Objective: To compare traditional and hybrid model of education in urology among 4th-year medical students in terms of training success Materials and Methods: In our urology clinic, the training success scores of seven randomly selected training groups, who were trained with the traditional model between 1998-2018, and the 4th year medical students who were trained with the hybrid model between 2018-2020 and constituted five randomly selected training groups were compared. Of the total 582 medical students, included in the study, 278 (47.8%) were enrolled in the traditional model group, and 304 (52.2%) in the hybrid model group. The training was evaluated with hands-on applications and theoretical and oral exams. Differences between both male and female students and differences that may vary depending on different faculty members teaching the students were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: The training success rates were significantly higher in the hybrid model group (300/304; 98.7%) than in the traditional model group (261/278; 93.9%) [p:0.002]. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found that factors such as the number of training groups, gender of medical students, and evaluations of different faculty members did not affect the educational success rate. Conclusion: The hybrid model could be accepted as a mobile education model in a sense. The exam results of medical students educated with the hybrid model were better than those receiviing training with the traditional model which can be explained by the increased accessibility of medical students to education in the hybrid model without constraints of time and place. Additionally, it is thought that conducting the oral exam as a "structured oral exam" also contributed to these results.