This research tests for differences in average grades awarded across six business disciplines in the business college at a southern regional university. Although complaints about college grade inflation have existed for over one hundred years, there has been increasing interest in recent years in grade inflation within the U.S. higher education system. Most published research on grade inflation has focused on systematic inflation at the institutional level, but relatively little has been published relative to cross-disciplinary grade inflation and deflation within a particular institution.

Differences in grading standards between disciplines may reflect better teaching, but they may also reflect lax standards. Lenient grading practices can have unintended negative consequences and are a cause for concern. On the other hand, relatively higher grades for a particular discipline that reflect better teaching should be encouraged and emulated. It is important to identify and evaluate differences in grading practices because unwarranted inconsistencies in grading practices have potential adverse effects upon faculty, students and the institution as a whole.

Using regression analysis and controlling for a number of potential causal factors such as student GPA, withdrawal rates and instructor experience, we compare average grades for nearly 400 classes in six business subdisciplines. We find that the average grades given out in three of the six subdisciplines within this college of business were systematically higher than in the other three, even after controlling for these other explanatory factors. While not offering any conclusions as to why these particular differences exist, there is a general discussion of factors that can explain higher (or lower) average grades from one discipline to the next. Although this research does not attempt to reach conclusions as to the reason for inconsistencies between disciplines at this university, it does provide a framework that other institutions can use to begin to at least identify systematic differences between grading practices within their own academic programs.