PREPARING FOR THE 2015 BAR EXAMINATIONS</a>

“What is past is prologue.”  – Robert Aitken

“Only the paranoid survive.”  – Andrew S. Grove

Restoration of essay question’s lead role in bar exam

The 2013 bar examination was notable for the revival of the essay question’s preeminent role.  The examination comprised 80% essay questions and 20% multiple-choice questions (MCQs).  This was a turn-around from the 2012 bar exam’s format of 60% MCQs and 40% essay questions and the 2011 bar where the use of problem-type essay questions was entirely discontinued in favor of MCQs and performance tests.    

The lead role of the essay question was further entrenched in the 2014 bar examination.  For instance in Remedial Law, there were only 8 MCQs having a weight of 1% each or a total weight of only 8%.  This allocation was substantially the same in the other bar subjects.  

Importance of a logic-driven or argument-driven approach to bar preparation

The restoration of the essay question’s leading role is a clear indication of the importance given by the High Tribunal to testing the examinee’s ability to think and argue like a lawyer.    

In 7 December 2012, the Supreme Court issued Bar Bulletin No. 1 for the guidance of the bar reviewees.  The bulletin states that “[w]hether  MCQ or essay, the questions  shall be based on a given set of facts, presented as briefly but as clearly and completely as possible.”

The bulletin enumerates the basic elements of problem-solving or what we may call as competencies that the examiners shall particularly look for:

1. Proper understanding and appreciation of the facts, particularly of the components or details that can be material in resolving the given problem.
2. Appreciation of the applicable law or laws that may come into play.
3. Recognition of the issue or issues posed.
4. Resolution of the issues through the analysis and application of the law to the given facts.

The bulletin states that the examinee’s presentation and articulation of his or her answer shall also be given weight.  In the Guidelines for the 2014 Bar, the Supreme Court said “that in a 5-point essay exam, the examiner can give credit even if the answer is not exactly correct but the answer is well-written and logical.” 

These statements in the bulletin indicate that the examination will be argument-driven or logic-driven rather than conclusion-driven.   This information is of capital importance since most law students have been taught in law school to be conclusion-driven rather than argument-driven and little if any time has been devoted to the proper presentation and articulation of one’s answers.    

The examinee thus has to be trained in presenting his answer in such a way as to display to the examiner his familiarity with the basic elements of problem-solving. 

Issue-spotting

Bar Bulletin No. 1 includes as one of the competencies the examiners are looking out for is the “recognition of the issue or issues posed.”  Issue-recognition is a core competency which may be developed by a rigorous mock-bar and coaching program.   Bar Bulletin No. 1 was a harbinger of a shift from the typical issue-poser question to an issue-spotter question.   And indeed issue-spotter questions were liberally used in the 2013 bar examination. 

In this regard, the bar candidate must know the difference between an issue-poser and an issue-spotter.   The difference may be illustrated by giving an example of each. First let us give an example of an issue-spotter question.

Q         Jose filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage to Maria.  During the trial, the lawyer of Jose offered Jose’s testimony on the contents of a psychiatrist’s report which made a finding that Maria was suffering from nymphomania and which report was in the hands of Jose.   

            a)  If you were the lawyer for Maria, what objections if any can you raise to the offer of Jose’s testimony?  Explain.

            b)  If you were the lawyer for Jose, how would you counter the objections of Maria?  Explain.

            c)  If you were the judge, how would you rule on the objections? Explain.

A little difficult isn’t it?  That’s because the issues and the applicable laws were not laid down on a silver platter for the examinee.  It’s the examinee’s job to spot the issues and the applicable laws.  The examinee is also asked to argue for both sides, a common feature of American bar exam questions.

Using the same factual setting, the above question can be modified to an issue-poser question as follows:

Q         Jose filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage to Maria.  During the trial, the lawyer of Jose offered Jose’s testimony on the contents of a psychiatrist’s report which made a finding that Maria was suffering from nymphomania and which report was in the hands of Jose.  Maria’s lawyer objected on the ground that the testimony would violate the physician-patient privilege.

If you were the judge, how would you rule on the objection?  Explain.    

The above essay question is less difficult to answer than the preceding one.  This is because a narrow issue has been explicitly stated in the problem: Would the husband’s testimony on the contents of the psychiatric report violate the physician-patient privilege?  Knowing the issue, the examinee would find it comparatively easy to determine the applicable law, i.e., Section 24(c), Rule 130 of the Rules of Court regarding the physician-patient privilege.

On the other hand, in the issue-spotter question, the examinee has to spot the three issues involved:

a)    Would the husband’s testimony violate the marital disqualification rule?

b)    Would the husband’s testimony violate the physician-patient privilege?

c)    Would the husband’s testimony violate the hearsay rule?

Spotting these three issues is not easy if one has not been trained to do so.  Issue-spotting is not a matter of good luck.   There is a science to issue-spotting.  Knowledge of issue-spotting techniques and training exercises to develop proficiency in using these techniques would be of immense help.

An example of an issue-poser question in the 2014 bar is Question No. 24.

Solomon and Faith got married in 2005. In 2010, Solomon contracted a second marriage with Hope. When Faith found out about the second marriage of Solomon and Hope, she filed a criminal case for bigamy before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila sometime in 2011.

