by:
Atty. Glenn M. Mortel
"There is nothing that can help a bar examinee most than a constant and intensive study of the provisions of the various codes and the interpretation and application thereof by the Supreme Court in its decisions. By study is meant, that the provisions must be correctly understood and the thought or words thereof put to memory. After a chapter, for example, has been studied, the next one should be studied next, and after this, a review of all that has already been studied re-reviewed, to keep the subject matter and the provisions fresh in mind." - Alejo Labrador
1.
Actual preparation for the bar examination starts from the first day a law student attended class during the first year in the law school.
2.
The blooming secret in passing the bar examination is this: Present good answers that will make the examiners take notice. Good answers anchored upon logical reasoning, written in readable English and more importantly, justified by appropriate legal authority.
3.
If the candidates are at a loss as to what specific legal provisions or case doctrines to use in answering problems, the only alternative left for them is to use their own common sense.
4.
The key to passing the bar examinations is contained in one word: ARTICULATION. Articulation is expressive of the following basic fundamentals: good language, impressive presentation, logical reasoning and substantial background knowledge of law and procedure.
5.
The examinee who has a fairly good command of English, assuming that he is prepared in all other matters, stands definitely with a much better chance of passing.
6.
The responsive character of a given answer would depend to a great extent, on command of good language, logical reasoning and impressive presentation. This objective of preparing impressive and responsive answers can only be achieved by constant practice.
7.
Get this straight right now. Passing the bar examination has been, still is, and will always be a difficult proposition!
8.
No one can really help you pass the bar examination but yourself.
9.
The greatest blooming secret of passing the bar examination is and will always be: PREPARATION! Not just any kind of preparation, but proper, sound and systematic preparation.
10.
Systematic review can only be done by the use of what we call schedules which the candidate must follow vigorously to the letter if he expects to attain the best results.
11.
There will be times when you become sleepy while reviewing but never for one moment, tell yourself: Man, this review can wait! Do not be stupid. Always remind yourself that time is of the essence and is decidedly running too short for you.
12.
Force yourself to read, understand and absorb what law you reviewed. Otherwise, all your efforts will go to waste.
13.
Love and review cannot mix in the business of preparing for the bar examination.
14.
Early to bed, early to rise, that is the way to make a man healthy, wealthy and wise.
15.
A morning shower is a must.
16.
Never stay up late to the wee hours of morning, cramming law into your head. This would not do you any good. Remember, you have to conserve as much energy as you possibly can.
17.
Remember, keeping your health in good running condition is just as important as reviewing and passing the bar examination.
18.
Good handwriting is decidedly a great factor in passing the bar examination.
19.
To beat time, never write kilometric answers.
20.
By far the most important tool that the bar candidate could equip himself with which to tackle the examination that is inherently personal to him is command of written English.
21.
You have to write simple, grammatically correct English if you want to hurdle the examination.
22.
Presentation of answers that are not only good but logical, full of substance and supported by law and other authorities, are gems to the examiner, whether he has a good or black heart.
23.
Make your motto now: Stick to codal provisions! Compliment this with doctrines laid down in recent decisions of the Supreme Court.
24.
Impressive answers showing the candidates reasoning faculty is what the examiners want to read in your examination notebooks.
25.
Ability to retain your understanding of the substance of the law through efforts of study is more desirable quality to possess than mere ability to memorize legal provisions.
26.
Memorizing a particular provision of law word for word but without understanding it and its various implications is a lot of wasted effort.
27.
Never fail to read the newspapers when you are preparing for the bar examination. Read newspapers from 20 to 30 minutes every day.
28.
You can never expect to pass the bar examination without preparation.
29.
Predicting probable questions based on important principles or provisions of law is the safer method of speculating what the examiners are likely to ask in their examinations.
30.
Never depend on tips for your passing. But never brush these tips aside as nothing but trash. They may likely cause your downfall. Never, however, bank too much on them.
31.
Cheating is one sure way to endanger your future career as a prospective member of the legal profession. Never commit such atrocious act like cheating in the bar examination. It never pays. Depend on your own capabilities. Fight your battle royale on a high plane!
32.
Fountain or sign pens are really the most important equipment in bar examination. Never start for the examination without bringing along with you two or more fountain or sign pens.
33.
Like the weather, examiners are absolutely a bunch of unpredictable fellows, capable of asking unpredictable questions.
34.
Do not try to memorize 50 definitions or distinctions in any given time. Two or three will do.
35.
The real secret in remembering the matters contained in an enumeration is the use of keywords. Make your keywords on enumerations you consider important.
36.
Never leave a blank in an enumeration! However, if you use the letters a, b, c, etc. for numbers in the enumeration, so much the better. Ten to one, the examiner may not count his fingers. Make the first four in the enumeration definitely good.
37.
The bar candidate should do well to be always on guard against catchy questions capable of being answered in a number of ways, e.g. What is a complaint? The perfect answer should include both definitions in criminal and civil procedure.
38.
Never be content to answer questions with a mere yes or no. You must, at all times, give justification why your answer is a yes or no. Unless, of course, the examiner qualifies his question with instruction enclosed in parenthesis like: (Answer with a yes or no only).
39.
Always determine the real facts (examiners have the bad habit of including irrelevant facts to confuse you) and the issue or issues in controversy. Which side you take, always justify your side with reasons based on law, rule, equity and justice. Whatever your answer may be, provided it is written in legible language, the examiner will never deny you the corresponding credit you deserve.
40.
Always remember, make efforts to frame your answers so that they are responsive to the questions. Never beat around the bush. Go right straight ahead with your answer. Avoid citations if and when you are not absolutely sure about them. The shorter the answers are, the more direct, the better. Avoid display of flowery expressions which are complicated by legal verbosity. All you need are sensible, direct and reasonable answers that are responsive to the questions.
41.
Legal knowledge is not enough to solve a particular legal issue. What is important is ability to apply this knowledge to the solution of legal controversies.
42.
The most convenient method of tackling problem questions is to present immediately the conclusion of a given answer. Practice, practice, constant practice will help the bar candidate write good answers that examiners will give favorable credit.
43.
The technique of writing down answers responsive to questions is a matter that the candidate must learn as a matter of imperative necessity.
44.
Brevity and directness when done properly could make an answer both effective and impressive. However, when overdone to a point where the ideas sought to be conveyed becomes vague and difficult to understand, they become a liability.
45.
Never forget that every candidate is a potential bar topnotcher.
46.
So, if you are a candidate just preparing for the bar examination, whose chances of passing are quite problematical, just limit your ambition for the present to just working hard to obtain a 75 percent in the great battle of your life.
47.
Take comfort in this: That even those who become lawyers by "just luck", are making good in the practice of law. Nothing can really put a determined man down.
48.
In your preparation for the greatest battle of your life, call upon Him who is the source of all knowledge, wisdom and understanding. In deep humility, bended knees and tears, He will make all things beautiful in His time. Victory belongs to the most persevering!
Note:
All excerpts, except the last (No. 48), were taken by Atty. GLENN M. MORTEL from the book "SECRETS ON HOW TO PASS THE BAR EXAMINATION" by Dean Wenceslao G. Laureta, 1990 edition.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
The Bar Exam for Dummies
by Atty. Analou Sazon
PRELIMINARIES
This should be the jumping board to psyche up for the momentous task ahead. Even this preliminary would need careful planning. But more than the efficiency factor, its better to be effective, therefore, always plan your trip around the pragmatic horizon.
1.
Brief. - Bring only things you really truly honestly need for the pre-week. Never overload. Prepare for a to-each-his-own scenario in the airport or port. You should never assume that someone would be there to meet and help you carry your luggage. Also, it’s good to trim down your materials to the most basic ones. You won’t have time to go over annotated books during the bar month. Go for codals instead and maybe reviewers and answers to bar questions. Also, outlines and notes will do. In this way, you will be constrained to limit yourself to these materials and avoid spreading yourself out too thin.
2.
Family Home. – Be it airline or vessel reservations and lodging places, be sure to confirm your billeting. Make sure the landlady or the manager of the condo or dorm personally confirms your reservation. Don’t be hesitant to ask about amenities and furnishings. The last thing you will need during the entire bar month is an uncomfortable lodging place.
3.
Grace Period. – Schedule your departure for Manila around a practical and comfortable time. Calculate the number of days you will need to process your permit and visit the Bar Confidant’s Office among other things. Also, allow yourself reasonable time/days for settling into your new place. You will need at least a week to allow the place to “grow on you” so that you will not shock your system and risk having to adjust yourself within the bar month. Pre-week reviews may help.
4.
Bill of Particulars. – Be sure everything is complete for the processing of your bar permits. Ask around and confirm the completion of the requirements before leaving for Manila. Inquire at the Bar Confidant’s Office from time to time.
5.
