INTRODUCTION:

Introduction of new innovations, practices and concepts in the field of education is always expected for the advancement of education.¹ There has been a change in overall educational scenario and innovations in education are continuously taking place. As stated by Myron Tribus (1994), there are innumerable proposals in educational system and there are countless number of good ideas and the target is not just to pick one of them; rather it is to have comprehensive approach to combine all good works². Aggarwal (1997) argues that only that system of education is good which ensures effective learning. The important factor for success is effective learning. So, some precautions or some details about the semester system must be informed to students before switching from annual to semester or from semester to quarter system³.

Semester system is an arrangement of education, in which each academic year is divided into two parts of about six months for each semester. It is regarded as more advanced, accurate and interactive than the annual system. It examines the student performance every six months⁴. According to Abro (2014), semester system provides opportunity for students to learn more through the presentations, mid-term examinations, group discussions and submission of assignments etc with regular intervals⁵.

An annual system is a system wherein the students continue their studies throughout one year without any break. It is relatively traditional, and it covers a bigger syllabus⁶. The annual system of examination is replaced with the semester system but the semester system still has many deficiencies. There are numerous chances of favouritism and subjectivity. Teachers also feel relaxed in completing the prescribed syllabus within a stipulated time period successfully⁷.

The term perceived workload can be defined as the amount of work that is assigned to a person in a specified time period. It includes the feeling of being able to handle the work and to deal with the pressure. Excessive levels of academic workload can result in an increased prevalence of psychological and physical problems which in turn can adversely affect academic results⁸.

Academic outcome indicates the extent to which a student has achieved their learning goals⁹. In the annual system of education, the end-of-year examination assesses the whole course content covered throughout the year. In this system, students have ample time to master the subject as opposed to students who sit end-of-semester examinations and undergo in-semester evaluations. Additionally, the semester system provides students with an opportunity for continuous learning and assessment with frequent teacher-student interactions and assessment feedback. Both of these factors can affect the academic outcome of the students¹⁰.

Students have always been perceived as stressed individuals due to the amount of academic workload they bear. This perception is stronger when viewing students studying in medical-related fields¹¹. Stress is emotional feelings that make the person feel uncomfortable and unhappy with the situation that he or she has to overcome¹². Academic related stressors refer to any academic activity such as examination, co-curriculum, lifestyle, merit system workload, time management and others. Excess academic stress always results in poor health of the students, lower academic grades, discontentment, attitude changes, and isolation from their families as well as change in normal circadian rhythms¹³.

This study focuses on the objectives to differentiate annual and semester systems in terms of merits and demerits of both systems. Thus, to know in which system they perform efficiently and effectively.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Materials:

Data was collected by individual administration tool through google form. Tool 1 was a structured questionnaire of 6 items was developed for assessment of demographic variables of subjects. Tool 2 was a self-structured questionnaire consisted of 12 questions regarding academic workload. Tool 3 was a self-structured questionnaire consisted of 3 sections: Comparing marks obtained, clinical requirements and number of subjects. These tools were developed by the researchers and validated by five experts from the nursing fields. Tool 4 was a standardized questionnaire describing the stress among nursing students. Tool 4 is a standardized tool proposed by R. Balaji Rao, M.Sc., M.Ed., Lecturer. Prior authorization was secured from the appropriate authorities to utilize this copyrighted tool with reliability 0.82.

Methods:

Research approach:

The research approach used in this study was quantitative approach.

Research design:

The research design adopted for this study was comparative analytical design.

Variables:

Outcome Variables:

Perceived workload, academic outcome and stress.

Demographic Variables:

Hosteller/Day scholar, Extracurricular activities, Family, Gender, SSLC pass percentage and plus two pass percentage.

Setting of the study:

The study was conducted in Selected Nursing College in Central Kerala.

Population:

Target population:

B.Sc. Nursing students in Central Kerala.

Accessible population:

B.Sc. Nursing students of M.O.S.C. College of Nursing, Kolenchery.

Sample:

Third semester and third year B.Sc. Nursing students.

Sampling technique:

2 σ²(Z1-α /2 + Z1-β)

n= ---------------------------

μd²

σ = Pooled standard deviation (9.47), μd = clinical sig difference, Z 1-α/2 and Z 1-β = statistical table values, Z (α) table value =1.96, Z (β) table value = 0.88, Clinical significance = 1, By this equation, estimated sample size is 88. Convenience sampling technique was used in this study for selecting desired number of subjects.