Meanwhile, Solomon filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his first marriage with Faith in 2012, while the case for bigamy before the RTC of Manila is ongoing. Subsequently, Solomon filed a motion to suspend the proceedings in the bigamy case on the ground of prejudicial question. He asserts that the proceedings in the criminal case should be suspended because if his first marriage with Faith will be declared null and void, it will have the effect of exculpating him from the crime of bigamy. Decide.

The bar question presents the narrow issue of whether the petition for declaration of nullity of marriage presents a prejudicial question in the criminal case for bigamy.  

Process or remedy-focused questions

A clear trend in the 2013 bar examination was the liberal use of open-ended questions which asked the examinee to give the appropriate legal steps,  process,  or remedy that is available to one of the parties.    Examples of such type of questions are questions IV(C) and IV(D) in Remedial Law:

IV(C) Still in another case, this time for illegal possession of

dangerous drugs, the prosecution has rested but you saw from the records

that the illegal substance allegedly involved has not been identified by any

of the prosecution witnesses nor has it been the subject of any stipulation.

Should you now proceed posthaste to the presentation of defense

evidence or consider some other remedy? Explain the remedial steps you

propose to undertake.  

IV(D) In one other case, an indigent mother seeks assistance for her

14-year old son who has been arrested and detained for malicious mischief.

Would an application for bail be the appropriate remedy or is there

another remedy available? Justify your chosen remedy and outline the

appropriate steps to take.  

Open-ended, practical, and elucidative questions are not new.  They have been used on occasions in previous bar examinations and were the norm in the 1983 bar examination where the examinee was placed in the position of a lawyer acting for or advising a client.   Their liberal use in the 2013 bar examinations indicates an exigent need to train bar reviewees on how to analyze and answer these types of questions.

An example of a remedy-focused question in the 2014 bar exam is Question No. 20.

Tom Wallis filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of his marriage with Debi Wallis on the ground of psychological incapacity of the latter. Before filing the petition, Tom Wallis had told Debi Wallis that he wanted the annulment of their marriage because he was already fed up with her irrational and eccentric behaviour. However, in the petition for declaration of nullity of marriage, the correct residential address of Debi Wallis was deliberately not alleged and instead, the residential address of their married son was stated. Summons was served by substituted service at the address stated in the petition. For failure to file an answer, Debi Wallis was declared in default and Tom Wallis presented evidence ex-parte. The RTC rendered judgment declaring the marriage null and void on the ground of psychological incapacity of Debi Wallis. Three (3) years after the RTC judgment was rendered, Debi Wallis got hold of a copy thereof and wanted to have the RTC judgment reversed and set aside.

If you are the lawyer of Debi Wallis, what judicial remedy or remedies will you take? Discuss and specify the ground or grounds for said remedy or remedies.

It cannot be gainsaid that these types of questions are quite challenging for a bar examinee who after all has yet to practice law.   Special attention should therefore be paid to training and coaching the bar candidate to field these types of questions. 

Know-and-recall MCQs continue to dominate MCQ portion

The 2013 bar examination was notable for the reduction of the MCQ’s role.   In 2011 and in 2012, the MCQ portion was allocated a weight of 60% of the examinee’s grade.   In 2013, however the weight of the MCQ portion was substantially reduced to 20%.    In 2013, the number of MCQs was drastically cut from 100 MCQs in the 2011 and 2012 bar exams to only 10 to 20 MCQs, albeit the number of options was increased to five from four.  In the 2014 bar, only 7-8 MCQs were asked with a total weight of only 7%-8%[1] and the standard four-option MCQ was reverted to.        

Bar Bulletin No. 1 for the 2013 bar exam stated that “[w]hether  MCQ or essay, the questions  shall be based on a given set of facts, presented as briefly but as clearly and completely as possible.”   This clearly implied that problem-type  or analyze-and-solve MCQs would be solely used.  As it turned out, objective-type MCQs were still widely used for the 2013 and 2014 bar exams just as they had been in the 2011 and 2012 bar exams.  For instance in the 2014 Remedial Law bar exam, out of the 8 MCQs, 5 were objective-type or know-and-recall MCQs.   There were only 2 problem-type or read-and-analyze MCQs and one read-and-understand MCQ.      

The table below illustrates the vicissitudes of the bar exam format from 2011 to 2014.  

Based on the trend of the past bar exams, we can predict with some confidence that the nominal role of MCQs in the bar will continue and that most of the MCQs will be know-and-recall ones, with a sprinkling of analyze-and-solve and read-and-understand MCQs.

Importance of jurisprudence and statutory updates

The 2013 bar exam proved quite challenging in that the cut-off for Supreme Court decisions covered by the bar exam was up to 31 January 2013 of the current year. Traditionally the cut-off for jurisprudence and law to be covered was 30 June of the preceding year. It even became tougher in the 2014 bar which provided that 31 March 2014 was the cut-off for laws and jurisprudence covered by the 2014 Bar Examinations.

And the Supreme Court meant what it said.  For instance in the 2014 Remedial Law bar exam, Question No. 12 was based on a Supreme Court decision promulgated on 10 February 2014 (Republic v. Olaybar) while Question No. 15 was based on a Supreme Court decision promulgated on 25 March 2014 (People v. Go).

