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 examine the validity of student ratings of instruction by analyzing their relationships with several variables, including gender, academic rank, specialty, teaching time, and teaching method, at a medical school.
Methods
This study analyzed the student ratings of 297 courses at Ajou University School of Medicine in 2013. SPSS version 12.0 was used to analyze the data and statistics by t-test, analysis of variance, and Scheffe test.
Results
There were no statistically significant differences in student ratings between gender, rank, and specialty. However, student ratings were significantly influenced by teaching times and methods (p<0.05). Student ratings were high for teaching times of 10 hours or more and small-group learning, compared with lectures. There was relatively mean differences in students ratings by teaching times, specialty and rank, although the difference in ratings was not statistically significant.
Conclusion
Student ratings can be classified by teaching time and method for summative purposes. To apply student ratings to the evaluation of the performance of faculty, further studies are needed to analyze the variables that influence student ratings.