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 ...- 2011 Bar Exams: Discussions, Bar Questions and Results
- 2010 Bar Exams: Bar Questions, Discussions and Results
- 2008 Bar Exams Questions and Discussion
- Bar Exams 2009: Last Sunday Rescheduled
Tinkering with internet tools comes with the bonus of better understanding how existing laws apply to the third wave - that of technology, particularly the internet. This is also a great medium to disseminate and discuss ideas across borders, time, color or creed. 
Is it possible to have 16 examiners or more to check the booklets of bar examinees? I believe this bar reform will assure every bar examinee that his or her booklet will be checked thoroughly.
atty.fred paki-enlighten nga po ung news s inquirer last mar.30 re:bar exam..it stated there that the SC lowered the passing grade from 75-70 in 3 subjects only: civil,crim.and labor,the dq rate of 50-45 in civil and labor,does this mean po b n s 3 subjects lang nagkaroon ng adjustments? so ung passing average po was still 75% and not 70%?
tnx..
i did not make it. i was sad but i was able to overcome the feeling. i believe that it’s God’s will and that there is a reason behind.
the decision of the SC to lower down the passing percentage may have benefited many. but i guess it would have been better if they have made it secret among themselves so that SC’s integrity will be maintained.
since i the day of the release of the results.. and found out that i didnt make it, i’ve had mixed emotions – more of sadness but somehow, i have gradually accepted my fate. by gradually, i meant, convincing myself that there’s a reason for failing.. which reason, i am inclined to think however, was unfair..
as the issues abt the exam have not really been addressed. it is only in this site that we see reactions as these -clamor for reforms and transparency.. clamor for explanations and all…but you dont see them on paper..a week passed and there seem to be no article, aside from that of Dean Pangalangan’s, that discusses or mentions how unfair SC’s decision is. is there a “news blackout” on the issue??
well, maybe, personally, i can have closure when i receive a copy of my grades and see how bad i may have fared in the exams.. does anyone know when should we expect our grades? how soon?
thanks!
I failed like the rest of the unfortunates (or, are we really that unfortunate?) It is so sad coz we feel like a victim in this bar exam. VEry unluckily to us (bar flunkers – and I hate these words coz its not totally our own doing) that until now we are left hanging – wondering – amused and confused as we tried to determine and understand the reason behind our failures! All that we knew was the correction was unusually strict wrt civil, labor and criminal as alleged; and then the lowering of the passing rate blah, blah,blah! Can you just imagine if we have not benefitted all these then we can say na talagang mababa ang ratings natin! Kaya nga if pwede lang sana the SC will allow us to have REMOVAL and our failure in that 2007 Bar exam will be envalidated. Afterall, they all have the “prerogatives”. Is this possible? Are those who failed in the 2007 Bar exam amenable to this?
Like the rest, I am thankful to this site coz at least we have an avenue to ventilate our feelings. But again, this seems not enough. How I wish to hear something from atty Fred.
Really, it seemed unfair…
The 2007 examiners were
-Raul Pangalangan for political and international law;
-Rodolfo Salalima for labor and social legislation;
-Cirilo Tolosa for civil law; Lily Gruba for taxation;
-Justice Estela Perlas Bernabe for mercantile law;
-Raymond Fortun for criminal law;
-Sandra Marie Olaso-Coronel for remedial law,
-Justice Ma. Cristina Estrada for legal ethics and practical exercises
Source:http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=127230
From PDI website
SC lowers bar; Ateneo grad No. 1 among 1,289 new lawyers
First posted 01:20:49 (Mla time) March 30, 2008
Leila Salaverria
Philippine Daily Inquirer
MANILA, Philippines—The results of the 2007 examinations for the 5,626 aspiring lawyers would have been truly heartbreaking for many had the Supreme Court not decided to lower the bar, so to speak.
Because of the “unusually strict” correction process, the 2007 bar exams would have yielded the lowest number of passers in recent history.
