# data[].attributes.body
Icebreakers; letting students choose the first topic

# data[].attributes.body
- have a strategy

- biased by presentation style -> try to be aware of it, decide if this important

- read 5 to 10 exams, add upcoming failures etc to strategy

- risk: underestimate students, adhering to strategy means very good marks

- test write exam

- two examiners cross-examine, flip orders

- multiple examiners for oral: they can focus on different things

if one person asks a question and that might be important for all, send answer to all students later

trust that tutors etc do the same

# data[].attributes.body
it is fair to mark for formatting as long as it is explicit before the exam that they will be marked for this

timely communication also gives students the chance to let the school/ department know about any specific mitigating circumstances

# data[].attributes.headline
Counteracting subjectivity in paper grading

# data[].attributes.subject
Counteracting subjectivity in paper grading

# data[].attributes.body
grading categories; rubriks

# data[].attributes.body
anonymise student's identities before marking

beware: handwriting/ formatting biases

as a marker, go back to what you marked at a different time under different conditions (e.g. hungry vs. with cookie)

several independent markers

# data[].attributes.body
Be clear about the evaluation criteria - so that every student knows what is expected. Best in a written format to share with everyone

# data[].attributes.body
Separare "objective" from "subjective" criteria beforehand, know what to look for.

Written exam: Scan a few random answers, adjust criteria if you missed something obvious, then grade all based on the same criteria.

# data[].attributes.body
good for large courses

easier to streamline marking

easier to make marking subjective

# data[].attributes.body
2 examiners, being reflective/ aware, replicating the "exam parameters"

# data[].attributes.body
imbalanced workload/ effort --> ask questions