Needless to state these two cases could not have been taken up in law school by the 2014 bar candidates.  Yet it would be foolhardy for the bar reviewee to undertake a case survey during the bar review.    More or less a hundred cases are promulgated by the Supreme Court every month and a bar examinee would not have the time or experience to wade through all these decisions and choose the salient ones.  It is thus imperative to attend a bar review program where seasoned bar reviewers are surveying recent cases and statutes in order to choose those which may form the basis of bar exam questions. 

Importance of mock-bar and coaching program further underscored

The new developments in the bar examination format underscore the need for a training and coaching program that involves not only a series of mock-bar examinations but also one-on-one coaching with a feedback mechanism. The mere taking of practice exams by a reviewee and the giving to him of the answers would be inadequate. The reviewee must have the benefit of feedback from an experienced and competent trainer and this can only be had under a program that provides for one-on-one interaction with a coach. Using a series of specially crafted mock bar exams, the coach would be able to diagnose the weaknesses and strengths of the reviewee and to monitor and guide his progress. 

Individualized coaching is especially important for training the bar reviewee for the essay examination. Since the essay question requires the subjective judgment of the examiner, the examinee must be trained and honed in the proper manner of presenting his answer. Each examinee has his own strengths and weaknesses in approaching and answering essay questions and a “one size fits all” lecture or training session is not the proper approach. The comprehensive training program should especially train the examinee in the basic elements of problem-solving that the examiner is looking out for.

Practice is also very important.  It is absurd to just lecture a bar examinee on bar methods and techniques and then expect the examinee to magically deploy these during the bar examination.  That would be like lecturing a child on how to swim and then throwing him into a ten-foot-deep pool.  The examinee should undergo a series of mock-bar exams where he can get the feel of applying the essay and MCQ tactics and strategies with guidance from his coach. 

The Supreme Court itself recognized the salient role played by mock bars and bar exam coaching.  The Guidelines for the 2014 Bar recommend thus:

Practice Exams

A good practice for law schools/review classes to observe is to hold practice examination sessions with the Bar candidates, both on the Essay and the MCQ formats. In evaluating these practice exams, attention should be given to both the law and the Bar candidate’s presentation and use of English. In many instances, incorrect English is more serious as a problem than the lack of precise knowledge of law, and has been the cause of high failure rates. [Emphases supplied]

Clearly discernible from the Guidelines is the need for someone to evaluate the practice exam.   It is strongly advised that an experienced or certified bar exam coach be the one to undertake the evaluation, taking into account the obvious limitations of self-coaching. 

Fine-tuning of coaching and training to read and answer essay questions

In light of the increased role of issue-spotter questions, Jurists fine-tuned its coaching program to further train the examinees in issue-spotting skills, including the use of fact-pattern recognition, embedded-rule recognition, and other issue-spotting and rule-spotting techniques.   Issue-spotter questions are rarely if ever seldom asked in law school; hence the overwhelming majority of bar examinees have not had the benefit of any training and coaching on how to face them.  With this in mind, Jurists has added to its data bank of issue-spotter questions for use in its training and coaching program and undertaken further training of its corps of coaches to respond to the latest changes. 

Jurists has fortified its essay question training program by adding more process and remedy-focused questions to its bank of mock-bar questions and devising the appropriate training modules to help the reviewee tackle these kinds of questions.  Jurists has also further fine-tuned its logical and analytical matrixes to help the bar examinee better confront the increased use of problem-type essay questions.

The sheer number of questions (about 20 essay questions and 8 MCQs) which an examinee has to tackle in four hours puts emphasis on the need for training on time-management and thus simulated tests under the guidance and supervision of certified coaches has become imperative.        

Reinforcing the MCQ training program

From a high of 60% in the 2011 and 2012 bars, the MCQ’s weight has been cut down to a trifling 7%-8% in the last bar. While some reports indicate the discontinuance of the use of MCQs, Jurists still made the appropriate changes and fine-tuning of its MCQ training program to prepare the reviewee just in case MCQs would still be used in the 2015 bar.  Jurists has been at the forefront in the development and use of MCQ tactics and strategies which empowered its reviewees to shine in the MCQ portion.  

Utmost preparation and training

As of the writing of this article (April 2015), the Supreme Court has not yet released the relevant bulletins or resolutions regarding the format of the bar exam.   Jurists however has been proactive in its bar review and coaching program, fine-tuning and strengthening the same in order to respond to whatever format may be adopted by the Supreme Court, rather than just taking a passive stance of waiting first for the SC’s announcements and only then reacting.  

With the substantial use of issue-spotter questions and process and remedy-focused questions, there is a felt need for a bar review program which would properly train the reviewee, taking into account that these types of questions are not widely used in law schools.  A traditional bar review program based exclusively or heavily on lectures and passive study without any or scant training and mechanism for feedback would ill prepare the examinee for the argument-driven and competencies-based bar exams and could lead to the bitter agony of defeat.  On the other hand the examinee who backstops a rigorous study regime with a tested mock-bar and coaching program would significantly boost his chances of savouring the thrill of victory when he is granted leave by the High Court en banc to take the lawyer’s oath and to inscribe his or her name in the hallowed roll of attorneys.

