Podcast Summary: The Gist – "Kat and Mike's Museum of Bad Ideas"

Host: Mike Pesca (Peach Fish Productions)
Guest: Kat Rosenfield
Date: February 19, 2026
Theme: Kat and Mike introduce an experimental format where each presents a "bad idea," this time focusing on the push for "A+" grades at Harvard as a solution to grade inflation.

Episode Overview

In this episode of "The Gist," host Mike Pesca teams up with writer Kat Rosenfield for a pilot of "Kat and Mike's Museum of Bad Ideas." They collaboratively dissect the trend of grade inflation, specifically Harvard’s consideration of adding A+ grades to combat too many A’s. The conversation explores academic meritocracy, student entitlement, generational resilience, and the broader social consequences of insulating students from failure.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Introducing the Museum of Bad Ideas (09:14–10:40)

• Format Explanation:
  Mike and Kat reveal their new segment: each picks a contemporary "bad idea" for debate and critique.
• Moral Dilemma:
  Both express unease about focusing on negativity instead of promoting positive ideas:

  "I worry that maybe I'm not being the change that I want to see in the world." — Kat Rosenfield (09:56)

2. The Bad Idea: Giving A+ Grades to Solve Grade Inflation (10:40–30:25)

Background & Trends (13:12–16:51)

• Harvard's median GPA rose from 3.64 (2015) to 3.83 (2025).
• At Yale, nearly 80% of grades are in the A range.
• Grade inflation is not just an Ivy League issue but is happening nationwide.

  “According to the national center for Education Statistics, the average college GPA everywhere... was 2.81 in 1990... by 2020, it was 3.15.” — Mike Pesca (15:19)

Academic Meritocracy Undermined

• The distinction between effort and mastery has blurred—students equate grades with hard work, not skill:

  “Grades feel fair... when they work hard and get an A. Only one student spoke of grades in terms of demonstrating skill or mastering material.” — Mike Pesca (17:20)

• Kat dubs the situation “grade communism” (18:16) and questions if elite credentials even need a GPA to confer advantage.

The Fallout of Too Many A’s

• Losing distinction: Students feel pressure to add further credentials to stand out (double majors, clubs).
• Faculty struggle: Harder-grading professors become unpopular; evaluations threaten their standing.
• Administrative inertia: The system favors student “customer satisfaction” over academic rigor.

  "As long as you have students who feel entitled... professors who think of themselves as service providers... administrators whose primary goal is to make more of themselves... none of these groups are going to be able to come up with something that has the best interests of the College at heart." — Kat Rosenfield (24:12)

Proposed Solutions

• Faculty suggestions:
  • Cap A grades at 20% of enrollment plus 4 per course.
  • Replace the GPA system with course-relative percentile rankings for honors.
  • Allow instructors to submit raw scores or rankings for internal comparison.

  “They have to go to the grade point average, you know, six decimal points over. And that's a pretty foolish way to do it.” — Mike Pesca (21:43)

• Student & Administration viewpoints:
  Faculty are widely seen as having the most plausible path forward, though all are hindered by structural problems.

The Fatal Flaw of A+ Grades

• Adding an A+ just shifts the “grade race” upward, creating new competitive anxieties and replicating the same problems:

  “Shifting the entire grading scale up... could create continued cycles of upward pressure... much as Spinal Tap tries to increase the volume by adding an 11 to the volume knob.” — Mike Pesca, citing faculty report (29:17) “If you think the kids are killing each other now, they'll kill each over an A plus.” — Mike Pesca (29:58)

  • Kat introduces the “crabs in a bucket” analogy:

  “It's not that you need a larger bucket.” — Kat Rosenfield (30:04)

3. Discussion on Student Stress & Fragility (32:52–44:13)

• The conversation turns toward the prevalence of student stress—even minor grade distinctions carry major emotional weight.
• Kat argues that the problem starts earlier—with “failure not being acceptable” at home and through childhood, and a generational fear of emotional pain.

  "If you've never had [the experience of failure], you are going to eventually grow up to be a person who is so fragile and so terrified of ever not measuring up..." — Kat Rosenfield (35:18)

• Mike wonders if elite students will ever truly encounter failure, or just redefine it upward (e.g., not getting the very top law job).

4. Resilience, Risk, and the Purpose of Adversity (41:33–44:48)

• Resilience through adversity:
  Kat shares insights from her time as a teen advice columnist, urging young people to risk pain so they can learn resilience.

  "We want to hurt their feelings so that they understand that having your feelings hurt is not the end of the world. … The loss of resilience is something that really worries me..." — Kat Rosenfield (43:16)

• Generational shift:
  Kat and Mike agree that emotional fragility is increasing, and bubble-wrapping children is counterproductive.

5. Looking for Solutions and the Unlikelihood of Change (45:07–46:39)

• Discussion of anti-bullying programs: Mike sees some success, Kat is skeptical about bullying simply going "underground."
• Regarding Harvard:

  "I am putting the odds of [a sea change at Harvard] happening at the impetus of Harvard itself, slightly lower than an earthquake just opening up a chasm in Massachusetts into which the institution just falls wholesale and disappears." — Kat Rosenfield (46:13)

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On grade inflation:

  "Playing into stereotypes will be your friend, because everything about this is the stereotype affirmation of these students." — Mike Pesca (15:19)

• On student stress:

  "A fear of an A minus drives course shopping and stress." — Mike Pesca (32:53)

• On meritocracy lost:

  "What happened to the idea of excellence and what happened to the idea of the meritocracy?" — Kat Rosenfield (21:13)

• Best analogy:

  "It's not that you need a larger bucket." — Kat, extending the “crabs in a bucket” metaphor (30:04)

• Dark Ivy League joke:

  "They all... drove into a gorge because, you know, they had a 35 from Harvard." — Mike Pesca (21:36)

Segment Timestamps

• 00:39–01:12: Introduction of theme—environmental regulation, political commentary
• 09:14: Introduction to "Kat and Mike's Museum of Bad Ideas"
• 10:40: Harvard’s grade inflation and A+ proposal
• 17:20: Student perceptions of grades
• 18:16: “Grade communism” & loss of distinction
• 21:32: Meritocracy and honors system
• 24:12: Kat critiques college as "customer service" industry
• 29:17: Spinal Tap/A+ grade analogy
• 32:52: Discussion of stress and students’ fear of failure
• 35:18: Generational fragility roots
• 41:33: Lessons on resilience and emotional risk
• 43:16: On emotional callousing through adversity
• 46:13: Kat’s prediction on Harvard changing

Tone and Style

The conversation is witty, self-aware, and intellectually rigorous. Both hosts use humor and cultural references to keep the critique lively ("It's not that you need a larger bucket," "Spinal Tap tries to increase the volume by adding an 11..."). The tone vacillates between empathy for students and sharp satire of elite academic cultures. The co-hosts are frank, at times irreverent, and not afraid to challenge common beliefs or dig into institutional failures.

For more, listeners can share feedback at thegist@mikepesca.com or subscribe for extended episodes.