Getting Back to the Basics

Why I Replaced a Written Midterm with an Oral Exam

By Demonica Jones

Spring 2026

At the 2026 Ann Ferren Conference on Teaching, Research, and Learning, I attended a session titled Dusting Off Old Practices for the AI-Era. The conversation centered on a question many of us in higher education are wrestling with: in an era where artificial intelligence tools can instantly generate essays, summaries, and analyses, what does authentic student learning actually look like?

I left that session thinking about assessment, specifically, how I evaluate student learning in my courses. Like many faculty members, I have relied on written assignments and exams as core components of assessment. But the conversation at the conference challenged me to reconsider whether those formats still fully captured what I wanted students to demonstrate. Instead of focusing solely on what students can write, sometimes with the assistance of technology, I began thinking about how I might evaluate what students know, understand, and can apply in real time.

For my Multicultural Health course in the Department of Health Studies, I decided to experiment with something different: oral midterm exams.

Rather than framing AI solely as a challenge, I chose to see it as an opportunity to rethink assessment practices. The session at the Ann Ferren Conference reminded me that sometimes innovation comes from revisiting foundational practices.

Rethinking Assessment in the Age of AI

The rise of artificial intelligence has sparked important conversations about academic integrity and assessment design. Tools that generate written content have prompted many instructors to rethink traditional assignments like research papers or take-home exams. While these assignments still have value, they also require us to consider how we verify that student work reflects authentic learning.

Rather than framing AI solely as a challenge, I chose to see it as an opportunity to rethink assessment practices. The session at the Ann Ferren Conference reminded me that sometimes innovation comes from revisiting foundational practices. Oral exams are hardly new as they have long been used in fields such as medicine, law, and graduate education. Yet they remain relatively rare in undergraduate public health classrooms.

I wondered: what might happen if I brought this “back to basics” approach into my course?

Our Multicultural Health Classroom

Multicultural Health is a course that examines the complex relationship between culture and health. We explore how cultural, social, and psychological factors shape health behaviors, access to care, and health outcomes.

Throughout the semester, students analyze how structural and social determinants including race, religion, social class, diet and lifestyle, gender roles, sexual orientation, migration, and acculturation affect health and contribute to disparities across populations.

The course is deeply discussion driven. Students reflect on their own cultural identities, examine structural inequities in health systems, and analyze real world public health cases. My goal is not simply for students to memorize concepts but to develop cultural humility, critical thinking skills, and the ability to apply frameworks to complex health issues.

When I reflected on the learning goals of the course, I realized that an oral exam might actually align more closely with what I wanted students to demonstrate.

Designing the Oral Midterm

Instead of submitting a traditional research paper or completing a written midterm exam, students signed up for a 10–12 minute oral examination during the midterm period. During the exam, students responded to a combination of questions that focused on three areas:

Core Concepts: Students were asked to explain key ideas from the course such as cultural competence, health inequity, or social determinants of health in their own words.
Case-Based Application: Students analyzed short scenarios involving real world public health issues. For example, they might discuss how migration experiences influence health behaviors or how structural inequities contribute to disparities in health outcomes.
Critical Reflection: Students reflected on course discussions and readings, connecting them to broader public health challenges.

The goal was not to create a high-pressure environment but rather a structured conversation about course material. I also provided students with clear expectations and sample question themes in advance so they could prepare.

What surprised me most about the oral exams was how much they revealed about students’ depth of understanding.

What I Observed

What surprised me most about the oral exams was how much they revealed about students’ depth of understanding.

In written exams, students often have time to craft responses that may sound polished but sometimes obscure whether they truly grasp the underlying concepts. In oral conversations, however, it quickly becomes clear how students think through ideas. Students were able to articulate connections between cultural identity, structural inequities, and health behaviors in ways that demonstrated real engagement with the material. Many also drew on examples from class discussions, news events, or personal experiences.

The format also allowed me to ask follow-up questions. If a student mentioned a concept like health disparities, I could ask them to elaborate: What structural factors contribute to those disparities? How might public health interventions address them?

While the format was largely effective, there were some challenges. A few students needed a moment to gather their thoughts before responding, particularly when working through more complex, application-based questions. In these cases, I found it helpful to offer brief prompts or rephrase questions to support their thinking. Additionally, the time bound nature of the exam meant I had to be intentional about pacing to ensure consistency across students. These considerations highlighted the importance of balancing structure with flexibility in oral assessment.

Research on teaching and learning also supports this type of interactive assessment. Instructional scholars note that opportunities for dialogue and explanation allow instructors to better evaluate students’ conceptual understanding and reasoning processes (Nilson & Goodson, 2018).

These brief exchanges often revealed moments of insight that might never appear in a written exam.

Student Reactions

Understandably, many students were initially nervous about the idea of an oral exam. Speaking about course material in real time can feel intimidating, especially for students who are more comfortable expressing themselves in writing.

However, once the exams began, many students shared that they actually appreciated the format. Several commented that it felt more like a conversation than a test. Others noted that it encouraged them to focus on truly understanding the material rather than memorizing definitions.

In fact, students overwhelmingly expressed a preference for the oral exam, often noting that it felt more engaging and allowed them to better demonstrate their understanding.

For some students, the format even felt more equitable. Students who sometimes struggle with writing heavy assessments were able to demonstrate their knowledge through discussion and analysis.

Notably, I did not receive negative feedback about the format. In fact, students overwhelmingly expressed a preference for the oral exam, often noting that it felt more engaging and allowed them to better demonstrate their understanding. While some students were initially nervous, that anxiety typically subsided once the exam began and they recognized it as a guided conversation rather than a high stakes performance. This suggests that while apprehension may exist at the outset, the structure of the experience itself can help alleviate those concerns.

Of course, oral exams also require thoughtful planning to ensure fairness and consistency. I used a structured rubric that assessed conceptual understanding, application of course concepts, and clarity of explanation. This helped maintain consistency across exams and provided students with clear expectations.

Oral exams allowed me to assess student learning in ways that aligned closely with the goals of my course: critical thinking, real world application, and cultural reflection. They also created meaningful moments of connection with students.

Lessons Learned

This experiment reminded me that innovation in teaching does not always require adopting entirely new technologies. Sometimes it means reconsidering long-standing practices and adapting them to our current context.

Oral exams allowed me to assess student learning in ways that aligned closely with the goals of my course: critical thinking, real world application, and cultural reflection.

They also created meaningful moments of connection with students. In the middle of a busy semester, those short one-on-one conversations became opportunities to see how students were processing the course material and how their perspectives were evolving.

As artificial intelligence continues to reshape higher education, faculty are exploring new approaches to assessment and engagement. Many scholars note that AI is prompting educators to rethink traditional assignments and design assessments that emphasize authentic demonstration of knowledge and skills (Anderson & Rainie, 2023). Oral exams may not be the right fit for every course or discipline, but my experience suggests they can be a powerful tool for evaluating student learning in discussion-based fields like public health.

Sometimes, getting back to the basics can open the door to new possibilities.

Author Profile

Demonica Jones, PhD is a Professorial Lecturer in the Department of Health Studies. She earned her DrPH from the Pennsylvania State University and her MPH/MSW from the University of Illinois at Chicago. Her teaching focuses on multicultural health, health equity, and culturally responsive public health practice. She is committed to student-centered learning and innovative assessment strategies that promote critical thinking and real-world application.

References

Anderson, T., & Rainie, L. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the future of teaching and learning. Pew Research Center.

Nilson, L. B., & Goodson, L. A. (2018). Online teaching at its best: Merging instructional design with teaching and learning research. Jossey-Bass.