-oOo-

April 2015

UNLI BAR

Lifting of the 5-strike rule now official but some questions remain

  Prof. Manuel R. Riguera

On 3 September 2013 the Supreme Court en banc issued a resolution adopting the recommendation of the Committee on Continuing Legal Education and Bar Matters to lift the 5-strike rule.  The resolution provides that the Legal Education Board (LEB) shall prepare a refresher review class curriculum and accredit law schools which would be authorized to give refresher classes.  Just this January 13, the LEB issued an order ratifying its provisional rules on refresher review curriculum and accreditation.

History of the 5-strike rule

The 5-strike rule was laid down by the Supreme Court in Bar Matter No. 1161 issued on 8 June 2004.  Under the 5-strike rule, a bar candidate shall be disqualified after failing thrice; provided that the candidate may take a fourth or fifth examination if he successfully completes a one-year refresher course for each examination.  The 5-strike rule was first implemented in the 2005 bar examinations, although those who have reached or exceeded 5 takes as of 2004 would be allowed to take the bar one more time upon completion of a one-year refresher course.  Prior to 5-strike rule, there was no limit to the number of times a candidate could take the bar.

3 September 2013 Resolution 

As early as 2011, there were unofficial reports that the 5-strike rule would be suspended or even lifted outright. These reports gave hope to those who had struck out five times, with some even enrolling in refresher classes in anticipation of the rule’s abandonment.  On 3 September 2013 the Supreme Court en banc issued its much awaited resolution lifting the 5-strike rule.   The resolution reads as follows:

B.M. No. 1161 (Re:  Proposed Reforms in the Bar Examinations). – – The Court resolved, upon the recommendation of the Committee on Continuing Legal Education and Bar Matters, to LIFT the five-strike rule on bar repeaters, provided that the candidates have enrolled in and passed in regular fourth year review classes as well as attended a pre-bar review course every time they take the Bar Examinations after failing for the third time, under a curriculum prepared by the Legal Education Board (LEB), and in law schools accredited by it for that purpose.  This rule shall take effect beginning with the 2014 Bar Examinations. 

The resolution provides that the refresher candidates shall attend fourth year review classes under a curriculum prepared by the LEB and in law schools accredited by the LEB for the purpose.   Hence the passage by the LEB of the appropriate rules was required for the implementation of the resolution.

8 October 2013 letter of LEB Chairman and SC’s response

In reaction to the SC resolution, LEB Chairman Hilarion L. Aquino wrote the SC a letter informing it that the LEB could not yet officially act on the matter regarding the curriculum and accreditation for lack of quorum, since of the 7 LEB members, only two were incumbent:  the chairman himself and the CHED chairperson as ex officio member.  

Responding to Chairman Aquino’s letter, the SC Committee on Continuing Legal Education and Bar Matters expressed its view that the LEB Chairman may, in order not to adversely prejudice those individuals who are qualified to take the bar, prepare the required curriculum and the rules for the accreditation of law schools that may accept refresher course enrollees, subject to confirmation of the LEB as soon as it can constitute a quorum.  

Provisional Rules 

Accordingly, Chairman Aquino and board member Justin D.J. Sucgang (law student representative) issued the “Provisional Rules Re: Curriculum of the Refresher Review Class and the Law Schools Accredited to Offer it” dated 4 December 2013.   

Refresher Review Class Curriculum

Under the Provisional Rules, the refresher review class curriculum is composed of the following subjects with their corresponding units:                                 

The fourth year review based on the old curriculum was as follows:

Under the old curriculum, Remedial Law Review was a single 5-unit review subject  while under the new refresher review curriculum, Remedial Law Review was divided into two subjects, with Remedial Law Review I a 3-unit subject and Remedial Law Review II a 4-unit subject.

Accreditation

The Provisional Rules also adopted the following criteria in the accreditation of law schools authorized to conduct refresher review classes. 

8.1  The law school must have participated in the 2010, 2011, and 2012 Bar Examinations with not less than 10 bar reviewees in every bar examination. 

8.2  At no time in the past bar examinations has a law school gotten a zero score. 

8.3  The law school was never given a Warning to improve the quality of its law instruction nor imposed a sanction by the LEB. 

The above standards were quite strict such that the LEB in the Provisional Rules could come up with a list of only 60 law schools that were accredited and granted authority to conduct refresher review classes.  

Ratification of the Provisional Rules with modification on accreditation criteria

On 13 January 2014, three members of the LEB (Chairman Aquino, Sucgang, and Carmelita P. Yadao-Sison for the CHED Chairperson), constituting a quorum, issued an order ratifying the Provisional Rules subject to the amendment of Paragraph 8 on accreditation by deleting subparagraphs 8.2 and 8.3 and replacing them with a new paragraph 8.2.  Thus the amended Paragraph 8 on accreditation now reads as follows: 

8.1 The law school must have participated in the 2010, 2011, and 2012 Bar Examinations with not less than 10 bar reviewees in every bar examination. 

8.2  The law school has never been administratively sanctioned by the LEB. 

With the ratification by the LEB of its Provisional Rules, the SC Resolution of 3 September 2013 became fully effective. 