Inclusion criteria: Nursing students following annual and semester system available during data collection.

Exclusion criteria: Five investigators of annual system.

RESULT:

Section A: Description of subjects according to their demographic variables. (n₁ = 64, n₂ = 69)

Demographic Variables		Group 1(annual system)		Group 2(semester system)
Demographic Variables		Frequency(f)	Percentage (%)	Frequency(f)	Percentage (%)
Day Scholar/ Hosteller	Hosteller	60	93.8%	64	92.8%
Day Scholar/ Hosteller	Day Scholar	4	6.2%	5	7.2%
Extracurricular Activity	Yes	57	89.1%	64	92.8%
Extracurricular Activity	No	7	10.9%	5	7.2%
Family	Nuclear	64	100%	68	98.6%
Family	Joint	0	0%	1	1.4%
Gender	Male	6	9.4%	7	10.1%
Gender	Female	58	90.6%	62	89.9%

There is statistical significant moderate positive correlation between stress and perceived workload among nursing students following semester system and annual system. When the perceived workload among students following semester system and annual system increases, the stress also increases.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of the study is to assess the perceived workload, academic outcome and stress among the nursing students following semester system and annual system at a selected Nursing college in Central Kerala.

Section A:

The purpose of this study is to assess the academic outcome among nursing students following semester system and annual system. In the present study, the academic outcome is higher among nursing students following semester system (pass percentage – 92.7% in semester 1 and 100% in semester 2, number of distinctions– 3 in semester 1 and 7 in semester 2, and number of failures – 5 in semester 1 and 0 in semester 2). Similar findings are reported by a study conducted among students following annual and semester system of Government College of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan. The study revealed that semester system of examination is better than annual system of examination in respect of passing percentage and ratio, marks grading of students.

Section B:

The purpose of this study is to compare the perceived workload among nursing students following semester system and annual system. In the present study, 29.43 ± 6.69 and 31.68±7.729 are the mean values of perceived workload of annual system and semester system respectively. There is no significant difference in perceived workload between nursing students following semester system and annual system. (p value is 0.077). Supportive studies are not available. A study conducted in Punjab among 200 students showed contradictory findings to the present study which showed that students following semester system have more workload than students following annual system.

Section C:

The purpose of this study is to compare the stress among nursing students following semester system and annual system. In the present study, 63.44±26.84 and 76.36± 29.60 are the mean values of stress of nursing students following semester system and annual system. There is significant difference in stress between nursing students following semester system and annual system (p value is 0.009) The study revealed that nursing students following semester system have higher stress than annual system. Similar findings were obtained in the study conducted to assess the stress level of examination practice in semester and annual system among 100 students of School of Nursing Science and Research, Sharda University, Greater Noida, U.P. Results showed that the semester system students had more stress than the annual system students. However studies among 343 students studying physiotherapy in Pakistan showed contradictory findings to the present study which showed that students following annual system have higher stress than semester system.

Section D:

The purpose of this study is to find out the relationship between perceived workload and stress among nursing students following semester and annual system. In the present study, the findings showed that there is statistical significant moderate positive correlation between stress and perceived workload. Currently, no similar or contradictory studies that determined the relationship between perceived workload and stress among nursing students following semester and annual system.

CONCLUSION:

The findings of the study revealed that

· The academic outcome is higher for nursing students following semester system.

· There is no significant difference in perceived workload between nursing students following semester system and annual system.

· There is significant difference in stress between nursing students following semester system and annual system.

· There is statistical significant moderate positive correlation between stress and perceived workload among students following semester system and annual system.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

Here we extend our sincere thanks to all people who participated in the study.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

The author declares no conflict of interest in the study.

REFERENCES:

1. Aslam, H.D., Younis, A., Sheikh, A.A., Maher, M.& Abbasi, Z.A. Analyzing factors affecting student’s satisfaction regarding semester system in universities of Pakistan. Journal of American Science. 2012; 8.

2. Aggarwal, J.C. Essentials of Examination System Evaluation Tests and Measurement. New Delhi; Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd. Mazumdar, Mumtaz. 2005

3. Ribeiro IJ, Pereira R, Freire IV, de Oliveira BG, Casotti CA, Boery EN. Stress and quality of life among university students: A systematic literature review. Health Professions Education.2018 Jun 1; 4(2): 70-7.

