No more final exams?

Replacing a traditional final exam with a scaffolded group project revealed new opportunities for student learning while challenging our assumptions about authentic assessment. 

As educators, we often inherit assessment traditions that seem difficult to question. In medical education, the final theory-based examination has long been viewed as the definitive measure of student understanding. However, recent discussions around assessment reform at UNSW, alongside a growing focus on diverse and competency-based assessment, prompted me to reconsider whether a traditional final examination would be the best way to assess learning in our first-year Introductory Anatomy course (ANAT2111). 

For 2026, we redesigned the course through the UNSW Course Design Institute (CDI) Program to better align its aims, learning outcomes, and assessment and feedback opportunities. While foundational anatomical knowledge remains central, we wanted students to do more than memorise names and terms. Anatomy is about understanding where structures are located, how they relate to surrounding structures and how they function as part of an interconnected system. We wanted students to analyse, integrate and communicate their understanding of how body systems work together. This shift was informed by higher-order learning cognitive and integrative dimensions of Bloom's and Fink's taxonomies, encouraging students to move beyond isolated knowledge towards a more holistic appreciation of the human body. 

From final exam to group project 

One of the most significant changes was the removal of the traditional final examination, previously worth 30% of the course grade. In its place, we introduced a scaffolded group project worth 20%. Students worked collaboratively to create a digital visual representation, such as an infographic, mind map or flowchart, demonstrating how multiple body systems interact within a real-world scenario. Examples ranged from running a marathon and sprinting for the light rail to surviving a snake bite. The project included a proposal stage, formative feedback, final submission and individual reflection, allowing students to receive guidance and refine their work throughout the term. 

The decision was driven by a challenge I had observed over several years. Previously, one course learning outcome, the ability to examine and explain the interdependence of body systems, was assessed primarily through short-answer questions in the final examination. This provided limited opportunities for students to practise higher-order thinking during the term and generated minimal feedback because the examination occurred during the exam period after teaching had concluded. Additionally, I observed that student motivation often declined significantly once earlier assessments were completed, particularly when students felt confident they had already secured a passing grade. 

The new group assessment aimed to address these issues by creating a continuous feedback loop and encouraging students to move beyond memorising functions towards understanding relationships between systems. Throughout the term, students received informal feedback from instructors and peers during weekly laboratory sessions. The project also allowed students to develop graduate capabilities, including collaboration, communication, digital literacy and project management. 

Student and peer feedback 

Student feedback highlighted both strengths and challenges. Many students appreciated the collaborative learning environment, describing teamwork as helpful for understanding complex anatomical concepts. Others recognised the relevance of collaboration for future scientific and professional practice.  

At the same time, some students questioned whether a group project was the most appropriate assessment for anatomy, while others raised concerns about random group allocation, uneven contribution and the clarity of project expectations. 

“Teamwork and group environment were helpful for learning.” 

“Random grouping frequently results in unequal contribution, with some group members not fulfilling their responsibilities.” 

“I wish that the instructions for the group project were clearer. It was hard knowing what level of detail was expected until we sent our project in for feedback.” 

These comments provided valuable insights into the student experience and will inform future iterations of the assessment. While the group project created opportunities for deeper learning, it also highlighted the need for clearer communication, stronger scaffolding and evaluation processes, and more intentional support for team formation and collaboration. 

The transition also coincided with a cohort that achieved lower practical examination results than previous years. Increased emphasis on weekly quizzes and practical examinations may have contributed to these outcomes. Nevertheless, many students remained highly enthusiastic and expressed appreciation for the learning experience. 

“The hands-on approach has allowed me to understand anatomy on a deeper level and appreciate the beauty of the human body.” 

Perhaps the most valuable outcome of this pilot was the conversation it generated among educators, starting within my own discipline. Colleagues raised important questions about balancing authentic assessment, academic integrity, student motivation and disciplinary expectations.  

So, no more final exams?  

I don’t believe the question is whether final exams should disappear entirely. Instead, the question is whether our assessments provide students with the best opportunities to demonstrate learning, receive feedback and develop capabilities that extend beyond the classroom. For our anatomy course, this pilot has offered valuable insights from both student and educator perspectives, and has opened the door to further conversations about what effective assessment can look like in contemporary higher education.