I wrote a problem that has 3 popups and 3 numeric answers, but they alternate. When I input the answers, WeBWorK treats them in different orders (in other words, they mismatch). For example, the answer entered for the first popup is graded as a numeric answer (or vice-versa). How to fix the grading order? See below the source.

DOCUMENT();

loadMacros(

"PGstandard.pl", # Standard macros for PG language

"MathObjects.pl",

"PGML.pl",

#"source.pl", # allows code to be displayed on certain sites.

"PGcourse.pl", # Customization file for the course

"parserPopUp.pl",

);

# Show which answers are correct and which ones are incorrect

$showPartialCorrectAnswers = 1;

# First popup menu

$popupstrength = PopUp(["Strength",

"weak",

"moderate",

"strong"],

"strong"); # Correct answer

# Second popup menu

$popupdirection = PopUp(["Direction",

"negative",

"positive"],

"negative"); # Correct answer

# Third popup menu

$popupconclusion = PopUp(["Conclusion",

"Reject the null at the .05 level.",

"Fail to reject the null at the .05 level."],

"Reject the null at the .05 level."); # Correct answer

BEGIN_PGML

Two variables, Variable [`X`] and Variable [`Y`], are the focus of a study. The

study involves 14 research participants. The sum of the cross products

([`Z_X • Z_Y`]) for the 14 cases is -11.62.

a. Calculate and interpret [`r`].

[`r=`][_]{-.89}

This is a [@ $popupstrength->menu() @]*, [@ $popupdirection->menu() @]* relationship.

b. Calculate and interpret [`r^2`].

[`r^2=`][_]{.79}

c. Assuming you were to test the significance of [`r`] at the .05 level of significance,

state an appropriate null hypothesis. What would you conclude?

Null hypothesis: [`r=`][_]{0}

[@ $popupconclusion->menu() @]*

END_PGML

ANS( $popupstrength->cmp() );

ANS( $popupdirection->cmp() );

ANS( $popupconclusion->cmp() );

ENDDOCUMENT();

The graded answer is attached.

Notice the mismatch between the 2nd and the 5th answers.