The Un-movable Object: A Qualitative Analysis of Inertia in Assessment Innovation

Despite widespread recognition of the limitations of traditional exams during Emergency Remote Teaching, assessment practices in higher education have shown strong post-pandemic inertia. This qualitative pilot study investigates the persistence of traditional assessment models, conceptualized as the “un-movable object” of academic culture. Using a phenomenological approach, the study analyzes open-ended responses from a purposive sample of five university professors across Southern Europe. Thematic analysis identifies two primary sources of resistance to assessment innovation. The first is epistemological skepticism, whereby faculty view digital or alternative assessment formats as inherently less rigorous than face-to-face or oral examinations. The second is the security trap, in which technology is deployed to preserve traditional closed-book exams through surveillance rather than to redesign assessment pedagogically. While a minority of participants successfully adopted authentic, process-oriented assessment models, their cases highlight the exceptional pedagogical confidence required to overcome entrenched norms. The findings suggest that assessment inertia is driven not by habit alone, but by deep-seated trust deficits in both digital media and student integrity. The study concludes that sustainable assessment reform requires institutional validation of alternative assessment designs as rigor-equivalent to traditional invigilated exams. Although exploratory, the analysis provides a foundational hypothesis for future large-scale research on post-pandemic assessment innovation.