Abstract:

Teachers of the future in higher education will be faced with challenging tasks in an increasingly complex and interconnected world. Students have access to all information and the AI revolution has started. It is increasingly more important to use multi-dimensional assessment tools and embrace diversity in methods of exams. This is even more critical in online environments that can threaten and disrupt academic rigor and integrity. Oral exams haven´t traditionally been used much outside language classes. There are negative topics to have in mind like the stress of students and the subjective nature of the assessment, but there are also many positive factors like instant feedback and the possibility to assess deeper levels of understanding. An oral exam can be looked at as training for work related environment where the student provides valid arguments under challenging conditions. Previous research indicates that students tend to be happy with this approach. What is interesting about the development in recent years in Iceland is the increasing use of oral exams in this context.

The cases from two universities show different methods used in Iceland. In one of the universities individual students do not have access to the exam questions but get some time for reflection after they have drawn the question to answer. The assessment focus is to test theoretical knowledge and its application to practice. Furthermore, in this case the student must connect the questions of theory to group projects from the course. In the other university, students either get known or unknown questions but here they do not get time for reflection or preparing and must answer almost right away. In this university oral exams have been used individually or for group projects where the group gets from 30-60 minutes to answer intensive questions related to the project. Both universities have used oral exams in online as well as physical environment.

Overall, the authors' experience from these cases is that most participants come well prepared to these oral exams and seem to have covered the whole curriculum in the preparation process. The communication during the exams is in many instances fruitful and can contribute to the learning creation and helps to prepare the student for participation in real life situations. The individual oral exams in these cases seem to be more suitable to smaller classes below about 35 students, but in bigger classes the group oral exam can still be a valid useful tool. The next step is to increase and expand this method even more. Other research possibilities could be interesting, like cooperation in educational research in different disciplines and study programs, in undergraduate and on post-graduate levels. This could be a tested for different exam methods and students' engagement to critical thinking in the 21st century environment. The findings so far suggest that some successful trials in Iceland could be learned from and that they are rhyming with theories of knowledge assessment in academic and higher education circles. The cases are an interesting reminder of the meaningful development of classic tools in education and can shed a light on how these experiences can lead to extended layers of knowledge creation and practical learning outputs.

Keywords:

Oral exam, assessment, higher education, knowledge creation, practical application.