In addition, Harvard tends to always have these “leaks” because it has students and faculty that seem more self-critiquing because they really want to stay on top. Harvard to me reminds me of a really really really grown up Emory where there is a ton of self-critique and openness about the weaknesses, but Emory students have not made it to the level where they openly critique the academic environment perhaps because of complacency, low expectations (which mainly comes from lack of awareness of what goes on at some peer or aspirational peer schools in addition to the pre-professional interest). And honestly, most elite schools are more like this.
Only a few (seemingly the most elite) have reached the point where students and faculty are willing to critique such aspects of the experience from the inside. They’ve gotten to the point where they notice these things and demand more and squeal if they don’t get it whereas some student bodies seem not to know any better than what goes on at their own schools. And part of this seems be because students going to Ivies, especially top ones and Ivy Plus types, tend to have friends at other such schools and actually will compare things like academics across the schools if they share interests or take classes in a certain discipline whereas a person attending a “newer” elite may only be concerned about whether or not their classes are smaller or larger than those at peer or more elite schools. They aren’t aware or curious about the level of learning that takes place elsewhere. They seem to settle for superficial representations like rankings and make assumptions about the level of their own academics versus other places unless shown otherwise. It is honestly why I like to start pulling samples of coursework when these sorts of discussions on grade inflation and rigor come up, especially when someone from one elite school is pointing the finger at another. No, I am not singling you out. Students from some schools, especially in Emory’s tier like to claim grade deflation and point fingers at schools with inflation even when their school actually has inflation, just perhaps not enough for their liking in some areas. However, when equivalent “deflated” courses are compared to those some other schools, I think the differential in inflation is sometimes found to be justified. I don’t agree, however, with selective application of inflation and curved grades based upon the social status of of the student.
*Admittedly Oxford is a different thing so should not be compared to decently large/medium sized research universities except for main campus where there is substantial overlap in the courses offered and supposedly the content. In such a comparison, it is not surprising that main campus has more inflation in certain areas (classes can just be easier because of size, like in lower division humanities and social science courses), and then there may be a few cases where it exists and the difference is justified like in several of the chemistry courses offered at each. Whereas, in biology, inflation on main may make little sense when compared to Oxford (however, it may not be inflation…I can attest to some just pitching course at memorization level which is obviously the expertise of most students making the cut for selective schools so averages will naturally be high in such courses)