Skip to main content
Call +91 94133 18731
Book Free Demo

On-Screen Marking

On-screen marking vs traditional evaluation

Physical evaluation vs OSM: logistics, audit, scan dependency, and why revaluation is faster when the unmarked original stays in the cloud.

The pipeline

  1. 01MaskFictitious number. Flap torn off.
  2. 02ScanOverhead or high-speed. Books may be opened.
  3. 03CloudPrivate server. Copy, pages, quality.
  4. 04AgencyEvery copy reviewed page by page.
  5. 05PacketsApproved books assigned to examiners.
  6. 06RevalUnmarked original. Marks stored separately.

Direct answer

Traditional evaluation moves physical answer books to examiners. On-screen marking keeps a digital copy and moves access to examiners. OSM can improve tracking and reduce bundle logistics. It does not automatically improve academic judgement, and it adds a hard dependency on scan quality.

How it works

Traditional: scripts are packed, transported, stored, and marked with pen. Reconstructing who marked what, when, is often a paper trail.

OSM: scripts are anonymised images (fictitious number, flap off). Assignment, login, digital pen marks and submitted scores can be logged in realtime. Examiners still apply the scheme; they simply do it on a screen. First-evaluation ticks live as a stored layer; revaluation opens the unmarked original.

Key considerations

  • Cost shifts from transport/storage toward scanning, hosting and support.
  • Examiners need readable images and a scheme that matches the on-screen form.
  • Revaluation and second revaluation are faster because the unmarked original is already in the private cloud — no physical bundle to fetch — and first-evaluation free-hand digital marks are stored separately so the next examiner is not marking over someone else’s ticks.

Avid’s approach

We implement OSM as examination software plus institutional process — see Avid OSM. We do not claim OSM is “always better” than a well-run physical centre.