With job opportunities becoming more and more competitive, students are getting ready to face the world outside of college with the best GPAs they can get.

Princeton students, however, might have more trouble staying competitive with students from other peer schools because of the grade inflation policy that began at the university six years ago.

With selective schools seeing a disproportionate number of A’s, Princeton decided to set limits on how many top grades could be earned.

But for Penn students, a University mandate limiting the number of A’s won’t be a problem — and most seem satisfied with the current grading system.

“I’m happy with the way Penn is grading now,” Engineering freshman Sarah Scolnic said.

Penn currently has no plans to adopt a grade inflation policy, but certain departments seek to control grade inflation within their own courses. For example, Undergraduate Economics Chair and Professor Petra Todd said grading on a curve is up to the professor, but a general grade distribution is suggested in larger classes.

“I would not be in favor of a plan that explicitly restricts the fraction of A’s,” she said.

After observing a variety of students each year, Todd does not think each group should be treated identically. She explained that if students work hard, then they should be rewarded, but others should not receive A’s simply because the rest of their classmates may be struggling.

While Todd does not see a wide distribution of A’s in her department, she predicted grade inflation could be seen as a problem in very large and popular classes. However, she said the undergraduate deans monitor grade levels.

The policy was met with a variety of opinions from Princeton’s high-achieving students, professors and even other universities. Since its implementation in 2004, no hints of following in Princeton’s footsteps have come from fellow top institutions, including Penn.

“The reaction among students at Princeton is mixed,” said Michael Yaroshefsky, Princeton’s Undergraduate Student Government president. While he said some students do not mind the policy and haven’t seen much of a difference, others disagree with it.

After weighing the benefits and disadvantages of the policy, Yaroshefsky concluded the policy could give “more meaning to our grades” while the worst case scenario could involve reduced job and graduate school opportunities.

He said the “nightmare scenario” would be another student who is equally as intelligent from another top school who has a higher GPA receives the job over the Princeton graduate.

As for the observed effects, USG’s Undergraduate Life Committee Chair Michael Weinberg pointed out that Princeton’s GPA has gone down very slightly.

Since the policy is fairly new and has only affected two graduating classes for the entirety of their Princeton careers, Weinberg said the policy does not appear to have affected students’ post graduation plans. Employers aware of the policy may compare Princeton students to each other and acknowledge the university’s different grading system.

The university will be waiting to see how the policy affects medical, law and business school admissions once it has been in place for longer.

Weinberg believes a consistent grading scheme across other Ivy Leagues and top schools would create a better comparison among students. A similar grading policy could “reduce the potentially harmful effects of a deflationary policy.”

Princeton History Professor Michael Gordin has not felt that the deflation policy has affected his grading since he has always “roughly graded.” In fact, he believes the policy allows students who produce excellent work the opportunity to stand out from their peers more than they have been able to in the past.

“An ‘A’ means more” and employers should be able to recognize that, Gordin said. The policy will also encourage employers to re-value the ‘B’ as a good grade.

Gordin called grade inflation across the Ivy League a “victimless crime.” He explained that grades have improved over time, and Ivy League schools find it difficult to mark their overall above-average students toughly.

Retired Princeton European Literature Professor Robert Hollander was involved in the process to curb grade inflation and believed it is a “necessary concern.”

Hollander described Princeton faculty over-grading because they wanted to be “friends and get friendly course evaluations.”

Hollander believes the policy makes sure that work is given the appropriate grade rather than an undeserved one.

While only having taught at Princeton for two years, Comparative Literature Professor Peter Brooks recalled his experience at the University of Virginia that grading was “on a strict curve — and I hated that.”

Brooks believes the right approach is not being too concerned with grade inflation. If the outcome results in a “de-emphasis of grades,” then he feels that could be more of a positive result.

Recognizing that Princeton’s policy has both costs and benefits, Todd said “it would provide less motivation for students” at Penn.

Chemistry Professor Madeleine Joullie said Penn should consider Princeton’s grade inflation policy but should ultimately make a decision based on what is good for Penn itself.

“It seems that schools that have stricter admissions are the ones that have grade inflation,” Joullie said. Since schools with tough admissions assume they have accepted top students, grade inflation increases are to reward good students with good grades, she explained.

In looking at Princeton, Joullie does not think that their policy will affect their future plans, as it is “easy to recognize the schools that have grade inflation.”

March 4 — This article has been altered from the print edition. Although the Princeton GPA has dropped slightly, it is due to the grading policy. Employers aware of the policy may take this into consideration.