Abstract:
Regular course evaluation, based on the feedback obtained from students, is an important evidencebased
approach to improve quality in the higher education system, which is important for curricular
changes or modifications. The aim of the course evaluation surveys is to identify strengths and
weaknesses of different courses in the MBBS degree program and to assess the possibility of
internalizing good practices to improve the courses. Three Google Form based course evaluations were
conducted centrally through the Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC), Faculty of Medicine (FoM),
University of Ruhuna (UoR). The Heads of three departments and students of three batches from preclinical,
para clinical and clinical phases were separately invited for course evaluations immediately
after their main examinations conducted from May 2023 to March 2024 in the FoM, UoR. The Faculty
Board approved a self-administered questionnaire, which was used for data collection, consisting of
curriculum content, assessments, learning environment and facilities. The pre-clinical department,
having the highest response rate at 52.4%, was followed by the clinical department at 40.6%, and the
para-clinical department at 28.5%. Most of the students across all departments felt that the areas
covered in the curriculum were adequate, with pre-clinical (97.9%), para-clinical (81.1%), and clinical
(97.2%) departments receiving positive feedback. The number of lectures delivered to cover the
curriculum was also well-received, with over 90% of students in each department finding it adequate.
The course evaluation highlights different needs and feedback across pre-clinical, para-clinical, and
clinical phases. In the pre-clinical phase, students find the curriculum is generally adequate. In the
para-clinical curriculum, students find excessive content and insufficient practical focus. In the clinical
phase, the course evaluation received good responses; however, students recommended integrating
more topics and clinical exposure. The areas identified through students‘ feedback were directed to the
departments for necessary measures to improve the courses.