4. Kausar R. Perceived Stress, Academic Workload and Use of Coping Strategies by University Students. Journal of behavioural sciences. 2010 Jun1; 20(1).

5. Elias H, Ping WS, Abdullah MC. Stress and academic achievement among undergraduate students in University Putra Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2011 Jan1; 29: 646-55.

6. Richardson M, Abraham C, Bond R. Psychological correlates of university students' academic performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin. 2012 Mar; 138(2): 353.

7. Fallows, S., & Symon, G. Extending the academic year: new opportunities for learning. International Journal of Educational Management. 2000; 14 (7); 308-315.

8. S.G. Hart, L.E. Staveland, Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research, P. Hancock, N. Meshkati (Eds.), Human Mental Workload, North- Holland 1998: 139-183.https://tophat.com

9. Naqvi AS, Fatima. Hybrid Semester System in MBBS Program- Ziauddin Medical College Experience. Pak J Med Dent. 2015; 4(1): 78-80.

10. M.S.A. Rahim, N.Z.M. Saath and N.H.F. Suhaimi. Relationship between Academic Workload and Stress Level among Biomedical Science Students in Kuala Lumpur. Journal of Applied Sciences. 2016; 16: 108-112.

11. Ganesh, G., U. Kavitha, B. Anandarajan and M. Chandrasekar. A study to analyze various factors contributing to stress in first year MBBS students during examination. Int. J. Biomed. Adv. Res. 2012; 3: 700-703.

12. Saat, N.Z.M., I. Ishak, S.H. Lubis and A.R. Ghazali. The effect of merit score towards the stress score among first year student. Proc.-Social Behav. Sci. 2011; 18: 613-616.

13. https://www.collegedeckho.com

14. https://www.collegedeckho.com

15. Akhund SA. Medical Students' Academic Achievement Differences in Annual and Semester-Based Examination Systems: Anatomy Subject Scores As an Example. Cureus. 2021 Nov 20; 13(11): e19775.doi: 10.7759/cureus.19775. PMID: 34950553; PMCID: PMC8687803.

16. Komal Sharma, Elisha Mahato and Poonam Thakur. Assessing the stress level of examination practice in semester and annual system among the students. Indian Journal of Advanced Research. 2023; 11(2): 1178-1181.

17. Yangdon K, Sherab K, Choezom P, Passang S, Deki S. Well-Being and Academic Workload: Perceptions of Science and Technology Students. Educational Research and Reviews. 2021 Nov; 16(11): 418-27.

18. Rukhsana Kausar, Perceived Stress, Academic Workloads and Use of Coping Strategies by University Students. Journal of Behavioural Sciences. 2010; 20.

19. Susana Rubio-Valdehita, Ramón López-Higes and Eva Díaz-Ramiro, Academic Context and Perceived Mental Workload of Psychology Students, Spanish Journal of Psychology. 2014; 17 (e53): 1–8.

20. Asfandyar Yousaf. A Case study of Annual and Semester Systems of Examination on Government College of Management Sciences, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2012; 2(9).

21. Fardows N, Nayer D, Nayer S, Yousuf H. Impact of Education System (Semester and Annual System) On Students performance In Pakistan. In edulearn16 Proceedings 2016 (pp. 581-588).

22. Akhund SA. Medical Students’ Academic Achievement Differences in Annual and Semester- Based Examination Systems: Anatomy Subject Scores As an Example. Cureus. 2021 Nov 20; 13(11).

23. Suvarna VD, Bhata GH. A study on academic achievement and personality of secondary school students. Istraživanja u Pedagogiji. 2016; 6(1): 99-108.

24. Vásquez R. Ethnic identity and academic achievement of Zapotec and Mestizo high school youth in greater Los Angeles (Doctoral Dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University).

25. Duffy A, Keown-Stoneman C, Goodday S, Horrocks J, Lowe M, King N, Pickett W, McNevin SH, Cunningham S, Rivera D, Bisdounis L. Predictors of mental health and academic outcomes in first-year university students: Identifying prevention and early-intervention targets. BJPsych Open. 2020 May; 6(3): e46.

26. Atta S, Murtaza F, Saeed A, Butt A, Arif M, Naeem Z. Academic Stress Levels in Annual Semester System: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study on Students of Physiotherapy in Lahore, Pakistan. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences. 2020 May 17; 9(2): 359.

