Dear College of Science Faculty and Staff,
Way back, when we had learned to read, in the middle part of elementary school, I experienced my first oral examination. It was Sight Reading. We went up to the teacher’s desk one by one, where she gave us a book and a marked passage to read right then. Reading out loud is one of my favorite things, so I loved this exam, but for some kids it was terrifying and I knew it may not have reflected their true abilities.
Fast forward to graduate school at Rockefeller University, where my assessment for the Virology course was given as a speaking exam. (Here’s a change: ‘oral exam’ sounds to me like the dentist, so I prefer ‘speaking exam’ and will use that term.) The topic was fascinating and important - understanding types of viruses, pathologies associated, and underlying mechanisms. A panel of three eminent faculty members examined each student for an hour. I found the exam interesting, and friendly, but I could not answer one question: ‘what did Peyton Rous mean when he said things went from bad to worse’? Dr. Rous, I knew, discovered Rous Sarcoma Virus, and had been awarded a Nobel Prize for the stunning demonstration that a virus can cause cancer. (Note that Rous Sarcoma Virus has no relationship to Respiratory Syncytial Virus, except they are both abbreviated RSV). The discovery was made in 1911 when viruses were barely understood - Dr. Rous was not believed and set the research aside until microscopic techniques could visualize the virus. The work led to discovery of the first ‘oncogene’ src, that can ‘transform’ cells towards a cancerous state and heralded understanding that cancers are controlled by genetic changes (here’s a nice discussion by Harold Varmus, former NIH Director and Nobel Laureate). In my speaking exam, I did not know the answer to ‘what did Peyton Rous mean when he said things went from bad to worse’? It was a little scary, but Professor Igor Tam who asked this, did not seem upset, and explained that over time, tumors caused by RSV change so that the cancer cells become more aggressive and invasive.
Many of us have administered qualifying speaking exams to PhD students. It can be frightening for each student, because to think on your feet or even sitting down requires lots of preparation, confidence, and hopefully a friendly set of examiners. The advantage is that an examiner gets an immediate sense of whether the student knows their topic and those related. There is no AI help possible. In the course ‘Building with Cells’ that I pioneered at MIT, the final exam was a presentation around any topic new to the student – there was a lot of wiggle room – including being able to address questions offered by class members. Students loved this format, the spread of topics was amazing, and while the internet (or now Gen AI) could be used, having to speak the presentation and address questions right away, ensured that a student truly understood their topic.
In the Northeastern University College of Science, we already use presentations to assess students, at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. How can we expand speaking assignments and speaking exams to encourage student evaluations that are AI-proof and benefit the learner? There’s a lot of work to using speaking exams, and for large classes peer assessment or AI-assisted methods could distribute the load. We need to teach students how to succeed in speaking exams, to have sufficient confidence and presentation skills. As we consider how to meet the challenges of higher education in the era of Gen AI, let’s think about having students speak their knowledge. It can be a win all round.
Warm wishes to everyone.