Adjust your body clock. – Months before the Bar, make sure you train yourself to wake up at 5 am and stay wide awake and alert till 5 pm. This will simulate the examination schedule. Also train yourself to eat a fast but full lunch. This will require a very good technique. Lastly, as a very popular reviewer would suggest, “run the marathon”. Practice answering Bar questions using the exact same sign pen you will use during the bar within the exact bar examination time. That is 8am-12pm and 2pm-5pm. This will train your hands to write continuously for 4 hours.
6.
Support Pendente Lite. – Take your vitamins, eat healthy, and drink lots of water. Never forget physical activities, you need that to keep your brain running smoothly too. If you have to try some new supplements, do so months before the bar so that you can monitor your body’s response.
Of course, you should have imbibed the 4L’s (law, logic, language, legible handwriting) in your system by now.
THE FIRST SATURDAY
This day should not be taken lightly for it is as nerve-racking as the first Sunday itself, especially for first time bar takers. The “fear of the unknown” will occupy position number one. Be weary of possible apparitions courtesy of early childhood traumas and fixations. You can never tell…
1.
Do lots of calming exercises. Panic attacks and anxieties will be in overload on this day. Be sure to catch yourself and not waste your energy on useless worries. Pray a lot.
2.
If possible, visit DLSU and find your assigned building. Familiarize yourself with the place and go through the anticipated routine. This will at least ease your nerves at some level. “Knowing thy enemy is winning half the battle”
3.
Limit your review to codals. Pace yourself and do not overdo it. You are already expected to be finished with deep studying during the past 5 days or so. This is the time to relax a bit.
4.
Attend the Bar Ops mass. – You will need God’s blessing as well as a break from studying. Fresh air outside the four walls of your condo or dorm will do you a lot of good. It will clear your head. Also, this is the time to break away from the monotony of legal provisions and indulge your weary brain in some good old “tsismis” of what’s and who’s.
5.
Savor the fellowship and the moral support given to you by your well wishers. They will be overflowing during the first Sunday but you will sorely miss the action after they abruptly become invisible during the 2nd and 3rd weeks. So get a load of them while they are still there.
6.
Call or talk to someone who inspires you.
7.
TRY to get enough rest. (or sleep if you’re one of those who can)
THE FIRST SUNDAY
THE first Sunday is the height of the pendulum. In the rollercoaster play of emotions that Bar takers would surely experience this whole month, the first Sunday will be the peak.
1.
Ab Initio. - You should have set your alarm clocks the night before to make sure you don’t over sleep. Literally jump out of bed and do some physical movements and stretching. Read tips if you have, to rouse your sleepy brain. Just read, don’t study them. More importantly, welcome the day like a meeting with an old lost dear friend. The Bar is not something to conquer. Befriend it.
2.
Pace yourself. Give enough time and provide for personal necessities. Re check things to bring and make sure you don’t forget your permit and pens. Survival kit is essential. Wear comfortable clothes and shoes. (it’s advisable to make and keep a list according to your individual needs)
3.
Damages. - Instead of “tagip-TIPS”, rely on your personal preparation. Yes, you cynics! YOU CAN PASS THE BAR WITHOUT THOSE TIPS. Need testimonials? You won’t need to look very far.
4.
Subpoena. - Call someone who inspires you.
5.
Summons. - Call your family.
THE MOMENT
The make or break nature of this examination is not debatable but the good news is, we have the opportunity to make it lean more on the “make” side. Of course, it is expected that you have done your share of studying and preparation. This is the moment of truth.
1.
Remember your 4L’s.
2.
Be conscious of the time but don’t let it get the better of you.
3.
Calculate the minutes you would want to spend on a question to make sure you finish on time.
4.
Remember the techniques in formulating your answer. The pyramid or the inverted pyramid will be very helpful.
5.
Call to mind that the MOST minutes an examiner would spend on your booklet is 10. MAKE SURE HE GETS WHAT YOU MEAN IN TEN MINUTES. I’M TALKING ABOUT ALL 20 QUESTIONS. TEN MINUTES.
6.
PRAY.
7.
Think of someone who inspires you.
DURING THE PRE-WEEK
This is still crucial and you can’t let your guard down just yet. The days in between will need genius planning and technique because you can’t waste a single day and lose it to an ill-prepared schedule. Remember, every minute counts. Smart studying is the key.
1.
Destierro. - However, Mondays should be reserved for recreation and insanity. Off limits to books and review materials. Go out. You have the best excuse to have the audacity to indulge your most sinful desires and go zany. Just make sure you stay within the limits. Go malling, eat out or do something insane as a release. Just make sure you don’t tarnish La Salle’s immaculate reputation by doing something foolhardy. “Use sound discretion, after all, we are all of legal age.”
2.
Motion to Dismiss. - Do things that are not related to the bar. In a word, Un-law it!
3.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS: Berate yourself if you feel that you want to give in to your penchant for discussing answers. NEVER DISCUSS ANSWERS OR TALK ABOUT THE PAST EXAM. Consider it fait accompli, moot and academic. You’ve done your part. Get over it. It will help ease your nerves, as in “nerbiyos”.
4.
Contract of Adhesion. - Tuesday onwards, back to serious business. Study, Study, Study but pace yourself. Prioritize subjects but rest when your body calls for it. Smart studying is the key. Don’t just study everything randomly. Chose more important topics to dwell on and disregard likely insignificant ones. Trust your instincts. “See the forest and not the trees” as one of our professors would say.
5.
Postponement. - And if you lose the passion, pause for a while and think of the reason why you are here in the first place.
6.
Subpoena. - Call someone who inspires you.
Getting Through the Rest of the Week
By the third week, you will feel the gradual but very pronounced loss of excitement, enthusiasm and energy. The enemy at this point? Giving in to self-pity and defeat because of the toll the bar brings physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. But hold on, dear Bar taker, just the fact that you have come to this point only tells you one thing. You are here because you deserve it. You’ve earned it. Now is the worst time to give up. Here’s a little inspiration : “ …you can never tell how close you are; it may be near when it seems afar; so stick to the fight when you’re hardest hit; its when things go rough that you must not quit.” Sustain your buoyancy. Keep floating.
HAPPY ENDING
Nothing beats preparation and passion but after all is said and done, you will walk out of La Salle’s gate soaked in beer feeling proud of yourself. You’ve gotten through the bar in one piece. It will be hard but you have to admit, it will also have its moments. Physically and emotionally, it will be a growing experience and not many people have the opportunity to claim that. That will constitute your BRAGGING RIGHTS.
Enjoy! Treat yourself. You deserve it. But before you go paint the town red, don’t forget to pay your courtesy calls. Give out your thank you cards. Gratitude is never an outmoded virtue.
THE FORMULA
“WORK AS IF NO PRAYER WOULD HELP,
AND PRAY AS IF NO WORK WOULD HELP.”
PREPARATION + PASSION and INSPIRATION + PRAYER
AND NEVER FORGET TO ENJOY THE WHOLE BAR EXPERIENCE!
PRELIMINARIES
This should be the jumping board to psyche up for the momentous task ahead. Even this preliminary would need careful planning. But more than the efficiency factor, its better to be effective, therefore, always plan your trip around the pragmatic horizon.
1.
Brief. - Bring only things you really truly honestly need for the pre-week. Never overload. Prepare for a to-each-his-own scenario in the airport or port. You should never assume that someone would be there to meet and help you carry your luggage. Also, it’s good to trim down your materials to the most basic ones. You won’t have time to go over annotated books during the bar month. Go for codals instead and maybe reviewers and answers to bar questions. Also, outlines and notes will do. In this way, you will be constrained to limit yourself to these materials and avoid spreading yourself out too thin.
2.
Family Home. – Be it airline or vessel reservations and lodging places, be sure to confirm your billeting. Make sure the landlady or the manager of the condo or dorm personally confirms your reservation. Don’t be hesitant to ask about amenities and furnishings. The last thing you will need during the entire bar month is an uncomfortable lodging place.
3.
Grace Period. – Schedule your departure for Manila around a practical and comfortable time. Calculate the number of days you will need to process your permit and visit the Bar Confidant’s Office among other things. Also, allow yourself reasonable time/days for settling into your new place. You will need at least a week to allow the place to “grow on you” so that you will not shock your system and risk having to adjust yourself within the bar month. Pre-week reviews may help.
4.
Bill of Particulars. – Be sure everything is complete for the processing of your bar permits. Ask around and confirm the completion of the requirements before leaving for Manila. Inquire at the Bar Confidant’s Office from time to time.
5.
Adjust your body clock. – Months before the Bar, make sure you train yourself to wake up at 5 am and stay wide awake and alert till 5 pm. This will simulate the examination schedule. Also train yourself to eat a fast but full lunch. This will require a very good technique. Lastly, as a very popular reviewer would suggest, “run the marathon”. Practice answering Bar questions using the exact same sign pen you will use during the bar within the exact bar examination time. That is 8am-12pm and 2pm-5pm. This will train your hands to write continuously for 4 hours.
