To the Editor,
While I agree with many of Amie Sugarman's assessments ("Deflating Grade Inflation," April 22), I find it necessary to contest several of her statements, which do not seem to have a basis in fact.
Ms. Sugarman boldly asserts that "a student from a much lesser university with a 4.0 grade point average clearly has the advantage over an Ivy Leaguer with a much lower average." I don't think this is very "clear" at all. Among the advantages provided by attendance at an Ivy League institution are the alumni connections a student can make to help him or her get top job opportunities. These same connections are often much fewer and farther between at lower-ranked schools, certainly giving students at top schools an advantage in the job market.
Moreover, grades are not the only things that make one's resume competitive. Internships, clubs and other non-academic activities are also extremely important, and highly-ranked schools in the United States are often ranked as such not only for the academics they afford their students, but also the quality and quantity of opportunities they provide for extra-curricular growth. Again, this is another area in which Ivy League students have an advantage over students at many other schools, regardless of their grades.
Finally, I must take issue with Ms. Sugarman's characterization of the "fulfilling ability" of receiving an A. How satisfying can it truly be if the A does not signify being the best of the best? If one has worked diligently to receive his or her A and is truly the best in the class, then that individual is put at a disadvantage, knowing that the transcripts of other, less-qualified students are filled with the same grades.
I think the administration would do well to reconsider its grading policy, and I am confident that it will in no way result in a reduction in Dartmouth's prestige.