But then the high tribunal decided to adjust the passing rate to 70 percent from 75 percent, and the disqualification rate in three subjects from 50 percent to 45 percent.
As a result, 22.91 percent, or 1,289 law graduates, will now become full-fledged lawyers.
Had the adjustment in the passing rate not been made, only about 5 percent of last year’s takers would have made the grade.
The batch of passers includes the children of justices of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals and of other government officials.
Four Supreme Court members—Chief Justice Reynato Puno and Associate Justices Consuelo Ynares Santiago, Conchita Carpio Morales and Presbitero Velasco—did not take part in the discussions on the bar exams as they had relatives among the takers.
Top 10
Topping the list of passers was Ateneo de Manila University graduate Mercedita Ona, with a grade of 83.55 percent. She was followed by Jennifer Ong from the University of the Philippines, with a grade of 83.35 percent, and Yvanna Maalat, also of Ateneo, with 82.75 percent.
The rest of the top 10 placers were: Jennie Aclan, University of San Carlos, 82.1 percent; John Michael Galauran, University of Nueva Caceres, 81.6 percent; Karen Canullas, San Sebastian College, 81.4 percent; Cecille Mejia, ADMU, and Sheryl Ann Tizon, UP, tied at 7th place with 81.35 percent; Marforth Fua, San Beda College, 81.2 percent; Ruby Luy, Ateneo de Davao University, 80.9 percent, and Christian Llido, University of Cebu, and Vivian Tan, UP, tied at 10th place with 80.9 percent.
Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna, who chaired the 2007 bar examinations committee, said it was within the Supreme Court’s discretion to adjust the passing rates.
“The corrections were unusually strict, so the justices of the court felt there was a need to lower the passing grade,” he told reporters.
Balancing strictness
Describing the correction process as “difficult,” Azcuna said the adjustment was intended to balance the strictness.
He said those who corrected the papers were free to use their own standards in giving the grades, and it was up to the high court to adjust the passing rates.
The three subjects in which the disqualification rate was adjusted were civil, labor and criminal law.
Under the Rules of Court, a bar examinee is deemed to have passed if he or she obtains a general average of 75 percent in all subjects without falling below 50 percent in any subject.
Azcuna said adjusting the passing rates was also done in previous years, but not since 2000.
The passing rates in the previous six years were as follows: 2000, 20.84 percent; 2001, 32.89 percent; 2002, 19.68 percent; 2003, 20.71 percent; 2004, 31.61 percent, 2005, 27.22 percent, and 2006, 30.60 percent.
Azcuna said the high court took two days to release the results—the decoding of the names was done last Friday—because the Office of the Bar Confidant wanted to double-check the schools as some institutions had apparently changed their names.
Examiners
The 2007 examiners were Inquirer columnist Raul Pangalangan for political and international law; Rodolfo Salalima for labor and social legislation; Cirilo Tolosa for civil law; Lily Gruba for taxation; Justice Estela Perlas Bernabe for mercantile law; Raymond Fortun for criminal law; Sandra Marie Olaso-Coronel for remedial law, and Justice Ma. Cristina Estrada for legal ethics and practical exercises.
Thousands of law graduates and their families, friends and relatives braved the mid-afternoon heat to await the release of the results in the crowded courtyard of the Supreme Court offices on Padre Faura.
LCD screens to display the list of passers were mounted in the Supreme Court building’s lobby.
Until Azcuna’s press conference to announce the results finished, only members of the media were allowed into the lobby, but eager examinees and their relatives could be seen peeking through the open windows.
Puno, who was among four Supreme Court members who did not take part in the discussions on the bar exams because they had relatives among the examinees, said it is not usual practice for the high court to lower the passing rate.
“We [only] do that when the passing rate is unreasonably low,” he said.
From http://archive.inquirer.net/view.php?db=1&story_id=127451
SC takes hard look at law schools
First posted 15:03:40 (Mla time) March 31, 2008
Nestor P. Burgos Jr.
Visayas Bureau
xxx Puno said they also lowered the passing rate because of the lack of practicing lawyers in the country.
