Purpose
This study examines the implementation of the competency-based curriculum (CBC), which has become the primary educational model in Korean medical schools. It also presents valid evaluation criteria developed through expert consensus to support ongoing improvements in curriculum quality.
Methods
This study examines the implementation of the CBC, which has become the primary educational model in Korean medical schools. It also presents valid evaluation criteria developed through expert consensus to support ongoing improvements in curriculum quality.
Results
Three rounds of Delphi surveys were completed to validate the valid evaluation criteria. Criteria with lower content validity ratios were revised and supplemented based on expert feedback. Ultimately, the process resulted in the identification of five evaluation areas, 16 evaluation items, and 51 evaluation indicators. Among these, the indicators focusing on learner achievement were found to be the most significant.
Conclusion
This study developed an evaluation model and valid evaluation criteria specifically designed for the curricula of Korean medical schools. These were created based on expert consensus, which adds to the strength and relevance of the proposed framework. The establishment of valid evaluation criteria is expected to enhance evaluation practices, promote educational quality, and support the continuous improvement of medical education.

Purpose
This study aims to develop a system of course monitoring by students and evaluate the course quality management system (CQMS) implemented as an educational assessment tool.
Methods
This research was conducted in accordance with the ADDIE model which is a well-known instructional design model. The ADDIE process includes needs analysis, design of the course monitoring and course evaluation, development of evaluation forms, implementation of course monitoring, and evaluation of the program.
Results
To meet the need for a system that can replace the traditional lecture evaluation approach, this study developed and implemented a new course evaluation system. In comparison with the quantitative evaluation method, course monitoring by students provided more qualitative information on classes and courses from the students’ perspective. The students' realistic description helped know how student felt the atmosphere of class and what kinds of teaching style students preferred. However, some view that the evaluation by the four monitoring members was less reliable.
Conclusion
This study proposed a course quality management based on students’ monitoring which emphasized the narrative evaluation to help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the classes and gather qualitative information from the students’ perspective that can be used to improve the courses. It is expected that providing the monitoring members with better orientation could help manage the quality of the courses using the monitoring system.

Purpose
We aim to identify what potential bias factors affected students’ overall course evaluation, and to observe what factors should be considered in the curriculum evaluation system of medical schools. Methods: This study analyzed students’ ratings of preclinical instructions at the Ajou University School of Medicine. The ratings of instructions involved 41 first-year and 45 second-year medical students. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between years of study and ratings’ scoring. Learning difficulty, learning amount, student assessment, and teacher preparation from second-year students were significantly higher than first-year students (p<0.05). The analysis results revealed that student assessment was the predictor of ratings from first-year students, while teacher preparation was the predictor of ratings from second-year students. Conclusion: We found significant interactions between year of study and the students’ rating results. We were able to confirm that satisfaction of instructions factors perceived by medical students were different for the characteristics of courses. Our results may be an important resource for evaluating preclinical curriculums.

Purpose
The purpose of this study was to develop criteria to evaluate a premedical curriculum to ultimately improve the quality of premedical education.
Methods
The first draft of the evaluation criteria was developed through a literature review and expert consultation. The Delphi survey was conducted to ensure the validity of the draft.
Results
The final premedical curriculum criteria consisted of three evaluation areas (curriculum development, curriculum implementation, and curriculum outcome), five evaluation items (educational
objective
, organization of curriculum, instructional method, class management, and educational outcome), and 18 evaluation indicators.
Conclusion
There should be further discussion on the evaluation questionnaire and the content for each evaluation indicator with regard to its practical application. Also, a concrete evaluation system, including evaluation standards and rating scales, should be developed.