Coverage of 3 September 2013 Resolution

Who are the retakers covered by the 3 September 2013 Resolution?  Does it apply to all candidates who will be retaking the bar for the 4^th time  or more?  Or does it apply only to those taking the bar for the 6^th time or more?    The writer believes that the resolution should apply only to the latter.   For the 4^th or 5th retakers, it is believed that the old 4^th year review class curriculum applies without any additional accreditation requirement.  Of course with the abolition of the old 4^th year review curriculum in SY 2015-2016, there would no longer be any need to distinguish between the two groups of retakers.

The Refresher Review Class Curriculum

The refresher review class curriculum is evidently based on the LEB Model Law Curriculum.  There appears to be two matters however which the LEB may have overlooked when it drafted the Provisional Rules.    First, the LEB had amended the model law curriculum by deleting one unit each from Civil Law Review II and Remedial Law Review II.  Hence under the amended Model Law Curriculum, both Civil Law Review II and Remedial Law Review II are only 3-unit and not 4-unit subjects. 

Second.  The LEB Model Law Curriculum was first implemented in school year 2012-2013.   Thus the 4^th year model law curriculum class would be held for the first time only in SY 2015-2016; the present 4^th year review classes would still be under the old curriculum.  

Suggestions

The Supreme Court should be lauded for lifting the 5-strike rule.   Considering the great difficulty of the bar exams, the fluctuations in the pass rate, and the continual reforms and changes in the exam format, it would be fairer to the candidates if no cap was imposed.   The writer however respectfully makes a few suggestions in order to better effectuate the liberal and compassionate purpose behind the lifting of the 5-strike rule. 

Firstly, it is suggested that the new refresher curriculum be applied beginning only with the 2016 bar exams. This is because the 4^th year LEB model law curriculum will kick in only in SY 2015-2016.   

It is also recommended that Civil Law Review II and Remedial Law Review II in the new refresher curriculum be reduced to 3 units.  This would synchronize the new refresher curriculum with the LEB Model Law Curriculum.

Lastly, it is suggested also that the accreditation of law schools authorized to give refresher law classes be deferred to the 2015 bar.  This would avoid prejudice to those who had enrolled for SY 2013-2014 in anticipation of the lifting of the 5-strike rule for the 2014 bar, only to discover that their law school would not be accredited under the subsequent LEB rules to give refresher courses.    

-oOo- 

All rights reserved January 2014

THE NEW 2012 BAR EXAMINATION FORMAT: ITS IMPACT ON BAR REVIEW AND PREPARATION

Last March 20, Justice Martin S. Villarama Jr., chair of the 2012 Bar Examination Committee, announced to the law deans the new changes approved by the Supreme Court for the 2012 Bar Examination.

The changes had their genesis from an ongoing debate on the format of the bar examination, which was not settled with finality despite the adoption of the combined MCQ and performance-test format in the 2011 Bar.

One side advocates the use of MCQs and performance tests as the new and progressive trend in bar examinations. The other side contends that the essay examination is still the gold standard in measuring the competence of those aspiring to be lawyers. The latest changes appear
to be a compromise between the two views.

The changes

Justice Villarama said that the bar examination will be held in October 2012.Traditionally the bar was held in September. The 2011 Bar however was administered in November in order to give the examinees more time to adjust to the new format.

For the bar examination subjects, except legal ethics, the examination would consist ofan MCQ portion and an essay-exam portion. There will still be a performance test (trial memorandum) on the afternoon of the last Sunday. The MCQ portion would have a weight of 60% while the essay-exam part will have a weight of 40%.2 For political law, civil law, commercial law, and remedial law, the MCQ exam will consist of 100 MCQs to be answered in 2 hours while for labor law, taxation, and criminal law, it would be 75 MCQs in 1½ hours.

The essay examination will follow the MCQ exam and will consist of 10 essay questions (with sub-questions) to be answered in 2 hours for political law, civil law, commercial law, and remedial law, and 1½ hours for labor law, taxation, and criminal.

The legal ethics examination will be held on the afternoon of the last Sunday and will consist of a one-hour, 50-MCQ examination. After the legal ethics exam, the examinee will be given 2½ hours to prepare a trial memorandum on a hypothetical civil or criminal case. Note that the trial memorandum will not be on the subject of legal ethics. 

For greater clarity, the schedule of the examination is tabulated below:

 Impact on bar exam preparation and review

The combined MCQ and essay-question type of bar examination would pose new and additional challenges to the bar examinee. This would require that the examinee be a multi-skilled one, able to analyze and answer both an MCQ and an essay question.

There is one set of skills for reading and answering an MCQ and another for reading and answering an essay question. Yet it should be noted that both the MCQ and the essay question components are to be tackled by the examinee in a single 4-hour or 3- hour examination. In effect the examinee would be tackling four exams (two in the morning and two in the afternoon) in one day. The bar examinations would thus be an arduous test of both cerebral and physical fitness.

MCQ and Essay exam under grinding time pressure 

It is to be noted that the examinee is given only 2 hours to answer 100 MCQs in Political Law, Civil Law, Commercial Law, and Remedial Law; 1½ hours to tackle 75 MCQs in Labor Law, Taxation, and Criminal Law; and 1 hour to answer 50 MCQs in Legal Ethics. Hence on average an examinee has only 1 minute and 12 seconds to answer an MCQ. Compare this with the 1 minute and 48 seconds that an examinee has on average to answer an MCQ in the US Multi-State Bar Exam (MBE).