6.
Support Pendente Lite. – Take your vitamins, eat healthy, and drink lots of water. Never forget physical activities, you need that to keep your brain running smoothly too. If you have to try some new supplements, do so months before the bar so that you can monitor your body’s response.
Of course, you should have imbibed the 4L’s (law, logic, language, legible handwriting) in your system by now.
THE FIRST SATURDAY
This day should not be taken lightly for it is as nerve-racking as the first Sunday itself, especially for first time bar takers. The “fear of the unknown” will occupy position number one. Be weary of possible apparitions courtesy of early childhood traumas and fixations. You can never tell…
1.
Do lots of calming exercises. Panic attacks and anxieties will be in overload on this day. Be sure to catch yourself and not waste your energy on useless worries. Pray a lot.
2.
If possible, visit DLSU and find your assigned building. Familiarize yourself with the place and go through the anticipated routine. This will at least ease your nerves at some level. “Knowing thy enemy is winning half the battle”
3.
Limit your review to codals. Pace yourself and do not overdo it. You are already expected to be finished with deep studying during the past 5 days or so. This is the time to relax a bit.
4.
Attend the Bar Ops mass. – You will need God’s blessing as well as a break from studying. Fresh air outside the four walls of your condo or dorm will do you a lot of good. It will clear your head. Also, this is the time to break away from the monotony of legal provisions and indulge your weary brain in some good old “tsismis” of what’s and who’s.
5.
Savor the fellowship and the moral support given to you by your well wishers. They will be overflowing during the first Sunday but you will sorely miss the action after they abruptly become invisible during the 2nd and 3rd weeks. So get a load of them while they are still there.
6.
Call or talk to someone who inspires you.
7.
TRY to get enough rest. (or sleep if you’re one of those who can)
THE FIRST SUNDAY
THE first Sunday is the height of the pendulum. In the rollercoaster play of emotions that Bar takers would surely experience this whole month, the first Sunday will be the peak.
1.
Ab Initio. - You should have set your alarm clocks the night before to make sure you don’t over sleep. Literally jump out of bed and do some physical movements and stretching. Read tips if you have, to rouse your sleepy brain. Just read, don’t study them. More importantly, welcome the day like a meeting with an old lost dear friend. The Bar is not something to conquer. Befriend it.
2.
Pace yourself. Give enough time and provide for personal necessities. Re check things to bring and make sure you don’t forget your permit and pens. Survival kit is essential. Wear comfortable clothes and shoes. (it’s advisable to make and keep a list according to your individual needs)
3.
Damages. - Instead of “tagip-TIPS”, rely on your personal preparation. Yes, you cynics! YOU CAN PASS THE BAR WITHOUT THOSE TIPS. Need testimonials? You won’t need to look very far.
4.
Subpoena. - Call someone who inspires you.
5.
Summons. - Call your family.
THE MOMENT
The make or break nature of this examination is not debatable but the good news is, we have the opportunity to make it lean more on the “make” side. Of course, it is expected that you have done your share of studying and preparation. This is the moment of truth.
1.
Remember your 4L’s.
2.
Be conscious of the time but don’t let it get the better of you.
3.
Calculate the minutes you would want to spend on a question to make sure you finish on time.
4.
Remember the techniques in formulating your answer. The pyramid or the inverted pyramid will be very helpful.
5.
Call to mind that the MOST minutes an examiner would spend on your booklet is 10. MAKE SURE HE GETS WHAT YOU MEAN IN TEN MINUTES. I’M TALKING ABOUT ALL 20 QUESTIONS. TEN MINUTES.
6.
PRAY.
7.
Think of someone who inspires you.
DURING THE PRE-WEEK
This is still crucial and you can’t let your guard down just yet. The days in between will need genius planning and technique because you can’t waste a single day and lose it to an ill-prepared schedule. Remember, every minute counts. Smart studying is the key.
1.
Destierro. - However, Mondays should be reserved for recreation and insanity. Off limits to books and review materials. Go out. You have the best excuse to have the audacity to indulge your most sinful desires and go zany. Just make sure you stay within the limits. Go malling, eat out or do something insane as a release. Just make sure you don’t tarnish La Salle’s immaculate reputation by doing something foolhardy. “Use sound discretion, after all, we are all of legal age.”
2.
Motion to Dismiss. - Do things that are not related to the bar. In a word, Un-law it!
3.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS: Berate yourself if you feel that you want to give in to your penchant for discussing answers. NEVER DISCUSS ANSWERS OR TALK ABOUT THE PAST EXAM. Consider it fait accompli, moot and academic. You’ve done your part. Get over it. It will help ease your nerves, as in “nerbiyos”.
4.
Contract of Adhesion. - Tuesday onwards, back to serious business. Study, Study, Study but pace yourself. Prioritize subjects but rest when your body calls for it. Smart studying is the key. Don’t just study everything randomly. Chose more important topics to dwell on and disregard likely insignificant ones. Trust your instincts. “See the forest and not the trees” as one of our professors would say.
5.
Postponement. - And if you lose the passion, pause for a while and think of the reason why you are here in the first place.
6.
Subpoena. - Call someone who inspires you.
Getting Through the Rest of the Week
By the third week, you will feel the gradual but very pronounced loss of excitement, enthusiasm and energy. The enemy at this point? Giving in to self-pity and defeat because of the toll the bar brings physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. But hold on, dear Bar taker, just the fact that you have come to this point only tells you one thing. You are here because you deserve it. You’ve earned it. Now is the worst time to give up. Here’s a little inspiration : “ …you can never tell how close you are; it may be near when it seems afar; so stick to the fight when you’re hardest hit; its when things go rough that you must not quit.” Sustain your buoyancy. Keep floating.
HAPPY ENDING
Nothing beats preparation and passion but after all is said and done, you will walk out of La Salle’s gate soaked in beer feeling proud of yourself. You’ve gotten through the bar in one piece. It will be hard but you have to admit, it will also have its moments. Physically and emotionally, it will be a growing experience and not many people have the opportunity to claim that. That will constitute your BRAGGING RIGHTS.
Enjoy! Treat yourself. You deserve it. But before you go paint the town red, don’t forget to pay your courtesy calls. Give out your thank you cards. Gratitude is never an outmoded virtue.
THE FORMULA
“WORK AS IF NO PRAYER WOULD HELP,
AND PRAY AS IF NO WORK WOULD HELP.”
PREPARATION + PASSION and INSPIRATION + PRAYER
AND NEVER FORGET TO ENJOY THE WHOLE BAR EXPERIENCE!
How to Pass the Philippine Bar Examinations - Full Report by Justice A. Melencio-Herrera
OBSERVATION ON THE 1980 PHILIPPINE BAR EXAMINATIONS – Full report
The following are excerpts from the actual reports of the 1980 Bar Examiners submitted to, and released to the law schools by, Madam Justice Ameurfina Melencio-Hererra, Chairperson of the 1980 Committee on Bar Examinations. I have already made a summary of this report and has posted it in this blog in the post entitled “How to pass the Philippine bar exams.” However I believe that law students and law professors will gain more by reading the full report. Although this report was made more than 27 years ago, the lessons that can be gleaned are timeless and can still very much apply to those who will be taking the Philippine bar exams. This report is also useful for law professors and law schools as this will help us re-evaluate our teaching methods in order to effectively help our students hurdle the hardest exam in the Philippines, the bar exams.
The report starts out with these interesting observations:
1. With a relatively few notable exceptions, I observed a deficiency in the examinees’ ability to express properly and concisely their answer to the questions.
2. Likewise, with a few notable exceptions, the analytic or logical process left much to be desired.
3. Knowledge of the fundamental legal principles was lacking in many instances.
4. Only in a few instances was there a command of the English language.
Recommendation for consideration
1. The elevation of the standards of legal education and instruction, i.e., a more intensive preparation in the legal fundamentals necessary for the assumption of office as a member of the Bar.
2. Require additional courses even in law school proper in the fields of English composition and grammar for those who are deficient in their ability to express and convey their ideas.
Additional recommendation on the grading system
The present grading system tends lo lay stress on competitive performance. And yet, difference in decimal points could be subjective and may not do justice to the competitors, Perhaps, the shift should be towards the assessment of each, individual candidate’s performance. I would categorize the candidates’ performance into just three (3) classes, namely: (1) failure, (2) passing and (3) outstanding without giving any grades in specific figures.
Finally, the unknown identity of the examiners even among themselves (except to the Chairman) until the final submission of the candidate’s performance is to be commended as a meritorious feature in the conduct of Bar examinations and should be adopted as a norm for future examinations. It is obvious that it insulates the examiner from unhealthy representations on the part of interested parties and it should encourage a more respectful attitude towards the Bar examinations.