27. Prabu PS. A study on academic stress among higher secondary students. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention. 2015 Oct; 4(10): 63-82.

28. Bedewy D, Gabriel A. Examining perceptions of academic stress and its sources among university students: The Perception of Academic Stress Scale. Health Psychology Open. 2015 Jul 29; 2(2): 2055102915596714.

29. Harithasan D, Singh DK, Abd Razak NA, Baharom NB. Personal, Academic Stressors and Environmental Factors Contributing to Musculoskeletal Pain among Undergraduates Due to Online Learning: A Mixed Method Study with Data Integration. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022 Nov 4; 19(21): 14513.

30. Mahyuddin RA, Haneef ZM, Alalwani BM, Al Juhani A, Fallatah SM, Abdulmajeid SA, Alsaidi DA. The prevalence of stress among medical students and its effects on academic performance in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2018 Apr 1; 71(5): 3200-5.

31. Perveen U, Saeed M. A Comparative Study of Examination Practices in Annual and Semester System in Public Sector Universities of the Punjab Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. 2014; 3(1): 243-54.

32. Azam M, Ishaq R, Iqbal Q, Jan SU, Mengal MA, Saleem F. Frequency of anxiety, depression and stress among pharmacy undergraduates of annual and semester system: A cohort-based comparison. Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Community Medicine. 2020; 6(3).

33. Batool A, Ahmad S, Ch AH. A Study of Students’ Perceptions Regarding the Effectiveness of Semester and Annual Examination System at Institute of Education and Research. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences. 2018 Jun 5; 11(10): 2582-5.

34. Zeb SA. A Comparative Analysis of Students’ Satisfaction Level Regarding Annual and Semester Systems: A Case Study of Government Post Graduate Jahanzeb College, Swat.

Received on 11.06.2025 Revised on 02.07.2025

Accepted on 18.07.2025 Published on 13.08.2025

Available online from August 20, 2025

Asian J. Nursing Education and Research. 2025;15(3):181-186.

DOI: 10.52711/2349-2996.2025.00038

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License.

Demographic Variables		Group 1(annual system)		Group 2(semester system)
Demographic Variables		Frequency(f)	Percentage (%)	Frequency (f)	Percentage (%)
SSLC	≤ 90	24	37.5%	20	29%
	91-95	14	21.9%	15	21.7%
	96-100	26	40.6%	34	49.3%
PLUS, TWO	≤90	16	25%	8	11.6%
	91-95	26	40.6%	19	27.5%
	96-100	22	34.4%	42	60.9%

SI. No.	Criteria	Group 1 (Annual system)	Group 2 (Semester system)
SI. No.	Criteria	Group 1 (Annual system)	First semester	Second semester
1.	Number of students	64	69	69
2.	Pass percentage	84.37	92.7	100
3.	Number of distinctions	3	3	7
4.	Number of first class	49	48	61
5.	Number of second class	2	13	1
6.	Number of failures	10	5	0
	Number of failures in one subject	4	2	0
	Number of failures in two or more subjects	6	3	0

Workload	Group 1 (n= 64)		Group 2(n=69)		t value	p value
	f (%)	Mean ±SD	f (%)	Mean ±SD
Low workload (0-18)	4 (6.2%)	29.43 ± 6.69	3 (4.3%)	31.68 ± 7.729	-1.784	0.077
Mild Workload (19-28)	23 (35.9%)		15 (21.7%)
Moderate Workload (29-37)	31(48.4%)		37 (53.6%)
Severe Workload (38-48)	6 (9.4%)		14 (20.3%)
Total	64 (99.9%)		69 (99.9%)

Stress	Group 1(n=64)		Group 2 (n=69)		t value	p value
Stress	f (%)	Mean ±SD	f (%)	Mean ±SD	t value	p value
No stress (0 – 31)	6 (9.40%)	63.44 ± 26.84	3 (4.3%)	76.36 ± 29.60	-2.631	0.009^*
Mild stress (32 –63)	29 (45.3%)		20 (29.0%)
Moderate stress (64 – 95)	20 (31.2%)		29 (42.0%)
High stress (96-127)	8 (12.5%)		13 (18.8%)
Extreme Stress (128-160)	1 (1.6%)		4 (5.8%)
Total	64(100%)		69 (99.9%)