After having tackled the rigorous MCQ exam, the examinee without any rest will proceed to tackle the essay examination. The essay examination is composed of ten questions, with subquestions. Law students who have taken 2-hour final examinations consisting of 10 questions with subquestions are familiar with their nerve-wracking nature. Note that in Labor Law, Taxation, and Criminal Law, the examinee will have only 1½ hours to answer the 10 essay questions; hence time-wise these will be tougher than the morning subjects. 

Importance of coaching

There is thus a cogent need for a training and coaching program that involves not only a series of mock-bar examinations but also one-on-one coaching with a feedback mechanism. The mere taking of practice exams by a reviewee and the giving to him of the answers would be inadequate. The reviewee must have the benefit of feedback from an experienced and competent trainer and this can only be had under a program that provides for one-on-one and face-to-face interaction with a coach. Using a series of specially crafted mock bar exams, the coach would be able to assess the weaknesses and strengths of the reviewee and to monitor and guide his progress. 

Individualized coaching is especially important for training the bar reviewee for the essay examination. Since the essay question requires the subjective judgment of the examiner, the examinee must be trained and honed in the proper manner of presenting his answer. Each examinee has his own strengths and weaknesses in approaching and answering essay questions and a “one size fits all” lecture or training session is not the proper approach. The comprehensive training program should address the following: analysis of the question, issue-spotting, responsiveness to the question, and the presentation and format of the answer.

Time management is an important aspect of the examinee’s training and coaching. Examinees who have not undergone training on time management may find themselves running out of time to answer all the questions or to finish the trial memorandum.

Jurists in excellent position to respond to the changes, resounding success in 2011 Bar

Jurists Bar Review Center is well placed to adjust to the new 2012 Bar exam format because of its experience and expertise. Jurists already has a proven and tested practice-exam and coaching program in place since 2005 and employed in the 2005 to 2010 bar examinations to produce stellar pass rates. This program was based primarily on training and coaching students to analyze and answer problem-type and essay questions using the renowned Jurists Method.

In the 2011 Bar Examination, Jurists was the only bar review center to implement an intensive mock-bar and one-on-one coaching method for the MCQ and performance test components of the bar. The Jurists program proved to be a resounding success in the 2011 Bar Examination. 193 out of 307 examinees hurdled the 2011 Bar for a pass rate of 62.87%, almost double the national pass rate of 31.95%. For the reviewees who faithfully followed the full training program of 9 mock bars and attendance in the one-on-one coaching sessions, the pass rate was an outstanding 73.16%. Jurists reviewees who made history by passing the inaugural MCQ and performance test bar examination attested to the big part played by the Jurists Program in their success.

Utmost preparation and training

With new and additional changes being implemented again by the Supreme Court, the bar examinee should leave no stone unturned in his preparation for the 2012 bar. With the return of the essay examination, the 2012 bar will be a battle royal from start to finish. Those who have faced essay examinations in the bar know the extreme challenge they pose. Nor should the performance test be taken lightly. In the 2011 bar exam, it was reported that only 15% passed the trial memorandum test. An examinee would greatly enhance his chances of victory if he employs a rigorous study regime backstopped by a tested mock-bar and coaching program which addresses the MCQ, the essay-examination, and the performance-test components of the 2012 bar examination.

JURISTS ONLINE BAR REVIEW & COACHING PROGRAM NOW ON ITS THIRD YEAR, PREWEEK LECTURES NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE!

Jurists Bar Review Center, in response to popular demand from law graduates and bar reviewees, launched in 2014 the Jurists Online Bar Review and Coaching Program (Jurists Online) as an alternative to its traditional (on-site) bar review and coaching program. In line with its continuing efforts to better serve its reviewees, Jurists has now also made available online its complete 2016 preweek lectures.  Jurists Online is on its 3^rd season and gives the online reviewee best value for his or her money by providing access to the following:

• Latest and complete 2016 pre-bar and pre-week lectures (no recycled lectures) viewable 24/7 via on-demand videos. 
• Handouts and materials on printable digital form.
• Primer on bar review & exam tactics and strategies.
• Mock-bar exams and answers thereto.
• Written feedback and one-on-one coaching on each mock-bar exam from Jurists’ experienced and certified coaches.
• Performance-monitoring and testmanship evaluation by the coaching staff to leverage the reviewee’s strengths and to eliminate his weaknesses.

Jurists pioneered bar exam coaching in the Philippines in 2005 and has elevated the same to a science.  Its experienced bar exam coaches, personally trained and certified by head coach Prof. Manuel Riguera, have developed the skills and the intuitive feel necessary for proper and effective bar exam coaching.  In particular, the coaching staff has acquired substantial experience and expertise in training the examinee to read and analyze fact-based essay questions and thereby empower him to outperform in the bar exams.  A subscriber will therefore feel confident in placing his trust in the Jurists online coaching program.  

Jurists Online is now on its third year and Jurists has further improved and fine-tuned its online bar review and coaching program.  

Don’t  tarry! Sign-up now with Jurists Online!  

Enrollment is on a limited basis so as to preserve an ideal coach-reviewee ratio.