1. Very many examinees, to put it mildly, “murder” the English language. Some are worse than high school undergraduates.
2. They fail to analyze and understand the question thoroughly, where oftentimes the answer is found or suggested in it.
3. They base their answer not on the specific import or meaning of the question but on the association they believe the question has with a vague knowledge of the legal provision that instantly comes into their minds. The results is an answer given without reflection that obviously misses the point or fails to obtain full credit.
4. There are few examinees who just do not have the mental capacity for the law profession. Taking the examinations for any number of times may only be an exercise in futility.
5. Handwritings of some are difficult to read or “decipher”. Apparently, the examinees concerned do not make any sincere or serious effort to make them readable.
The ink used spreads or the ballpen is too fine or light and blue. Both make correction of the papers an ordeal to the examiner who has to change his correction speed to very slow.
6. Many examinees also need, aside from the English language, a refresher course in logic. They give inconsistent or conflicting positions in one answer and do not know how to analyze problems.
7. Many examinees do not follow instructions. Few give a “Yes” or “No”, making the examiner guess just what they mean in their vague discussion. Others copy the question first before answering. Still others over several pages and making correction difficult, or they write on both sides of the page.
8. Many examinees do not review their answers. Many answers have been found lacking not only several words but important ones as well which spell the difference between correct and wrong answers.
1. Many candidates did not know specific provisions of the Civil Code on Torts and Damages. This may be due to the fact that the subject of Torts and Damages was not given much attention in the basic law course and in the bar review because in the past, this field of law was rarely the subject of the bar questions. And yet, the importance of this branch of civil law cannot be ignored considering that most civil cases filed in our courts involved torts and damages. Our lawyer must, therefore, be more familiar with this important branch of civil law before they are allowed to practice. I respectfully recommend that in future bar examinations torts and damages be listed among the divisions of civil law to be considered in the bar examinations.
2. Many candidates were familiar with cases decided by the Supreme Court and some even mentioned their titles. Unfortunately, however, a good number did not know the fundamental legal principles enunciated in such decisions. Considering that under the civil law system, which is the system followed in the Philippine, the rules of law are found in the codes, unlike the common law where the law is found in the cases, it is evident that a knowledge and understanding of the law as found in the codes is more important than a knowledge of the cases. In actual litigations most cases are resolved by the very law itself and the problem for the lawyer and court lies more in finding the specific law applicable to the case rather than find a decided case on which to base a decision. Therefore, with all due respect, I submit that more emphasis should be given in the bar examinations on the knowledge of the law and the fundamental principles rather on the knowledge of specific cases.
3. I agree that definitions and distinctions, enumerations and memory work should not be the criteria in the bar examinations and that all bar questions be in the form of problems and cases. But may I suggest and recommend that the problems and questions be based on codal provisions and fundamental principles of civil law which law practitioners are likely to face in their practice rather than extra practitioners are likely to face in their practice rather than extra ordinary situations that rarely confront our courts and practitioners.
4. A number of candidates could not write legibly. I found it hard to read their answers and much time was wasted in deciphering what they wanted to say. Bar candidates should be advised to write legibly.
5. Many candidates did not use the proper tenses. Bar candidates should be advice to be more careful with their tenses and try to aim at clarity in their answer.
6. Some candidates do not follow the numbers correlatively in answering the questions. They jump over some numbers and do not indicate where the answer may be found thus making the correction more difficult, confusing and time consuming.
7. Some candidates have resorted to what they called “alternative answer” by discussing both sides of the problem and arriving at opposing conclusions. Considering that most problems in the bar have to sides the appraisal and grading of those “alternative answer become more difficult. In my view this should be avoided.
Except for some exceptions, the ability of the examinees to present their opinions and thoughts on the questions asked was creditable. There were misspelling wrong grammar and a number of omissions but they are acceptable and not glaring, considering the pressure on the examinees and the time constraints.
What is apparent, however, is the general misconception of the principles of taxation in relation to the whole context of taxation, as well as its practical application especially in the light of other applicable laws. Reading the answers, it seems that the approach to taxation is divided into two approaches. One is that taxation is a necessity and, therefore, tax laws must be legal. Second thought is that taxes are burdens on the citizenry and, therefore, must be considered illegal The Method of teaching taxation must have been rather simplistic with no aim to apply the tax laws on our day to day dealings. As this was apparent, the undersigned tended to be more lenient in her corrections of the test papers.
It is observed that using December 31, 1979 as the cut-off date for sourcing the questions is rather restrictive and does not give the examiner sufficient leeway especially in topics where major changes, even on concepts, are effected by the government. Since most of the students will be taking pre-bar review, wouldn’t April or May be a better date? At least questions will be more current.
The procedure by which the test papers were given to us, the checks and counter checks by the bar confidant and others who were participating in the handling of the test papers to maintain the integrity of the bar leaves nothing to be desired. Full cooperation was given by them.
1. The 1980 Examinations, under the strict monitoring and guidance of the Chairman, have succeeded in maintaining the complete confidentiality of the identities of the BAR examiners. This was achieved by the adoption of the following measures:
2. The poor grammar, limited vocabulary, redundancy and unorganized presentation of the issues involved have a caused a telling effect of the percentage of passing in Mercantile Law.
3. The allocation of certain percentages on the number of question given to each subdivision of the bar subject has assured a uniform stress, thereby avoiding the concentration of questions on a particular law or subdivision.
4. Despite the written instructions, a great number of the examinees have repeated verbatim the facts of the case and the question. This has wasted the examiner’s time and effort in correcting the papers.
On November 16, 1980, there were 1,798 bar candidates who took the examination in criminal law, out of this number, 594 successfully passed or 33%, while 1,204 failed, 221 of whom are disqualified for having obtained a grade below 50%.
1. Substandard collegiate or academic training, resulting in the insufficient knowledge of the law and its application; and
2. Inadequate command of the English language.
These observations may be properly shown by quoting answers of a certain examinees to a question thus propounded as follows:
Question No. 6(b) – “An accused was found guilty of double murder and was meted out two sentences of reclusion perpetua. How would be the accused serve the sentences?”
Answer – “Both penalties must be served by the accused, and he was electrocuted and died then it washes out the remaining sentence to served by the accused.”
Quoted hereunder is another question to which the examinees concerned gave his answer as follows:
Question No. 11. – “Patrolman Cruz, acting under orders of the Municipal Mayor, Who wanted to put a stop to the frequent occurrence of robbery in Sitio Masukal, patrolled the place. At about midnight, seeing three persons acting suspiciously in front of an uninhabited house and entering the same, he arrested them without warrant and took them to the municipal building where they were detained in jail for about five hours before they where released.
Patrolman Cruz was accused of arbitrary detention. If you were the Judge, would you convict him of the crime charged?”
Answer – “No. considering his possession as peace officer by the higher authority to patrol the place where robbery are frequent. The one responsible for this is the Municipal Mayor who order without warrant of arrest and the act of the patrolman are in good faith believing to be a robbery entering a house.
So the proper party liable is the Municipal Mayor.”
Most, if not all, who obtained failing grades have different unique ways of answering questions which only tends to show either because of poor scholastic training or lack of preparation not only in their collegiate or academic courses but may also be traceable to their primary and secondary education.
The majority of those who failed in the subject have also manifestly shown their poor command of the English language, such that certain examinees may probably know the law nut they lack the ability to express themselves. The results is that, one will find it very difficult to understand what they really wanted to convey in their answer to the question propounded.
As an example, I hereby refer to the answer of another examinee to question No. 17. herein below quoted as follows:
Question No. 17 – “AA” was the owner of a jeepney for hire. When his driver was hospitalized, he hired “BB” as driver on a temporary basis and entrusted to him the vehicle for transporting passengers from Quiapo to Baclaran with a compensation of P30.00 a day. “BB” never returned the vehicle and after search the vehicle was found in Tarnate, Cavite, About to be sold. “BB” was charged with Qualified Theft and was convicted .
Appealing the judgment of conviction, defense counsel contends that “BB” may have committed Esta fa but not Qualified Theft on the theory that the position of the vehicle was obtained with the consent of “AA” the owner, and therefore, there was no illegal taking.
Decide the case.”
In answer thereto, the particular examinees gave the following answer:
“The defense counsel of the accused contention in untenable assuming now that there is no illegal taking of the jeep from “AA”. The owner but “BB” a temporary driver hired by “AA” failure to return the jeep such vehicle as now ready to be sold by “BB” have an intent to gain is theft cases as an element.
It may not be amiss to state in this connection, that there are also hundreds of them whose penmanship is almost illegible.
