Harvard students launch petition calling plan for new grading policies "racist"

quote:

---

"This petition calls on Harvard to reject the proposed grading policy, arguing that it is not merely flawed but racially harmful in effect," a petition on Change.org started by Angelina Agostini, a freshman at Harvard College, reads.

"We center racism as a core concern, contending that although the policy is framed as neutral ‘differentiation,’ it functions as a system of ranking and sorting that mirrors and reinforces existing racial and socioeconomic hierarchies," the petition reads. "Because first-generation, low-income (FGLI) students and students of color are disproportionately affected by structural inequities long before arriving on campus, the policy would compound those disadvantages rather than correct them."

On March 30, Amanda Claybaugh, dean of undergraduate education, announced that Harvard College would postpone its controversial grading reform to fall 2027 and implement a new "SAT+" grade, The Harvard Crimson reported.

The initial version of the reform was a "strict cap on A grades," which "drew sharp backlash from students and cautious concern from faculty," the student newspaper reported.

In February, The Harvard Crimson noted that the proposal came following a October 2025 report from Claybaugh which found that more than 60% of grades Harvard undergraduates received were A’s, compared to only a quarter of grades 20 years ago.

---

quote:

---

In a letter directed to "Harvard College Undergraduate Students, FAS Faculty, Amanda Claybaugh, Undergraduate Educational Policy Committee, and whomever else this may concern," Agostini and another student wrote, "The proposed grading policy is blatantly racist. Its harms are not hypothetical and have a history of heavily harming and burdening students of color and first-generation, low-income (FGLI) students."

"To everyone reading this letter, we want to reiterate that FGLI students of color are no less capable, intelligent, or deserving than their more privileged peers," the letter continued. "What differs is the burden we are forced to carry. Policies like this shift the costs of institutional decisions onto marginalized students while dismissing the resulting harm as accidental or nonexistent. So-called ‘neutral’ standards can produce racial outcomes without discriminatory intent (Inoue, 2023). History shows where this leads, and ignoring those lessons only ensures the harm will be repeated."

---