrative rule that accommodates all of the shades of gray between these two extremes and yet still fairly measures “excellence” is impossible. It is better to leave judgments of academic excellence to professors who directly observe the quality of student work and understand the nature of the course than to administrators looking at aggregate statistics.

Overhauling the grading schema would also take a great deal of effort on the part of the Faculty. That body, however, has many other things on its plate, from deciding what it means to be educated in the 21st century to reforming our calendar to finding ways to incentivize and promote better pedagogy. Even if the Faculty thinks that grade inflation is a problem, it should be low on its priority list.

Finally, on a very basic level, grades should be a representation of the quality of a student’s work. Imposing an artificial standard trivializes grades by forcing a distribution to conform to preconceived notions. Although having a large percentage of high grades may decrease the relative value of such grades in the eyes of graduate schools or potential employers, it would be more misleading to have grades that were unjustifiably and arbitrarily lowered.

Like democracy, Harvard’s may be the worst grading system—except for all the others. If grade inflation was a clear problem and there were fair and compelling ways to reduce grades without harming the undergraduate experience, we would hardly mind having fewer A’s on our transcripts. Until someone finds such a silver bullet, however, we’ll take the status quo.