Several examinees have made very unsatisfactory showing to such an extent that there is one who obtained a grade as low as 7% another obtained a grade of 11%; still some others obtained grades of 12%; 16%; 17%; 18%; 19%; 20%; 21%; 24%; 25%; 26%; 27%; 31%; 34%; etc.
Due to this very poor showing of a considerable number of examinees, in order to avoid unnecessary waste of time, money and energy and in order to give the students concerned advice to shift to other course before it is too late, it is suggested that before a law student is allowed to enroll in the College of Law proper, he should first pass an entrance examination, to be given under the supervision of the Supreme Court. More or less, the examination to be given should cover the following subjects: (1) Elementary Law; (2) Logic; (3) English and Composition, etc.
It is further suggested that in order to afford bar examinees a better opportunity to pass the given subjects, at least 30 questions should be propounded in each subjects and the examinees allowed to answer a choice of twenty questions.
(1) The candidates should be required to write their answers on every other line, thus leaving a blank space between lines. This will facilitate correction, especially as many scrawl their answers and there is abundance of poor penmanship. Beside, almost all notebooks are less than half-filled so that there will be no problem of pages to write on.
(2) Answer should be separated from one another by at least two space-lines. This will facilitate identification of answer and obviate the review (resulting in time consumed, which could be otherwise invested in further correction) of questions overlooked by the candidate or not answered at all.
(3) Unless there is a very imperative reason for requiring the examiner to date every initial, this should not be required. Too much time is wasted.
(4) A device should be adopted so that the examiner will not have to write on two separate grading sheets. Instead carbonized paper or similar duplicatory means, should be used. This will eliminate errors committed while transposing the grades on the second grading sheet, and more important, it will save time. More than half an hour is consumed every time grades of 25 notebooks are duplicated on the grading sheet (or an average of more than three hours per 200 notebooks) – time which could, instead, be spent correcting notebooks.
It with be noted that no suggestions on “substantive” aspects have been made because the writer believes that she is still not in a position to suggest further development in that respect.
I. Conduct of the Examination
As far as I know there has been no word, whether publicly made or circulated in whisper, of any leakage of questions or even merely of the identities of the examiners. The story going around, according to a law faculty member of the UST and lecturer at the U.P. College of law, is that in the Bar examinations there was only one examiner for all the subjects: Justice Herrera herself.
While this rumor may be laced with some humor, it points up nonetheless the successful safeguarding of the integrity of the examination.
II. Showing of the Examinees
In Legal Ethics and Practical Exercise , 620 examinees out of 1,792 applicants (or 34.6%) obtained a grade of 75% or higher. 1,172 failed to make the passing grade; included in this number are 119 applicants whose grades were lower than 50%. Grades ranged from a high of 93% to a disquieting low of 7%. A profile of grade-distribution is appended to this report.
The examinees inhabiting the lowermost rungs of the grading scale manifested not alone an appalling lack of knowledge of the fundamental principles involved in the examination questions but also an inability to logically string their thoughts together compounded by an almost incredible deficiency in language skills.
That is not to say that everyone who received higher grades demonstrated no language difficulties. It may in fact be justifiably said that a commendable command of language is the fortune of but a few of the examinees.
III. Other Matters
(a) Comment on the relative weight of legal Ethics.
Rule 138 allocates the combination of Legal Ethics and Practical Exercise a relative weight of 5% in the Bar examination. Because of the joinder of these two non-homogeneous subjects, it has of course been necessary to apportion the rather meager 5% between Legal Ethics on the one hand and, on the other, Practical Exercise. In this year’s examination. The apportionment is 70% for the first and 30% for the other.
In overall terms, therefore, the effective relative weight of Legal Ethics is only 3.5% (this being 70% of 5%), and that of Practical Exercise 1.5% (being 30% of 5%).
One question that may be asked is whether it is worth examining Bar applicants in full subjects with effective relative weights that, by mathematical calculation, would require almost 30 points (in Legal Ethics) or some 67 points (in Practical Exercise) to effect a single point differential in the overall Bar examination average of an examinee.
A more basic observation, however, arises out of a comparison between Legal Ethics 3.5% and Taxation’s 10%. The relative weight of the first is only a third of the second, But we do know that ethics is bedrock matter to the profession. While its articulation in codal or canonical form may vary from time to time, the basic principles by which a lawyer’s conduct must ever be guided are virtually unchanging, if these are not at all unchangeable. On the other, tax laws in particular undergo changes with rapidity that leaves even the tax practitioners gasping in trying to catch up, so that passable knowledge of tax laws now could mean nothing after we no more than a few years. Yet, taxation in effect is recognized in quantitative terms as three times more important than legal ethics.
It may be a manner if looking at the conclusion of Legal Ethics in the Bar examination, considering the feathery weight allocated to the subject, as but a grudging concession to the ethical aspects of the ancient and honorable profession of the law.
May not a re-appraisal be in order?
(b) The Bar examination as a device to re-orient the educative process.
While passing the Bar examinations has not been conceded by the law schools as an end in the educative process of a lawyer, Dean Irene Cortes has noted that.
***what has developed in most schools is that it has become the principal goal. The curriculum, method of instruction, the review courses in the fourth year-all contribute to emphasize this.”
It seems from the observation of Dean Cortes that the currently predominant stress in instruction has been a sort of reaction to Bar examinations which have largely been a test of knowledge of the law’s content, with scant requirement for demonstration of the applicant’s proficiency in analytical and reasoning techniques associated with the exercise of the profession of the law.
This caused-and-effect relation, so far productive of less than ideal results, indicates that it is possible to cause a re-orientation of the stress in instruction in the law schools by institutionalizing the type of Bar examination that, to enable their law graduates to hurdle the same, would compel the law schools to shift their emphasis instruction towards techniques rather than mere content. For instance, If it were regularly made a part of the Bar examination questions involving problem-situations to ask the examinees to identity the issue, law schools would have to teach their students the techniques in issue identification and not simply to know what the law is. I use this as an example because many examinees in Legal Ethics and Practical Exercise went off-track in problem-solving due to error in perceiving the issues.
The possibilities of the Bar examination as a device with which to trigger off the orientation can only be expressed in general terms here. Obviously, the fashioning of specifics will require a detailed study.
Source:
http://imalawyer2015.blogspot.com/2009/08/how-to-pass-philippine-bar-examinations.html
The following are excerpts from the actual reports of the 1980 Bar Examiners submitted to, and released to the law schools by, Madam Justice Ameurfina Melencio-Hererra, Chairperson of the 1980 Committee on Bar Examinations. I have already made a summary of this report and has posted it in this blog in the post entitled “How to pass the Philippine bar exams.” However I believe that law students and law professors will gain more by reading the full report. Although this report was made more than 27 years ago, the lessons that can be gleaned are timeless and can still very much apply to those who will be taking the Philippine bar exams. This report is also useful for law professors and law schools as this will help us re-evaluate our teaching methods in order to effectively help our students hurdle the hardest exam in the Philippines, the bar exams.
The report starts out with these interesting observations:
1. With a relatively few notable exceptions, I observed a deficiency in the examinees’ ability to express properly and concisely their answer to the questions.
2. Likewise, with a few notable exceptions, the analytic or logical process left much to be desired.
3. Knowledge of the fundamental legal principles was lacking in many instances.
4. Only in a few instances was there a command of the English language.
Recommendation for consideration
1. The elevation of the standards of legal education and instruction, i.e., a more intensive preparation in the legal fundamentals necessary for the assumption of office as a member of the Bar.
2. Require additional courses even in law school proper in the fields of English composition and grammar for those who are deficient in their ability to express and convey their ideas.
Additional recommendation on the grading system
The present grading system tends lo lay stress on competitive performance. And yet, difference in decimal points could be subjective and may not do justice to the competitors, Perhaps, the shift should be towards the assessment of each, individual candidate’s performance. I would categorize the candidates’ performance into just three (3) classes, namely: (1) failure, (2) passing and (3) outstanding without giving any grades in specific figures.
Finally, the unknown identity of the examiners even among themselves (except to the Chairman) until the final submission of the candidate’s performance is to be commended as a meritorious feature in the conduct of Bar examinations and should be adopted as a norm for future examinations. It is obvious that it insulates the examiner from unhealthy representations on the part of interested parties and it should encourage a more respectful attitude towards the Bar examinations.
1. Very many examinees, to put it mildly, “murder” the English language. Some are worse than high school undergraduates.
2. They fail to analyze and understand the question thoroughly, where oftentimes the answer is found or suggested in it.
3. They base their answer not on the specific import or meaning of the question but on the association they believe the question has with a vague knowledge of the legal provision that instantly comes into their minds. The results is an answer given without reflection that obviously misses the point or fails to obtain full credit.
4. There are few examinees who just do not have the mental capacity for the law profession. Taking the examinations for any number of times may only be an exercise in futility.
