  Sudden access to the rapidly improving large language model GPT by open-ai
forces educational institutions worldwide to revisit their exam procedures. In
the pre-GPT era, we successfully applied oral and open-book home exams for two
courses in the third year of our predominantly remote Software Engineering BSc
program. We ask in this paper whether our current open-book exams are still
viable or whether a move back to a legally compliant but less scalable oral
exam is the only workable alternative. We further compare work-effort estimates
between oral and open-book exams and report on differences in throughput and
grade distribution over eight years to better understand the impact of
examination format on the outcome. Examining GPT v4 on the most recent
open-book exams showed that our current Artificial Intelligence and Reactive
Programming exams are not GPT v4 proof. Three potential weaknesses of GPT are
outlined. We also found that grade distributions have largely been unaffected
by the examination format, opening up for a move to oral examinations only if
needed. Throughput was higher for open-book exam course instances (73% vs 64%),
while fail rates were too (12% vs 7%), with teacher workload increasing even
for smaller classes. We also report on our experience regarding effort. Oral
examinations are efficient for smaller groups but come with caveats regarding
intensity and stress.
