Purpose
Objective of this research is to find out weaknesses of undergraduate programs in terms of personnel and financial, organizational management and facilities in view of faculty and library staff, and determining factors that may facilitate program quality–improvement.
Methods
This is a descriptive analytical survey research and from purpose aspect is an application evaluation study that undergraduate groups of selected faculties (Public Health, Nursing and Midwifery, Allied Medical Sciences and Rehabilitation) at Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) have been surveyed using context input process product model in 2014. Statistical population were consist of three subgroups including department head (n=10), faculty members (n=61), and library staff (n=10) with total population of 81 people. Data collected through three researcher-made questionnaires which were based on Likert scale. The data were then analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results
Results showed desirable and relatively desirable situation for factors in context, input, process, and product fields except for factors of administration and financial; and research and educational spaces and equipment which were in undesirable situation.
Conclusion
Based on results, researcher highlighted weaknesses in the undergraduate programs of TUMS in terms of research and educational spaces and facilities, educational curriculum, administration and financial; and recommended some steps in terms of financial, organizational management and communication with graduates in order to improve the quality of this system.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships among medical students' assessments on peers' group presentations, instructors' assessments of those presentations, and students' educational achievements in other assignments and tests.
METHODS
A total of 101 first-year students from a medical school participated in the study. The students' educational achievements in a 4-week long integrated curriculum were analyzed. Student's final grades were comprised of the following education criteria: two written tests (60%), 15 group reports (25%), one individual report (7%), and four group presentations (15%). We compared scores of the group presentation assessed by the peers and the two instructors. Furthermore, we compared peers' assessment scores with each component of the evaluation criteria.
RESULTS
Pearson correlation analysis showed significant correlaton for the assessments between peers and instructors (r=0.775, p<0.001). Peer assessment scores also correlated significantly with scores for the group assignments (r=0.777, p<0.001), final grades on the curriculum (r=0.345, p<0.001), and scores for individual assignments (r=0.334, p<0.001); however, no significant correlation was observed between the peer-assessed group presentation scores and the two written test scores.
CONCLUSION
Peer assessments may be a reliable and valid method for evaluating medical students' performances in an integrated curriculum, especially if the assessments are used to academic processes, such as presentations, with explicit evaluation and judgment criteria. Peer assessments on group presentations might assess different learning domains compared to written tests that primarily evaluate limited medical knowledge and clinical reasoning.