5. Handwritings of some are difficult to read or “decipher”. Apparently, the examinees concerned do not make any sincere or serious effort to make them readable.
The ink used spreads or the ballpen is too fine or light and blue. Both make correction of the papers an ordeal to the examiner who has to change his correction speed to very slow.
6. Many examinees also need, aside from the English language, a refresher course in logic. They give inconsistent or conflicting positions in one answer and do not know how to analyze problems.
7. Many examinees do not follow instructions. Few give a “Yes” or “No”, making the examiner guess just what they mean in their vague discussion. Others copy the question first before answering. Still others over several pages and making correction difficult, or they write on both sides of the page.
8. Many examinees do not review their answers. Many answers have been found lacking not only several words but important ones as well which spell the difference between correct and wrong answers.
1. Many candidates did not know specific provisions of the Civil Code on Torts and Damages. This may be due to the fact that the subject of Torts and Damages was not given much attention in the basic law course and in the bar review because in the past, this field of law was rarely the subject of the bar questions. And yet, the importance of this branch of civil law cannot be ignored considering that most civil cases filed in our courts involved torts and damages. Our lawyer must, therefore, be more familiar with this important branch of civil law before they are allowed to practice. I respectfully recommend that in future bar examinations torts and damages be listed among the divisions of civil law to be considered in the bar examinations.
2. Many candidates were familiar with cases decided by the Supreme Court and some even mentioned their titles. Unfortunately, however, a good number did not know the fundamental legal principles enunciated in such decisions. Considering that under the civil law system, which is the system followed in the Philippine, the rules of law are found in the codes, unlike the common law where the law is found in the cases, it is evident that a knowledge and understanding of the law as found in the codes is more important than a knowledge of the cases. In actual litigations most cases are resolved by the very law itself and the problem for the lawyer and court lies more in finding the specific law applicable to the case rather than find a decided case on which to base a decision. Therefore, with all due respect, I submit that more emphasis should be given in the bar examinations on the knowledge of the law and the fundamental principles rather on the knowledge of specific cases.
3. I agree that definitions and distinctions, enumerations and memory work should not be the criteria in the bar examinations and that all bar questions be in the form of problems and cases. But may I suggest and recommend that the problems and questions be based on codal provisions and fundamental principles of civil law which law practitioners are likely to face in their practice rather than extra practitioners are likely to face in their practice rather than extra ordinary situations that rarely confront our courts and practitioners.
4. A number of candidates could not write legibly. I found it hard to read their answers and much time was wasted in deciphering what they wanted to say. Bar candidates should be advised to write legibly.
5. Many candidates did not use the proper tenses. Bar candidates should be advice to be more careful with their tenses and try to aim at clarity in their answer.
6. Some candidates do not follow the numbers correlatively in answering the questions. They jump over some numbers and do not indicate where the answer may be found thus making the correction more difficult, confusing and time consuming.
7. Some candidates have resorted to what they called “alternative answer” by discussing both sides of the problem and arriving at opposing conclusions. Considering that most problems in the bar have to sides the appraisal and grading of those “alternative answer become more difficult. In my view this should be avoided.
Except for some exceptions, the ability of the examinees to present their opinions and thoughts on the questions asked was creditable. There were misspelling wrong grammar and a number of omissions but they are acceptable and not glaring, considering the pressure on the examinees and the time constraints.
What is apparent, however, is the general misconception of the principles of taxation in relation to the whole context of taxation, as well as its practical application especially in the light of other applicable laws. Reading the answers, it seems that the approach to taxation is divided into two approaches. One is that taxation is a necessity and, therefore, tax laws must be legal. Second thought is that taxes are burdens on the citizenry and, therefore, must be considered illegal The Method of teaching taxation must have been rather simplistic with no aim to apply the tax laws on our day to day dealings. As this was apparent, the undersigned tended to be more lenient in her corrections of the test papers.
It is observed that using December 31, 1979 as the cut-off date for sourcing the questions is rather restrictive and does not give the examiner sufficient leeway especially in topics where major changes, even on concepts, are effected by the government. Since most of the students will be taking pre-bar review, wouldn’t April or May be a better date? At least questions will be more current.
The procedure by which the test papers were given to us, the checks and counter checks by the bar confidant and others who were participating in the handling of the test papers to maintain the integrity of the bar leaves nothing to be desired. Full cooperation was given by them.
1. The 1980 Examinations, under the strict monitoring and guidance of the Chairman, have succeeded in maintaining the complete confidentiality of the identities of the BAR examiners. This was achieved by the adoption of the following measures:
2. The poor grammar, limited vocabulary, redundancy and unorganized presentation of the issues involved have a caused a telling effect of the percentage of passing in Mercantile Law.
3. The allocation of certain percentages on the number of question given to each subdivision of the bar subject has assured a uniform stress, thereby avoiding the concentration of questions on a particular law or subdivision.
4. Despite the written instructions, a great number of the examinees have repeated verbatim the facts of the case and the question. This has wasted the examiner’s time and effort in correcting the papers.
On November 16, 1980, there were 1,798 bar candidates who took the examination in criminal law, out of this number, 594 successfully passed or 33%, while 1,204 failed, 221 of whom are disqualified for having obtained a grade below 50%.
1. Substandard collegiate or academic training, resulting in the insufficient knowledge of the law and its application; and
2. Inadequate command of the English language.
These observations may be properly shown by quoting answers of a certain examinees to a question thus propounded as follows:
Question No. 6(b) – “An accused was found guilty of double murder and was meted out two sentences of reclusion perpetua. How would be the accused serve the sentences?”
Answer – “Both penalties must be served by the accused, and he was electrocuted and died then it washes out the remaining sentence to served by the accused.”
Quoted hereunder is another question to which the examinees concerned gave his answer as follows:
Question No. 11. – “Patrolman Cruz, acting under orders of the Municipal Mayor, Who wanted to put a stop to the frequent occurrence of robbery in Sitio Masukal, patrolled the place. At about midnight, seeing three persons acting suspiciously in front of an uninhabited house and entering the same, he arrested them without warrant and took them to the municipal building where they were detained in jail for about five hours before they where released.
Patrolman Cruz was accused of arbitrary detention. If you were the Judge, would you convict him of the crime charged?”
Answer – “No. considering his possession as peace officer by the higher authority to patrol the place where robbery are frequent. The one responsible for this is the Municipal Mayor who order without warrant of arrest and the act of the patrolman are in good faith believing to be a robbery entering a house.
So the proper party liable is the Municipal Mayor.”
Most, if not all, who obtained failing grades have different unique ways of answering questions which only tends to show either because of poor scholastic training or lack of preparation not only in their collegiate or academic courses but may also be traceable to their primary and secondary education.
The majority of those who failed in the subject have also manifestly shown their poor command of the English language, such that certain examinees may probably know the law nut they lack the ability to express themselves. The results is that, one will find it very difficult to understand what they really wanted to convey in their answer to the question propounded.
As an example, I hereby refer to the answer of another examinee to question No. 17. herein below quoted as follows:
Question No. 17 – “AA” was the owner of a jeepney for hire. When his driver was hospitalized, he hired “BB” as driver on a temporary basis and entrusted to him the vehicle for transporting passengers from Quiapo to Baclaran with a compensation of P30.00 a day. “BB” never returned the vehicle and after search the vehicle was found in Tarnate, Cavite, About to be sold. “BB” was charged with Qualified Theft and was convicted .
Appealing the judgment of conviction, defense counsel contends that “BB” may have committed Esta fa but not Qualified Theft on the theory that the position of the vehicle was obtained with the consent of “AA” the owner, and therefore, there was no illegal taking.
Decide the case.”
In answer thereto, the particular examinees gave the following answer:
“The defense counsel of the accused contention in untenable assuming now that there is no illegal taking of the jeep from “AA”. The owner but “BB” a temporary driver hired by “AA” failure to return the jeep such vehicle as now ready to be sold by “BB” have an intent to gain is theft cases as an element.
It may not be amiss to state in this connection, that there are also hundreds of them whose penmanship is almost illegible.
Several examinees have made very unsatisfactory showing to such an extent that there is one who obtained a grade as low as 7% another obtained a grade of 11%; still some others obtained grades of 12%; 16%; 17%; 18%; 19%; 20%; 21%; 24%; 25%; 26%; 27%; 31%; 34%; etc.
Due to this very poor showing of a considerable number of examinees, in order to avoid unnecessary waste of time, money and energy and in order to give the students concerned advice to shift to other course before it is too late, it is suggested that before a law student is allowed to enroll in the College of Law proper, he should first pass an entrance examination, to be given under the supervision of the Supreme Court. More or less, the examination to be given should cover the following subjects: (1) Elementary Law; (2) Logic; (3) English and Composition, etc.
