A little over 31% of those who took the Bar Exams in September 2004 passed-- quite a high percentage compared to previous exams.
That is not to take away from those who passed the exam-- I'm sure many of those who hurdled the tests deserve to be lawyers. Still, the results can be mystifying. On one hand you have obviously intelligent, studious law graduates (those who went to UP Law and studied well for the Bar come to mind) failing to make the grade; on the other, you have people who can't write a single coherent paragraph-- or worse, can't remember the definition of something as basic as police power-- going to the PICC to take their oaths as lawyers.
I don't doubt the integrity of the exams or those who administered them. As I discussed in a previous blog (see Sidebar), the Bar is pretty much cheat-proof.
Still, there are tons of suggestions on how to make the Bar a better gauge by which to admit people into the law profession. They range from the ludicrous (Sen. Miriam Santiago has suggested that the Bar Exams be abolished) to the logical (more multiple-choice objective questions). The SC has already adopted a lot of the reforms suggested by a committee formed sometime back. In Bar Matter No. 1161 Re: Proposed Reforms in the Bar Examinations, the SC adopted reforms such as the appointment of a tenured Board of Examiners with an SC Justice as Chairperson (as opposed to naming a new batch of examiners every year), "the formulation of essay test questions and 'model answers' as part of the calibration of test papers", and (as mentioned earlier) the addition of multiple-choice objective questions.
These reforms should be implemented within the next five years. I only hope that these manage to ferret out those unfit to practice law, so we can be spared from the undeserving idiots who insist we address them as "attorney."
That is not to take away from those who passed the exam-- I'm sure many of those who hurdled the tests deserve to be lawyers. Still, the results can be mystifying. On one hand you have obviously intelligent, studious law graduates (those who went to UP Law and studied well for the Bar come to mind) failing to make the grade; on the other, you have people who can't write a single coherent paragraph-- or worse, can't remember the definition of something as basic as police power-- going to the PICC to take their oaths as lawyers.
I don't doubt the integrity of the exams or those who administered them. As I discussed in a previous blog (see Sidebar), the Bar is pretty much cheat-proof.
Still, there are tons of suggestions on how to make the Bar a better gauge by which to admit people into the law profession. They range from the ludicrous (Sen. Miriam Santiago has suggested that the Bar Exams be abolished) to the logical (more multiple-choice objective questions). The SC has already adopted a lot of the reforms suggested by a committee formed sometime back. In Bar Matter No. 1161 Re: Proposed Reforms in the Bar Examinations, the SC adopted reforms such as the appointment of a tenured Board of Examiners with an SC Justice as Chairperson (as opposed to naming a new batch of examiners every year), "the formulation of essay test questions and 'model answers' as part of the calibration of test papers", and (as mentioned earlier) the addition of multiple-choice objective questions.
These reforms should be implemented within the next five years. I only hope that these manage to ferret out those unfit to practice law, so we can be spared from the undeserving idiots who insist we address them as "attorney."
2 comments:
hear! hear! totally agree! and not just because i passed =)
hear! hear! totally agree! and not just because i passed =)
Post a Comment