This makes a lot of sense, and follows typical methods that were done by hand long ago. When I TA'd freshman physics at a big university in the 90s, the grading session was a two-pass assembler. First pass, we simply identified the possible answers. Second pass, we marked them. This gave us much more consistency, and it was quicker overall.
Amusingly, the exams always asked for a numerical answer, from which we could guess which mistake they made, then we would find that mistake in their calculation and mark it. Without that trick, identifying the specific mistake in each answer was a pretty tedious process.
Comments
This makes a lot of sense, and follows typical methods that were done by hand long ago. When I TA'd freshman physics at a big university in the 90s, the grading session was a two-pass assembler. First pass, we simply identified the possible answers. Second pass, we marked them. This gave us much more consistency, and it was quicker overall.
Amusingly, the exams always asked for a numerical answer, from which we could guess which mistake they made, then we would find that mistake in their calculation and mark it. Without that trick, identifying the specific mistake in each answer was a pretty tedious process.