It is further suggested that in order to afford bar examinees a better opportunity to pass the given subjects, at least 30 questions should be propounded in each subjects and the examinees allowed to answer a choice of twenty questions.
(1) The candidates should be required to write their answers on every other line, thus leaving a blank space between lines. This will facilitate correction, especially as many scrawl their answers and there is abundance of poor penmanship. Beside, almost all notebooks are less than half-filled so that there will be no problem of pages to write on.
(2) Answer should be separated from one another by at least two space-lines. This will facilitate identification of answer and obviate the review (resulting in time consumed, which could be otherwise invested in further correction) of questions overlooked by the candidate or not answered at all.
(3) Unless there is a very imperative reason for requiring the examiner to date every initial, this should not be required. Too much time is wasted.
(4) A device should be adopted so that the examiner will not have to write on two separate grading sheets. Instead carbonized paper or similar duplicatory means, should be used. This will eliminate errors committed while transposing the grades on the second grading sheet, and more important, it will save time. More than half an hour is consumed every time grades of 25 notebooks are duplicated on the grading sheet (or an average of more than three hours per 200 notebooks) – time which could, instead, be spent correcting notebooks.
It with be noted that no suggestions on “substantive” aspects have been made because the writer believes that she is still not in a position to suggest further development in that respect.
I. Conduct of the Examination
As far as I know there has been no word, whether publicly made or circulated in whisper, of any leakage of questions or even merely of the identities of the examiners. The story going around, according to a law faculty member of the UST and lecturer at the U.P. College of law, is that in the Bar examinations there was only one examiner for all the subjects: Justice Herrera herself.
While this rumor may be laced with some humor, it points up nonetheless the successful safeguarding of the integrity of the examination.
II. Showing of the Examinees
In Legal Ethics and Practical Exercise , 620 examinees out of 1,792 applicants (or 34.6%) obtained a grade of 75% or higher. 1,172 failed to make the passing grade; included in this number are 119 applicants whose grades were lower than 50%. Grades ranged from a high of 93% to a disquieting low of 7%. A profile of grade-distribution is appended to this report.
The examinees inhabiting the lowermost rungs of the grading scale manifested not alone an appalling lack of knowledge of the fundamental principles involved in the examination questions but also an inability to logically string their thoughts together compounded by an almost incredible deficiency in language skills.
That is not to say that everyone who received higher grades demonstrated no language difficulties. It may in fact be justifiably said that a commendable command of language is the fortune of but a few of the examinees.
III. Other Matters
(a) Comment on the relative weight of legal Ethics.
Rule 138 allocates the combination of Legal Ethics and Practical Exercise a relative weight of 5% in the Bar examination. Because of the joinder of these two non-homogeneous subjects, it has of course been necessary to apportion the rather meager 5% between Legal Ethics on the one hand and, on the other, Practical Exercise. In this year’s examination. The apportionment is 70% for the first and 30% for the other.
In overall terms, therefore, the effective relative weight of Legal Ethics is only 3.5% (this being 70% of 5%), and that of Practical Exercise 1.5% (being 30% of 5%).
One question that may be asked is whether it is worth examining Bar applicants in full subjects with effective relative weights that, by mathematical calculation, would require almost 30 points (in Legal Ethics) or some 67 points (in Practical Exercise) to effect a single point differential in the overall Bar examination average of an examinee.
A more basic observation, however, arises out of a comparison between Legal Ethics 3.5% and Taxation’s 10%. The relative weight of the first is only a third of the second, But we do know that ethics is bedrock matter to the profession. While its articulation in codal or canonical form may vary from time to time, the basic principles by which a lawyer’s conduct must ever be guided are virtually unchanging, if these are not at all unchangeable. On the other, tax laws in particular undergo changes with rapidity that leaves even the tax practitioners gasping in trying to catch up, so that passable knowledge of tax laws now could mean nothing after we no more than a few years. Yet, taxation in effect is recognized in quantitative terms as three times more important than legal ethics.
It may be a manner if looking at the conclusion of Legal Ethics in the Bar examination, considering the feathery weight allocated to the subject, as but a grudging concession to the ethical aspects of the ancient and honorable profession of the law.
May not a re-appraisal be in order?
(b) The Bar examination as a device to re-orient the educative process.
While passing the Bar examinations has not been conceded by the law schools as an end in the educative process of a lawyer, Dean Irene Cortes has noted that.
***what has developed in most schools is that it has become the principal goal. The curriculum, method of instruction, the review courses in the fourth year-all contribute to emphasize this.”
It seems from the observation of Dean Cortes that the currently predominant stress in instruction has been a sort of reaction to Bar examinations which have largely been a test of knowledge of the law’s content, with scant requirement for demonstration of the applicant’s proficiency in analytical and reasoning techniques associated with the exercise of the profession of the law.
This caused-and-effect relation, so far productive of less than ideal results, indicates that it is possible to cause a re-orientation of the stress in instruction in the law schools by institutionalizing the type of Bar examination that, to enable their law graduates to hurdle the same, would compel the law schools to shift their emphasis instruction towards techniques rather than mere content. For instance, If it were regularly made a part of the Bar examination questions involving problem-situations to ask the examinees to identity the issue, law schools would have to teach their students the techniques in issue identification and not simply to know what the law is. I use this as an example because many examinees in Legal Ethics and Practical Exercise went off-track in problem-solving due to error in perceiving the issues.
The possibilities of the Bar examination as a device with which to trigger off the orientation can only be expressed in general terms here. Obviously, the fashioning of specifics will require a detailed study.
Source:
http://imalawyer2015.blogspot.com/2009/08/how-to-pass-philippine-bar-examinations.html
Philippine Bar Exams Trivia
Philippine Bar Exams Trivia
by Ralph A. Sarmiento
1st Bar Exams:
* 1901 with 13 examinees.
Highest Grade of All Time:
* 96.7 in the 1954 Bar Exams by Florenz Regalado of San Beda College.
2nd Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.95 in the 1954 Bar Exams by Renato L. de la Fuente of San Beda College.
3rd Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.85 in the 1949 Bar Exams by Anacleto C. Mañgaser of the Philippine Law School (PLS).
4th Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.5 held by Manuel G. Montecillo of Far Eastern University (FEU) in the 1948 Bar Exams & Antonio R. Quintos of Ateneo de Manila University in the 1954 Bar Exams.
5th Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.3 in the 1944 Bar Exams held by Jovito R. Salonga of the University of the Philippines & Jose W. Diokno, who did not finish his law studies.
Bar Topnotchers (1st Placers) to become Presidents of the Philippines:
* Manuel A. Roxas (University of the Philippines), 1913 Bar Exams with a grade of 92.
* Diosdado P. Macapagal of the University of Sto. Tomas, 1936 with a grade of 89.85
* Ferdinand E. Marcos of the University of the Philippines, 1939 with a grade of 92.35
Other Bar Topnotchers to become Presidents of the Philippines:
* Sergio S. Osmeña (University of Santo Tomas), 2nd Place - 1903 Bar Exams
* Manuel L. Quezon, (University of Santo Tomas), 4th Place - 1903 Bar Exams
* Elpidio R. Quirino (University of the Philippines), 2nd Place - 1915 Bar
* Carlos P. Garcia (Philippine Law School), 6th Place - 1923 Bar
Facts about the Jose W. Diokno Legend:
* Diokno was born on February 26, 1922.
* Diokno earned his Bachelor's Degree in Commerce Summa Cum Laude in 1940 at De La Salle College (now De La Salle University).
* He took the CPA Board Exam in 1940 while he was on his second year in law school and placed No. 1.
* In 1944, he petitioned the Supreme Court to take the Bar Exams without a law degree.
* The Supreme Court granted his petition and he took the Bar Exams in 1944 and tied with the Class Valedictorian of U.P. for the 1st Place with a grade of 95.3.
* Diokno is perhaps the only one who placed 1st in both the CPA board exams & the Bar Exams.
Facts about the Claro M. Recto Legend:
* Recto was born on February 8, 1890 at Tiaong, Tayabas (now Quezon Province).
* He graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree from Ateneo de Manila where his grades were all perfect (1.0), except only for one 1.3. He was conferred by Ateneo with Maxima Cum Laude honors (highest honors conferred by Ateneo).
* He took the Bar Exams in 1913 while he was still in his senior year in law school at the University of Santo Tomas - and FLUNKED.
* He finished his law degree in 1913, Class Valedictorian, University of Santo Tomas.
* The 1913 Bar Exams marked the first time that the test questions in Civil Procedure were in English, a new language in which Recto could not express himself very well.
* Justice Fischer, the examiner in Civil Procedure, also noted that Recto's handwriting was very difficult to understand.
* Justice Fischer gave Recto a grade of 41 which automatically disqualified him.
