In an op-ed in the last issue of the Record, David Wignall ’25 critiqued the trend of grade inflation at institutions of higher education, saying that it is causing lessened engagement with the “unadulterated” liberal arts education.
Wignall also argued that — above internships — grades could be the most meritocratic metric for employers, if inflation didn’t threaten their utility in hiring rounds throughout the year.
But grades aren’t the motivator for students that Wignall claims them to be, and they’re also not as meritocratic a measure as he deems. Wignall also unfairly portrays internships as the less meritocratic option, failing to see how opportunities like these can highlight skills that may not be reflected in underrepresented students’ GPAs.
Last year, like everyone else on this campus, I cared about grades — possibly even more so than the average first-year. But the courses where I was most incentivized to participate were not the classes in which I worried about my final grade. Rather, it was in courses where my professors cared more about serious engagement with the material than they did about grades.
While Wignall argues that students are not incentivized to engage with assingments in courses that dole out high grades, I have found that these are the kinds of courses where students are most driven to engage effectively with course content. They can speak openly without worrying that small mistakes might later be reflected in their grade.
Wignall also asserts that inflation has caused GPAs to become less important in hiring practices despite their meritocratic value, and that, as employers review waves of applicants who all have high GPAs, they tend to make hiring decisions based on other factors. But how much have GPAs ever mattered in employment?
For most employers, the GPA of a student at an elite institution can be deemed moot. Seeing Williams or Harvard on a resumé provides more than enough insight into a student’s work ethic and knowledge. The name — and prestige — of our institution is more of a shorthand than our GPA.
Further, to claim that grades are more meritocratic than prior experiences, especially past internships, downplays the achievements of students who have made the most out of what they can. While there are fair arguments behind the cries of nepotism in networking, what about the vast number of low-income and first-generation students at the College who secured multiple prestigious internships without network webs or connections?
I’ll be frank: I don’t get the best grades, but I don’t believe I’m the only one. The College requires students to take courses outside of their intended disciplines, and any work I’ve submitted for a Division III course has been followed by sincere apologies to my professor.
But where I can shine is in my internships. While I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, I am able to edit videos for communications internships, write articles for newsrooms, and analyze policy for political campaigns. These kinds of skills are not always taught or recognized at the College.
My performance in school is not reflective of the technical skills I possess that apply to the working world — and this is true for other students at the College and across the country. That’s why internships matter to employers, a point Wignall doesn’t acknowledge.
I would argue that, to employers, internships are just as meritocratic as grades. Just as more advantaged students can “game the system” when it comes to extracurriculars and internships, so too can they use their resources to improve their grades.
I’m thinking of the many students from my high school who earned higher GPAs because they paid tutors, worked with college counselors, and more. These students from more resourced backgrounds are able to take spots at elite institutions like Williams and will likely be more prepared to write essays in comparison to the small number of underrepresented students. These students come to college with preparation and skills that have not been afforded to underprivileged students like myself.
Colleges understand that the current job market is not a friendly place, and I imagine that they want to position their students to be considered for employment. If this means that elite institutions have to dole out high grades so that students can find time to explore other avenues, like internships, clubs, and jobs, then I’m all for grade inflation.
But grades have always been signposts for academic inaccessibility and resource discrepancies, more than simply highlighting differences between understandings of coursework. Rather than being “out of line with their ideals,” I believe that schools are doing the proper work in moving away from a broken system that turns students into data points to compare against Amherst.
Jayden Tran ’27 is from Alhambra, Calif.