Table 5 Free comments given by the faculty and students regarding various aspects of ILP-CNS.

Usefulness of Integrated Learning Program

1. ILP is good. All systems should be integrated

1. Time integration is more important than compulsory integration of everything-some topics may be left alone

2. It helped in gaining in much more knowledge.

2. Integrated sessions shall be useful provided the systems/areas having scope for integration are identified,

3. Integration is not good, it disturbs our own schedule

3. Adopting a flexible hybrid system comprising of both the traditional and ILP would be appreciated

4. OK for few systems but not for all

4. ILP is useful

Time of Implementation

1. System was nice but probably adopted in a very stressful manner at the wrong time.

2. ILP should not be kept at the end of the session, should be started early

Time table

1. Needs to be structured properly and followed also

2. Two successive lectures should not be of the same teacher

3. Fours hours of continuous didactic lectures become stressful

Mode of content delivery

1. Case discussions were too many and they were mostly of higher standard which we were unable to grasp

1. Less time to be allotted for case discussion, specifically in the first six months as it's a phase of transition

2. Case based learning were good but needed more organization

2. Cases to be framed after identifying the learning objectives of first year students

3. Extra stress on cases compromised with understanding of normal physiology

3. Discussion amongst clinical and basic science teachers is a must before case is presented to the students and adequate time for learning to be given

4. Dissections were too many which could have been reduced so that we get time to study

5. The hospital visits and patient contact was interesting

Integrated Assessment at the end of the module

1. Stressful

2. Examination should be conducted on the pattern of the University examination