JURISTS BAR EXAMINEES ROCK 2017 BAR

Team Jurists rocked the 2017 bar examination with an off-the-charts performance that cemented their place in the annals of bar exam lore. 589 new Jurists lawyers successfully vanquished the bar exam dragon for an impressive institutional pass rate of 60.22% far outstripping the national pass rate of 25.55%.  The 589 new Jurists lawyers represented 34% of the total 1,724 new lawyers who hurdled the 2017 Bar Examination.  

Team Jurists’ tour de force was highlighted by nine Jurists bar candidates placing in the Top 20:

5th  Monica Anne T. Yap 89.45%  (SBC-Mla)                                                     

6th  Lorenzo Luigi T. Gayya  89.10% (UST) 

10th  Emma Ruby J. Aguilar 88.40% (UST) 

11th  Lyan David M. Juanico  88.35% (SBC-Mla) 

12th Lougenia P. Cariño   87.85% (SBC-Mla) 

13th  Arman Joseph M. Guzman  87.75% (UST) 

14th  Jewelle Ann Lou P. Santos  87.65% (AdMU) 

15th  Nadia Christine L. Mendiguarin  87.55% (Saint Louis University) 

16th  Eileen Carla Y. Carpio      87.40% (SBC-Mla)

Hail to the new Jurists lawyers!  Your Jurists Family is so proud of and happy for each and every one of you!

9 JURISTS BAR EXAMINEES LAND IN TOP 20 OF 2017 BAR

Congratulations to the 9 Jurists Bar Examinees who landed in the Top 20 of the 2017 Bar Examination:

5th  Monica Anne T. Yap      89.45%  (SBC-Mla)

6th  Lorenzo Luigi T. Gayya      89.10% (UST)

10th  Emma Ruby J. Aguilar      88.40% (UST)

11th  Lyan David M. Juanico      88.35% (SBC-Mla)

12th Lougenia P. Cariño      87.85% (SBC-Mla)

13th  Arman Joseph M. Guzman      87.75% (UST)

14th  Jewelle Ann Lou P. Santos      87.65% (AdMU)

15th  Nadia Christine L. Mendiguarin      87.55% (Saint Louis University)

16th  Eileen Carla Y. Carpio      87.40% (SBC-Mla)

Your Jurists Family is so proud of you!  Kudos to you panyeros and panyeras!

-oOo-

IMPORTANT NOTICE

For Jurists Classic and Jurists Combo enrollees who would be unable to attend the lectures of 19 May 2018 (Bar Review Strategy & English for Bar Examinees) and of 20 May 2018 (Bar Exam Strategies & Tactics) because of ongoing law school classes/exams or graduation ceremonies, we have made available for viewing the videos of these lectures on the following dates and time at our review venue on Madison 101 Tower & Hotel:

Please note that these videos will not be streamed on or uploaded to the Jurists website and may be viewed only at the time and place indicated above.  

-oOo-

Student’s Freedom to Enroll in Review Center of Choice Protected by Law, Violation Thereof a Crime

Lex Adonis (not his real name), a law school graduate preparing to review for the tough bar examination, was in a quandary.   His graduation credentials, necessary for his bar exam application, were being held hostage by his law school unless he came up with the ransom:   the enrollment fee for the school-affiliated bar review center.  Lex had another bar review center in mind but he felt as though he had no choice but to kowtow to his law school.

Thanks to a fairly recent law, R.A. No. 10609, law graduates like Lex need not be bamboozled into enrolling in a bar review center not of their choosing. R.A. No. 10609 or the “Protection of Students’ Right to Enroll in Review Centers Act of 2013,” was approved on 23 August 2013.  This is a salutary law which recognizes and protects the right of students enrolled in courses requiring professional licensing examinations to freely choose their review center. 

It cannot be gainsaid that R.A. 10609 applies to law students as well.  The bar examination is the professional licensure examination for lawyers in the Philippines. The Legal Education Board had previously directed a law school to desist from the practice of requiring its law graduates to enroll in its in-house bar review center and had strongly censured the erring law school.  It is certain that future transgressions of the law will be more strongly dealt with by the LEB.       

“This law traces its roots from the manifold complaints we received from various graduating students who were forced by their schools to enroll in review classes as prerequisite for graduation,” said former Kabataan Partylist Rep. Raymond Palatino, one of the law’s principal authors.

The former youth legislator recalled that during congressional hearings for the said law, it was revealed that many schools in Metro Manila engage in such practice to earn commissions from review centers. “It’s actually a long-standing profiteering scheme enforced by certain school officials and owners of review centers to guarantee profits,” Palatino said.

The law declares the following acts as unlawful and criminal:       1. Compelling students enrolled in courses requiring professional examinations to take review classes, which are not part of the curriculum, in a review center of the HEI’s (Higher Educational Institution’s) choice;        2. Making such review classes a prerequisite for graduation or completion of the course;        3. Forcing students to enroll in a review center of the school’s choice, and to pay the corresponding fees that include transportation and board and lodging; and

       4. Withholding the transcript of scholastic records, diploma, certification or any essential document of the student to be used in support of the application for the professional licensure examinations so as to compel the students to attend in a review center of the HEI’s choice.

