Grade Calculator

In the late 18th century, American colleges employed wildly different—and often quite subjective—methods of ranking their students. At Yale in 1785, for example, the highest achievers were labeled “optimi,” followed by “second optimi,” then “inferiores” (lower), and finally “pejores” (worse). Across the Chesapeake at William and Mary, every student was simply classified as No. 1 (top of the class) or No. 2 (those deemed “orderly, correct, and attentive”). Meanwhile, Harvard operated on a purely numerical scale: from 1 to 200 in most subjects, and 1 to 100 for mathematics and philosophy. By the 1880s, Harvard had shifted again to a five‑tiered “Class” system (I through V), with Class V signifying failure. These disparate approaches—each arbitrary in its own way—underscored the need for a more uniform grading scheme.

In 1887, Mount Holyoke College pioneered the first modern letter‑grade system in the United States. Their initial scale ran A, B, C, D, and E—with E denoting failure (anything below 75 percent). Soon thereafter Mount Holyoke introduced F for failing, but continued to regard grades below 75 percent as unsatisfactory. The simplicity of letter grades—easily understood at a glance—proved contagious. Over the following decades, schools and universities across the country adopted A–F scales, though each institution developed its own thresholds for what constitutes an A or a C, and many layers of nuance (such as plusses and minuses) were added.

Although letter grades are efficient for objectively scored work—like math exams or multiple‑choice tests—they often fall short in conveying the richness of student learning in more subjective domains, such as essays or creative projects. A handful of schools have experimented with alternative approaches. Saint Ann’s School in New York City, for instance, eschews traditional grades entirely in favor of detailed narrative reports, believing that personalized feedback better fosters growth than a single letter. Similarly, Sanborn High School and other institutions have explored portfolio‑based and competency‑based assessments. Yet these labor‑intensive methods remain rare—especially at large universities, where professors may teach hundreds of students per term. For the foreseeable future, most students will continue to encounter the standard A–F scale, even as many educators strive to ensure grades play a balanced role in motivating and guiding learners.