Clinical Research Directory

End of Term vs. End of Module Examinations in the Preclinical Stage: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Student and Faculty Perspectives

Sponsor: New Valley University

Summary

Current practice and debate: Many medical schools use hybrid models that combine modular and final exams to balance reliability, validity, and feasibility. Still, there is no consensus on the optimal structure. The debate centers on three issues: educational impact, student stress, and faculty workload. Modular systems may support continuous learning but raise concerns about assessment burden and fragmentation of knowledge, as students may learn topics in isolation rather than as an integrated whole. End-of-term exams, by contrast, risk encouraging short-term memorization even though they test integration more effectively. Justification for the study: Given these competing advantages and drawbacks, the study aims to explore the perspectives of both students and faculty on the two approaches. Understanding how each stakeholder group perceives the effects on learning, stress, workload, and performance can fill a gap in the existing literature, which focuses mainly on learning behaviors rather than stakeholder views. Expected contribution: The findings are intended to inform evidence-based decisions on assessment design in preclinical medical education. By clarifying the trade-offs between distributed and cumulative exams, the study seeks to help institutions optimize learning outcomes while keeping assessment workload and student stress manageable

Official title: EndofTerm vs. End-of-Module Examinations in the PreClinical Stage: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Student and Faculty Perspectives

Key Details

Conditions

Interventions