* Recto took the Bar Exams again in 1914 and passed. However, I have not yet seen any official record in my research whether he placed in the Bar Exams of 1914. But it appears that Recto could not have been No. 1 in the 1914 Bar because the official records of the Supreme Court list Manuel Goyena as the no. 1 of that year.
* After passing, Recto wrote two books on Civil Procedure.
* When Recto studied in Ateneo and UST, the medium of instruction was Spanish. Manuel Roxas, on the other hand, UP's Class Valedictorian who topped the 1913 Bar Exams was a product of the US public school system and had spent a year in Hong Kong to better equip himself with American English before taking the Bar.
Facts about the Ferdinand E. Marcos Legend:
* Marcos was born on September 11, 1917.
* In college, Marcos' principal interest was the .22-caliber college pistol team.
* On September 20, 1935, Julio Nalundasan was at home celebrating that day's Congressional election victory over Mariano Marcos when he was shot and killed with a .22-caliber bullet fired by the 18-year-old Marcos.
* On December 13, 1938, Marcos was arrested for Nalundasan's murder but he successfully petitioned for release on bail, allowing him to complete his law degree from the University of the Philippines.
* In 1939, Marcos was found guilty and sentence to a minimum of 10 years in prison.
* Jailed, Marcos spent six months writing his own 830-page appeal while reviewing for the Bar Exams at the same time.
* Marcos posted bail to take the 1939 Bar Exams and passed with scores so high he was suspected of cheating.
* Legends say that his unofficial Grade was 98.5 and so he was summoned to appear before the Supreme Court en banc for an oral re-examination, after which his official grade was released as 92.35.
* Marcos is the only Bar candidate who was called by the Supreme Court for an oral re-examinations.
* In 1940, Marcos orally argued his own case in front of Supreme Court Justice Jose P. Laurel and on October 22, 1940, he was acquitted of the charge of murder and forthwith liberated from imprisonment.
* The next day, he returned to the Supreme Court where he was administered his oath as a lawyer.
1st woman to Top the Bar (1st Place):
* Tecla San Andres-Ziga of the University of the Philippines placed No. 1 in the Bar Exams of 1930 with a grade of 89.4. She served as Senator of the Republic of the Philippines from 1963 to 1969.
2nd woman to Top the Bar (1st Place):
* Cecilia Munoz-Palma (University of the Philippines) became the 2nd woman to place No. 1 in the Bar Exams in 1937 with a grade of 92.6. She later became the 1st woman Supreme Court Justice in 1973 and the 1st female President of a constitutional commission in 1986.
Bar Flunker who Placed 1st on his Second Take:
* Francisco Noel R. Fernandez (University of the Philippines) failed in the 1993 Bar Exams but placed No. 1 in the 1994 Bar Exams with a grade of 89.2.
1st Aeta Lawyer
* Wayda Cosme (Harvardian Colleges) passed the Bar Exam in 2001 to become the 1st Aeta Lawyer.
by Ralph A. Sarmiento
1st Bar Exams:
* 1901 with 13 examinees.
Highest Grade of All Time:
* 96.7 in the 1954 Bar Exams by Florenz Regalado of San Beda College.
2nd Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.95 in the 1954 Bar Exams by Renato L. de la Fuente of San Beda College.
3rd Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.85 in the 1949 Bar Exams by Anacleto C. Mañgaser of the Philippine Law School (PLS).
4th Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.5 held by Manuel G. Montecillo of Far Eastern University (FEU) in the 1948 Bar Exams & Antonio R. Quintos of Ateneo de Manila University in the 1954 Bar Exams.
5th Highest Grade of All Time:
* 95.3 in the 1944 Bar Exams held by Jovito R. Salonga of the University of the Philippines & Jose W. Diokno, who did not finish his law studies.
Bar Topnotchers (1st Placers) to become Presidents of the Philippines:
* Manuel A. Roxas (University of the Philippines), 1913 Bar Exams with a grade of 92.
* Diosdado P. Macapagal of the University of Sto. Tomas, 1936 with a grade of 89.85
* Ferdinand E. Marcos of the University of the Philippines, 1939 with a grade of 92.35
Other Bar Topnotchers to become Presidents of the Philippines:
* Sergio S. Osmeña (University of Santo Tomas), 2nd Place - 1903 Bar Exams
* Manuel L. Quezon, (University of Santo Tomas), 4th Place - 1903 Bar Exams
* Elpidio R. Quirino (University of the Philippines), 2nd Place - 1915 Bar
* Carlos P. Garcia (Philippine Law School), 6th Place - 1923 Bar
Facts about the Jose W. Diokno Legend:
* Diokno was born on February 26, 1922.
* Diokno earned his Bachelor's Degree in Commerce Summa Cum Laude in 1940 at De La Salle College (now De La Salle University).
* He took the CPA Board Exam in 1940 while he was on his second year in law school and placed No. 1.
* In 1944, he petitioned the Supreme Court to take the Bar Exams without a law degree.
* The Supreme Court granted his petition and he took the Bar Exams in 1944 and tied with the Class Valedictorian of U.P. for the 1st Place with a grade of 95.3.
* Diokno is perhaps the only one who placed 1st in both the CPA board exams & the Bar Exams.
Facts about the Claro M. Recto Legend:
* Recto was born on February 8, 1890 at Tiaong, Tayabas (now Quezon Province).
* He graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree from Ateneo de Manila where his grades were all perfect (1.0), except only for one 1.3. He was conferred by Ateneo with Maxima Cum Laude honors (highest honors conferred by Ateneo).
* He took the Bar Exams in 1913 while he was still in his senior year in law school at the University of Santo Tomas - and FLUNKED.
* He finished his law degree in 1913, Class Valedictorian, University of Santo Tomas.
* The 1913 Bar Exams marked the first time that the test questions in Civil Procedure were in English, a new language in which Recto could not express himself very well.
* Justice Fischer, the examiner in Civil Procedure, also noted that Recto's handwriting was very difficult to understand.
* Justice Fischer gave Recto a grade of 41 which automatically disqualified him.
* Recto took the Bar Exams again in 1914 and passed. However, I have not yet seen any official record in my research whether he placed in the Bar Exams of 1914. But it appears that Recto could not have been No. 1 in the 1914 Bar because the official records of the Supreme Court list Manuel Goyena as the no. 1 of that year.
* After passing, Recto wrote two books on Civil Procedure.
* When Recto studied in Ateneo and UST, the medium of instruction was Spanish. Manuel Roxas, on the other hand, UP's Class Valedictorian who topped the 1913 Bar Exams was a product of the US public school system and had spent a year in Hong Kong to better equip himself with American English before taking the Bar.
Facts about the Ferdinand E. Marcos Legend:
* Marcos was born on September 11, 1917.
* In college, Marcos' principal interest was the .22-caliber college pistol team.
* On September 20, 1935, Julio Nalundasan was at home celebrating that day's Congressional election victory over Mariano Marcos when he was shot and killed with a .22-caliber bullet fired by the 18-year-old Marcos.
* On December 13, 1938, Marcos was arrested for Nalundasan's murder but he successfully petitioned for release on bail, allowing him to complete his law degree from the University of the Philippines.
* In 1939, Marcos was found guilty and sentence to a minimum of 10 years in prison.
* Jailed, Marcos spent six months writing his own 830-page appeal while reviewing for the Bar Exams at the same time.
* Marcos posted bail to take the 1939 Bar Exams and passed with scores so high he was suspected of cheating.
* Legends say that his unofficial Grade was 98.5 and so he was summoned to appear before the Supreme Court en banc for an oral re-examination, after which his official grade was released as 92.35.
* Marcos is the only Bar candidate who was called by the Supreme Court for an oral re-examinations.
* In 1940, Marcos orally argued his own case in front of Supreme Court Justice Jose P. Laurel and on October 22, 1940, he was acquitted of the charge of murder and forthwith liberated from imprisonment.
* The next day, he returned to the Supreme Court where he was administered his oath as a lawyer.
1st woman to Top the Bar (1st Place):
* Tecla San Andres-Ziga of the University of the Philippines placed No. 1 in the Bar Exams of 1930 with a grade of 89.4. She served as Senator of the Republic of the Philippines from 1963 to 1969.
2nd woman to Top the Bar (1st Place):
* Cecilia Munoz-Palma (University of the Philippines) became the 2nd woman to place No. 1 in the Bar Exams in 1937 with a grade of 92.6. She later became the 1st woman Supreme Court Justice in 1973 and the 1st female President of a constitutional commission in 1986.
Bar Flunker who Placed 1st on his Second Take:
* Francisco Noel R. Fernandez (University of the Philippines) failed in the 1993 Bar Exams but placed No. 1 in the 1994 Bar Exams with a grade of 89.2.
1st Aeta Lawyer
* Wayda Cosme (Harvardian Colleges) passed the Bar Exam in 2001 to become the 1st Aeta Lawyer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
