Final answer:
Performance trait grades that are exceptionally high or low on performance reports must be substantiated in the comments. This ensures transparent and justified evaluations. The question contextually relates to both educational and corporate performance appraisal systems.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question is addressing the topic of performance appraisals and grading within what seems to be a corporate or educational context. In performance reports, any notably high or low performance trait grades, typically an 'A' or 'F', must be substantiated with comments to provide context and justification. This requirement ensures that evaluations are transparent, and that the grades given are supported by specific examples or evidence.
The discussion provided touches on concepts such as grading systems, how student performance factors into grading, and mentions both competition-based grading, akin to capitalism, and collective grading, paralleling a communist approach. It's implied that a grading system should reflect individual achievements accurately and evolves over time, a principle also applicable in workplace performance evaluations, as expressed in the concept of a 360-degree appraisal where feedback comes from multiple sources.
Considering that there are varied grading rubrics mentioned, it's critical to align the evaluation process with the correct rubric to ensure fairness and clarity in the assessment of performance, be it in education or a professional setting.