Posted on March 30, 2008 in Bar Exams
We’ve seen, in the past three or four days, a sudden buzz of comments and activities in this blog centered on the bar exams. Three times the site broke down due to the surge in traffic. After more than 1,500 combined comments in two blog entries (here and here) relating to the 2007 bar exams, we’ve seen, after a long and suspense-filled wait, the victors. Questions arise as the dust settles.
Why the sudden flow of heavy traffic? To be sure, the 2007 bar exams is not the most controversial — that is perhaps reserved to the previous commercial law leakage. Perhaps it’s arguable that it’s not the most difficult, although let’s not really go there. Suffice it to say that while examinees may have been caught offguard with what is “co-determination” in labor law, previous examinees were less fortunate when the “writ of amparo,” years before it was introduced and became controversial in the Philippines, was asked.
Maybe the interest lies in the fact that only 5% originally passed, then pulled up to 20%. Many are asking if the questions are really difficult. Some are unfairly asking if this is a weaker batch. Why do they have to pull it up to more than 20%? These are only some of the questions that have surfaced. Still, no matter what the criticism is, the increase certainly benefited hundreds of examinees.
Maybe it’s time to revisit the bar exam reforms.
Loading ...
we can analyze for etenity the “this and that” of the 07 bar result but one thing remains – names of the passers have already been released… no matter what we do, what we say, no more names can be added to it.
to the less fortunate, always remember – “to everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven” (ecclesiates 3:1-8)
I did not make it… but my respect to the Supreme Court remained untarnished… However, I feel so aggrieved with the result kasi unusual ang ginawa ng SC just to raise the passing percentage. Ang pag check ng aming test papers are done very extra ordinarily. And this was acknowledged by our very own Chairman Justice Azcuna… “unusually strict correction…”
Unfortunately, only a few had benefited the RECON made by the Supreme Court. If yung mga dq sa ibang bar subjects ginawa nilang 45 para di ma dq ay totoo, talaga naman pong very unfair sa ibang subject na nakakuha ng dq.
But this does not mean that the Supreme Court now has no eyes and ears to those who failed. I still believe that the Supreme Court will listen to us. Hence, I would respectfully suggest, considering the uniqueness of this 2007 Bar Exam, na huwag na lang sana nilang i-consider ‘tong failures natin ngayon as counted and part of the number of times that we fail in the bar exam, as the case maybe, in reference to the consequence of the three failure rule and/or the five failure rule. Perhaps this would be the least recon that a bar flunker, like us, can benefit now… after all, nailabas na ang result at wala na tayong magagawa.
The Supreme Court has always the say.
sayang! kung nagtake lang siguro ng bar nung 2007, shux! baka mag-toppa? diba? malas ba (coz one didnt take it nung 2007, eh di sana nagtop sila diba?) or swerte (coz they took it nung some other years na madami ang pumasa)? THINK ABOUT IT! Before making nasty and unfair comments, think about those examinees who sacrificed and worked hard during their 4 years in law school and during the bar review! who are we to say that they are less deserving? Buhay, pangarap, luha ang pinag-uusapan dito. wag naman sana halu-an ng yabang!c’mon! sa tingin nyo kaya if u took the 2007 bar exams, papasa kayo? think about it!
sayang! kung nagtak siguro ng bar nung 2007, shux! baka mag-top pa? diba? malas mo ba (coz one didnt take it nung 2007, eh di sana nagtop diba?) or swerte (coz one took it nung other years na madami ang pumasa at matataas ang grades)? THINK ABOUT IT! Before you make nasty and unfair comments, think about those examinees who sacrificed and worked hard during their 4 years in law school and during the bar review! who are we to say that they are less deserving? Buhay, pangarap, luha ang pinag-uusapan dito. wag naman sana halu-an ng yabang!
c’mon! sa tingin mo kaya if u took the 2007 bar exams, papasa ka? think about it!
I know that you will agree with me that we all want bar reforms to be conceptualized and be implemented immediately. We are making comments on the recent bar exam not for any other reasons but solely to focus on the issue of the urgency of bar reforms. Like for instance, I believe making our bar exams like those of some US States will achieve two important needed reforms. First, there will be no discretion involved because the one who will checked our answers are the computers. Second, we all know that in some States in the US the passing percentage is very low, actually, even some of our law graduates in the Philipines from reputable law schools failed in these Bar exams, and since the Supreme Court wants a stricter checking to lower Bar passing percentage, I believe it is now the right time to implement bar reforms. If this will happen, we will be leveling the playing field for all bar examinees. There will be no usual excuse of bad handwriting, that you pass because you are a son of a prominent family, or you are just lucky because the examiner when he or she checked your paper is in good mood, or the examiner only read the first, the middle, and the last answers and unfortunately your first, middle, and last answers are all wrong, and after that they will just put an unfavorable grade to the examinee, despite the fact that your other answers are correct. We cannot deny these realities, even the examiners themselves admit that they cannot check every single answers, even some bar topnotcher got 100% in a bar subject but they admit that they only answered 80% of the questions, and the other 20% they leave it blank because of the time running out. Brothers and Sisters, these are only few of the reasons that necessitates immediate Bar reforms.
