I don't think they're misunderstanding randomness. They are claiming that randomness is not sufficient for fairness. And I agree. Adding some determinacy to t

I don't think they're misunderstanding randomness. They are claiming that randomness is not sufficient for fairness. And I agree. Adding some determinacy to the shuffling design would reduce the variance of unfair scores that students receive. Ie, it could reduce the likelihood that a student's scores will be biased by a run of advantaged or disadvantaged scoring orders. It wouldn't be very hard to design such a scheme. It would produce fairer results in the short run. And in the long run, it would converge to the same fair averages as the fully random process. In fact it would converge faster. This short run statistical efficiency matters. Students don't have access to the long run results - since they're evaluated in the short run.