Final answer:
The grading system that assesses individual work ethic is rooted in meritocratic principles, whereas a shift to a collective model treats class performance as a shared outcome. This approach impacts student performance and can result in diverse motivations and study habits. Academic integrity remains paramount to ensure fair and accurate grading.
Step-by-step explanation:
The method of grading where every student receives an individual grade based on their work ethic, ability, and attendance is deeply rooted in the principles of meritocracy, similar to the competitive nature of capitalism. However, if a teacher decides to switch to a collective or communist grading model, it would mean that all students share the same grade, which in this scenario is a 'C' grade due to the class average being 75%. This shift to a collective grading system is designed to embody the ethos of "we're all in this together" and reflects an approach that prioritizes group success over individual achievement. It's essential to consider the implications for student performance and motivation when altering the grading system. For example, a switch to such a model might de-incentivize high-performing students or provide a safety net for those who perform less well, potentially leveling the academic playing field.
It's also important to note that various factors contribute to student performance, including study habits, as demonstrated by the fact that 30% of students study seven or fewer hours per week, while 70% study more than that. Furthermore, there is a clear negative correlation between the number of hours spent watching TV the week before an exam and the exam grade, highlighting the importance of dedicated study time.
The integrity of grading also comes into question with regards to academic integrity, as cheating and plagiarism undermine the accuracy of individual assessments, which is a concerning trend found among many undergraduate and graduate students.