<p>Exactly Poeme. When I was at Wharton, most of my core classes were curved to either a B or B+. In the upper-levels, I encountered that same curve quite often, but I do know of professors who would not use it (either they would get a natural distribution anyway, or they simply did not care to use it). </p>
<p>Overall, this is reasonable and I would call it deflationary (in the sense to maintain a really high GPA you have to be at the top of the curve in every class), but I wouldn’t call it grade deflation (as we think of it) because a B+/B is a much more friendly grade to set the curve to rather than a B-/C+ that you might see in the hard sciences like many of my friends did. Add to the fact that there are certainly ways to game your way to a high cumulative GPA by taking the right classes, and some Whartonites have opportunities to finish with 3.8 and 3.9s. </p>
<p>But, as you pointed out, it almost always means sacrificing time spent on extracurriculars, which help make for more well-rounded candidates (and teach students many things as well) or it means not challenging oneself and taking the easy way out. The former I have seen examples of with resumes I have received to screen for jobs in the past, though the latter is something I knew from classmates. I don’t necessarily think either is desirable, but you can’t fault people for trying to give themselves the best chances possible.</p>