Background: Objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) is one of the modern tools used to assess students’ clinical competencies. The scoring systems for OSCEs vary widely, which may influence the reliability of this assessment tool. Both checklists and global rating scales (GRS) are widely used as scoring methods for student performance in the OSCE. Objective: To compare a task-specific checklist and end exam GRS in the scoring of OSCE for the evaluation of sixth year medical students in surgery at Shendi University in 2017 and 2018. Methodology: This cross-sectional study compared a task-specific checklist and end exam GRS scores in the OSCE for the evaluation of sixth year medical students in general surgery at the Faculty of Medicine of Shendi University over two consecutive years (2017 and 2018).The results from six stations were analyzed, three from each year. SPSS was used for data analysis. Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess OSCE reliability and Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to identify correlations between the scoring methods. Results: The reliability of both scoring methods was 0.60 across all stations. The majority of students scored B or above (61%) when using the checklist while 46.5% scored B or above when the GRS was used. Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients (ρ) between checklist scores and GRS scores for the six stations ranged between 0.63 and0.88, and these correlations were found to be statistically significant (p = 0.001). Conclusions: The OSCE is a feasible and reliable approach for assessment of the clinical competence of undergraduate medical students. There was a strong correlation between the two scoring systems (checklist and GRS). Based on the results of this study, both ways of scoring the OSCE are considered acceptable.