Are current assessment methods helping medical students learn?

Published May 10, 2024 · Updated Oct 12, 2025

assessment methodsMedicine

Mostly not. UK National Student Survey (NSS) open-text analysis shows comments tagged to assessment methods skew negative, with 66.2% negative sentiment and a sentiment index of −18.8; Medicine and Dentistry run more negative still at −28.0. Yet across medicine (non-specific) the overall mood is relatively positive at 51.5% positive, while assessment methods remain a low point at −32.6. This case study uses those sector patterns to explain where medical assessment design falters and how programmes adjust to improve fairness, learning and wellbeing.

How do sequential exams affect learning and wellbeing?

High-stakes sequential exams compress effort into pass-to-progress thresholds, which elevates stress and pushes surface learning. Shifting weight towards continuous assessment and feedback supports knowledge integration and reduces risk. At programme level, a single assessment calendar prevents deadline pile-ups, and a balanced mix of methods aligned to outcomes reduces over-reliance on any single high-stakes hurdle. Early release of briefs and predictable submission windows particularly help mature and part-time learners. Student Voice Analytics can identify where sequential formats drive negative comments so teams can pilot alternatives and compare cohorts.

Why do delays in feedback and communication persist, and what works?

Extended turnaround times and weak course communications stall progress and heighten anxiety. Set realistic feedback windows, publish them on the assessment brief, and use a short post-assessment debrief to summarise common strengths and issues before individual marks. Keep a single source of truth for course updates, name an operational owner, and issue a brief weekly update so students can plan revision and placements with confidence.

How can we reduce subjectivity and inconsistency in assessments?

Subjectivity in case reports and OSCEs often stems from uneven interpretation of criteria. Use checklist-style rubrics with separated criteria and grade descriptors. Run quick calibration using 2–3 anonymised exemplars at grade boundaries and record moderation notes. For larger cohorts, apply targeted spot checks and sample double-marking where variance is highest. Text analytics can flag drift in comments and qualitative feedback, prompting timely calibration.

What safeguards protect assessment integrity without adding burden?

Integrity strengthens when design reduces opportunities to game the system. Diversify tasks beyond unseen written exams to include practical, real-world assessments that require application and reflection. Use plagiarism detection, proportionate invigilation, and anonymised marking. Offer short orientations on assessment formats, academic integrity and referencing, with mini-practice tasks, which helps not UK domiciled students and reduces avoidable breaches.

What lasting effects does COVID-19 have on assessments?

The rapid move online exposed gaps in guidance, platform readiness and access. Retain the best of that flexibility: provide asynchronous alternatives for oral components where feasible, build accessibility in from the start, and ensure students can access required technology. Publish concise online exam protocols and ethics guidance so expectations are consistent across modules.

Where do transparency and consistency break down?

Students question fairness when assessment briefs and marking criteria lack precision. Provide a one-page assessment method brief per task, covering purpose, weighting, allowed resources and frequent pitfalls. Align feedback to criteria and show how to close the gap. Regular marker meetings to standardise strategies improve predictability and build trust in outcomes.

What should medical schools do next?

Stabilise the delivery engine and make assessment legible. Freeze schedules where possible, explain late changes, and centralise communications. Provide annotated exemplars, realistic turnaround times and a short “you said/we’re doing” loop on student voice. Protect existing strengths in placements, delivery of teaching and content breadth by sharing effective practice across modules and teams.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

• Cuts your data by discipline (CAH), demographics (age, mode, domicile/ethnicity, disability), and cohort/site to pinpoint where assessment method issues concentrate.
• Tracks sentiment for assessment methods over time and surfaces concise, anonymised summaries you can share with programme and module teams.
• Supports like-for-like comparisons by subject mix and cohort profile, with export-ready tables for boards and quality reviews.
• Turns open-text into clear, prioritised actions for Medicine, helping leaders see patterns at whole-institution level and drill down to schools and programmes.

Request a walkthrough

Book a Student Voice Analytics demo

See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.

• All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
• Versioned outputs with TEF-ready governance packs.
• Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.

Book a demo Prefer email? [email protected]

More posts on assessment methods:

• What do UK sociology students say about assessment methods?
• Are law assessment methods working for students?
• Do current assessment methods in management studies work for students?
• Student perspectives on human resource management assessment methods

More posts on Medicine student views:

• What do UK medicine students say about location and how their courses run?
• What do students say about teaching staff in UK medical education?
• Do UK medical students feel they get value for money?
• Are medicine students satisfied with course organisation and management?