Going off topic here. I once went to a Economics exam without my calculator. So I wrote all the equations and filled everything in... everything except the final answer. Got 100%. They didn't care that I had not given a single final answer; I knew what I was doing. This would not have happened on an Engineering exam!
In every maths/physics/engineering exam I've had (with one exception, see below) exactly that would have happened. Everyone knew that g=10 (not 9.81) and pi
2=10. Get your arithmetic wrong and, provided you had clearly shown your working, the examiner would deduct one mark for the error - and then follow through your answer to see if you had made any further mistakes. If no further mistakes then you got almost full marks even though 99% of the intermediate answers might be incorrect.
The exception was in the mid 70s when calculators were new and not allowed in exams. In the first exam they were allowed, there was one question which
required the use of a calculator to get the right result (opamp input and output voltages). Most students didn't spot the necessity, and were correctly penalised because their engineering thinking was erroneous.
I also had a maths exam where the rubric stated "full marks can be obtained for answers to
about six questions".
Eric Laithwaite said he always inserted a question that
could not be answered well within the confines of a exam - and he expected his good students to recognise it and avoid it
Any engineer should recognise where dragons are in residence, and go elsewhere.