One hundred or even two hundred questions cannot be asked in Philippines Bar Exam in each bar subjects, the most 30 questions, but in some jurisdiction, it can be done. What is my point here? If a bar examinee could answer correctly 80% of the one hundred or two hundred questions, this kind of system in my opinion will likely achieved more the goal of the Supreme Court to limit the membership in the legal profession only to those who are more competent or qualified Lawyers compare to a bar passer in a 20 questions or 30 questions bar exams, and sometimes it happens not all 20 or 30 questions are all asked. Worst, according to some which is heresy of course but it is possible that it is happening with the present system that after checking the first five answers the exminer will proceed to checking the next booklet…I hope this is not true.
twas an unfair exam and checking. they should have been lenient too last year. how about those poor people who worked their b-utt off during law school but didnt pass last year cause of a mere half point? they should have a more clearer system in checking. the examiner in political law is a saddist
I agree, though damage has been done with our present type of bar exams, that a true bar reform has to be conceptualized.
To avoid biases and any unremarkable controversy “multiple choice” type of bar exam is highly appreciated!
Definitely, this kind of examination will not leave any room to prejudices especially if the one to correct the test papers are computers; PRC style! And one nice thing is, the prolonged agony of waiting the bar result will also be put to an end for it will only take a week or two to know the result.
But of course, a multiple choice type of examination is the most difficult and the scariest type of all! Like for example, if the answer is a then it is a! No chance to argue whatsoever! In here that only the deserving can pass, isn’t it? And in here also that a passing percentage will be low. So what? As long as you deserve it, then I think no hurt feelings!
Yes, a true bar reform is needed ORA MISMO!
The supercilious and irresponsible remark of Justice Ascuna that the 2007 bar examinations were checked with “unusually strict correction” showed us the truth: that there is no uniform standard for passing the bar exam. The only standard is the whim and caprice of whoever is the chairman.
This situation robs off on the dispensation of justice and equity in this country. If this situation continues, the ordinary Filipino cannot expect much from the judiciary.
While it is true that revisiting the rules on how bar exams are given may somewhat augment the problems that hound the entire lawyers-to-be populace, I still believe that people in the academe (or whoever is in charge of the work)first secure that law schools are indeed giving the right academic preparation to future lawyers.
I welcome the argument that a PRC-tailored type of test can at least make the checking more objective and accurate, but answering essay type questions is still indispensable to someone who really wants to become a good lawyer. As a lawyer, you are expected to have a large repertoire of vocabulary so as to nail in your logical arguments and get the job done. And to be such, one must have an impeccably impressive use of the language observing the highest adherence to the rules and conventions of English grammar.
I am not a lawyer (but planning to enter law school soon). I am an English teacher. And it surprised me big time to see that most of those who left their comments in this thread (who I presumed to be lawyers or law students) commit a lot of flaws in their tenses and basic subject and verb agreement.
I hate to sound arrogant here, but let me say it in Filipino, “Batu-bato sa langit, ang tamaan mabukulan sana ng pagkalaki-laki!”
Shoot me if you want but I find it really disgusting to read an impeccably impressive rhetoric with lousy and seemingly unmindful use of English grammar.
Improving English skills, added to numerous reasons on why examinees fail in bar exams, should be the first to be examined. Personally, I can’t blame an examiner if he stops checking the rest of the paper if in the first few sentences of an examinee’s answer to a question already has grammatically incorrect sentences.
Essay-type questions should indeed be sustained. And to ‘impress’ or ‘convince’ the examiner’s ‘nod’ is the sole responsibility of the examinees by giving the most ‘convincing’ and most ‘impressive’ way of arguing using the English language.
The questions were not really hard. The 2007 lawyers are just the weakest batch. I’m sorry, but that’s how “we” look at it.
The “codetermination” question in labor law? that’s a basic concept in labor. And don’t tell me they don’t know the Globe doctrine. or whether or not a carpenter is a regular or casual employee.
and in crim law there are only 10 items.
I mean, how hard can it be?
and by the way, yung bar exams, di kailangan ng reforms yun. ok na ang bar as it is.
thats what separate lawyers from the common tao.
ok na rin yun na may human factor talaga sa pagcheck ng booklets para may luck factor. yung luck factor kasi yung equalizer, so that yung mga feeling super smart, babagsak and yung mga ok lang, pumasa. that’s life.
dapat nga 20% lang per year ang pumasa. its not the lowest passing rate ha.
yung UPCAT nga is 5% lang. so meaning, getting to UP is harder than passing the bar.
di ba?
Atty. D, madali naman talaga yung exam. Ang mahirap yung examiners dahil super strict ang checking. I’m sure nung pumasa ka sumabit ka din lang dahil mabait yung examiners mo. Haha.
I’m pretty sure din na sa 75.01 grade mo Atty D, 99.99% of that is pure luck
@Atty. D:
What’s your name?
Para naman kapag may 2007 bar passer kang makaharap sa court malalaman nila na sinabi mo weakest batch sila. At kapag binasura ka nila sa court at least malaman mo na mali ka.
Peace