“This lack of practicing lawyers is one of the causes why we have a backlog of cases especially in the trial courts. We have enough lawyers but very few are practicing the profession,” he said.
The Chief Justice said most the lawyers are in private corporations or government agencies, with only a few becoming trial lawyers.
Many keep asking or insisting that reforms be made immediately, such as converting the essay-type examination into an 80% multiple choice-type of test. That may be a good way of reforming the bar. But the question is, are we prepared for it?
Most of examinees who failed in the recent bar are clamoring for the change. But don’t you think that such change might be more prejudicial to you and to the rest who will be taking the next one? Even though the reforms has already been initiated a few years back, still many law schools are not modifying their curriculum in such a way that the students would be well versed or prepared in answering multiple choice questions.
It’s a fact that students are still trained to answer essay-type questions, and I’m not surprised if many got low marks on the multiple-choice portion of the last bar. Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for reforms, anything to truly and reasonably test the knowledge of the examinee without undue or unnecessary difficulty. All I’m saying is that we’re pushing the SC to initiate bar exam reforms even if we ourselves are not ready for it.
i’ve been into the teaching profession for more than a decade, and i share the sentiment of a few souls in this forum shouting for reforms.
essay-type questionnaires are most difficult to check, time-consuming, and to say it to be a tedious job is simply an understatement.
i have no qualms as to the manner of checking of the examiners. however, with the rise of clamour with the recent bar exams, would it not be just fair that SC would give back the notebooks of the examinees. and would it not be best to publish the CORRECT ANSWERS on the bar questions?
by then, it would hush the clamor of the “flunkers” and would further put SC or the bar exams to a pedestal beyond smirk.
and i agree to whoever said that all these be put to media. there is xxx and imbestigador.
ancient na talaga kasi ang essay type…. we will be ready in due time if ever there will be reforms… but we need a reform now…. now na….. sana ang bar ay tulad nga dati…. 2x a year binibigay….. kasi yung mga flunkers they will be having delay sa pagiging lawyers…. multiple choice na sana at 2x a year ang bar……..
Pingback: A Glance Once More - 2007 Bar Exams « Macka
reforms for the bar exam:
1.if the examinee ,who passed, is not contented with the result of the examination he/she can retake the bar exam until he/she will be contented;
2.if the examinee,who failed,is not contented with the result of the examination he/she can retake the bar exam until he/she will passed;
3.only those who got an averaged grade of 83 in their law school t.o.r are allowed to take the bar exam.:(
my warmest congratulations to the new set of bar passers!!!be faithful to your oath..to those who did not make it, i understand your plight..but dont end it there..continue to dream and believe..it’s all about having faith..see you in La Salle on September..lets take it again!!!godspeed..
i am planning to take the 2008 bar exam and i am not sure if i will be one of those who will jubilate when the result will come out or one of those who will “sourgrape” (sorry for the word) because of the systems adopted in checking the answers…i admit that i am not very good when it comes to the three L’s required to a woul-be- lawyer (Law, Language & the Logic) but i would still want to try my luck hoping that after the “hullabaloo” of the 2007 bar exam, the examiner would be more lenient in checking the answers of the 2008 bar examinees… i am from the province and from a “whom-we-seldom see-some-of-our-professors” law school ( in taxation lang naman.j.hehehe.) that is why i am not confident enough in taking this year’s bar exam. I have read some of the comments of those who did not make it and some of those who emerged victorious, and i observed that passing the bar exam is really the “make-or-break” to all those who aspires to become a lawyer. As i take the plunge this september and finally commit a “suicide” (read: no formal review classes, jobless for 4 months, filing fee and airfare to & from manila were all donations.heheheheh) i just hope i will be one of those who will emerge victorious despite all the odds. Congratz to all the new lawyers..to those who did not make it, try again this september. with your determination and willingness…disgrasya na lang kung hindi pa kayo maging lawyer.
the 2008 bar examinees do need your prayers. KUDOS!