Any HEI official or employee, including deans, coordinators, advisers, professors and other concerned individuals found guilty of committing any of these unlawful acts shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of up to 6 years and a fine of ₱750,000.

Lex’s story had a happy ending.  After he had advised the erring law school of R.A. 10609 and his intention to report the matter to the proper authorities, his graduation credentials were forthwith delivered to him.   He reviewed in the bar review center of his choice and went on to successfully hurdle the bar exam.  “Taking the bar is one of the most important challenges one will ever face,” Lex said.  “It demands the best preparation a law graduate can have and it requires that his confidence should be at the highest level.  You won’t get either one if you were dragooned into signing up with a bar review center you’re not comfortable with.”  

-oOo-

Jurists Bar Review launches “Jurists Bar Ops”

Jurists Bar Review Center™ has come up with another first for the 2018 Bar Review Season: Jurists™ Bar Ops.

Jurists Bar Review has put together for Jurists Bar Ops a dedicated and elite team picked from the roster of Jurists bar review lecturers and Jurists coaches, as well as consultants in the field of bar exam research and forecasting. The team will provide invaluable academic support services to the bar examinees during the bar exam week by furnishing them with critical bar exam intelligence in the form of last-minute tips. The team will employ data analytics, intelligence-gathering, case surveys, and pattern and trend analysis to come up with the last-minute tips.  

Jurists Bar Ops will take predictive analysis to the next level.  Bar exam forecasting usually consists of informing the bar reviewees of topics or areas that are likely to be asked in the bar exams.   A topic or area-focused prediction has its limitations however since bar exam questions are primarily put in problem-type questions or fact-based hypotheticals.  A bar reviewee may have been “tipped” as to the topic or subject of a bar exam question, yet he may still fail to give the correct and logical answer, either because he failed to spot the topic embedded in the problem-type question or he was not apprised of how to properly answer the question with the result that his answer is just a simple conclusion unsupported by proper logic and reasoning.  Otherwise put, the sweeping or horoscope-like tenor of topic or area-focused tips may have limited value to an examinee working under grinding time pressure in the heat of the actual bar examination.    

Jurists Bar Ops addresses this shortcoming by phrasing its last minute tips in Q&A rather than in topical or subject format.  The answers will be formatted in the renowned Jurists™ template.  The last-minute tips will furnish the bar examinees with actionable information in the form of precision-targeted Q&As which they can forthwith deploy while sitting for the bar exam and which will empower them to immediately spot or pinpoint a predicted bar exam question and give the answer thereto. 

Jurists Bar Ops will serve, at no additional cost, all Jurists Prebar and Preweek Reviewees (Classic, Online, and Combo).  In conjunction with Jurists’ mock-bars and one-on-one coaching program, Jurists Bar Ops will give the Jurists bar reviewees a significant and unique competitive advantage for succeeding in the toughest professional licensure exam in the country.

-oOo-

Advice for the Bar Examinee (2017 ed.)

by: PROF. MANUEL R. RIGUERA

“The key is not the will to win.  Everybody has that.  It is the will to prepare to win that is important.” — Bobby Knight, Hall of Fame Basketball Coach.

I have put together some advice and tips for those about to sit for the bar examination.  These are based on my two decades’ experience as a law professor, bar review lecturer, and bar exam coach.   I hope that they will prove of some help to the examinee who aspires to hurdle one of the toughest bar examinations in the planet.     

BEFORE THE BAR EXAM

READ MATERIALS ON HOW TO PREPARE FOR AND PASS THE BAR EXAM.   The bar exam is not a matter to take lightly.  Hence reading materials on how to prepare for and to pass the bar will greatly increase your chances of seeing your name inscribed in the bar exam hall of fame.  You can bring these materials as light reading to your three-day vacation after law school graduation.    When I prepared for the 1991 bar, I read a well-worn pamphlet by Prof. Jose Nolledo, Pointers for a Bar Candidate (1960).  I also read a booklet by Commissioner Regalado Maambong on the bar examination.   The two booklets served me well by giving practical advice on how to prepare for the bar and how to avoid costly mistakes during the preparation and the actual taking of the bar.   

From the current crop of bar prep books, I strongly recommend Bar Blues (Central Books)written by Tanya Karina Lat, Maria Gracia Gamez, and Marilyn Manait.  Bar Blues is comprehensive yet very readable.  Slaying the Bar Exam Dragon by Dean Rufus Rodriguez is another book which I would advise you to read.

Other useful books in this genre are Performance Boosters to Conquer Any Law Exam (Not Just the Bar Exam) by Siegfred Mison; Effective Bar Review Methods by Abelardo Domondon; and the inspiring The Law School Boot Camp (Create Yourself, Achieve Your Dreams) by Ma. Christina G. Castillo (Central Books, 2015).     

PREPARE AND ORGANIZE YOUR REVIEW MATERIALS.  Prepare your list of reviewers after your graduation and buy those that you do not have.  Get the opinion of professors and last year’s bar examinees as they are the best judges of law reviewers and can give you the pros and cons of a particular reviewer.  

As for the copious annotations or commentaries that you used as textbooks during your first three years in law school, consult them only if you need examples or illustrations of particular legal provisions.  This is an area where annotations or commentaries have an advantage over most reviewers which tend to put too much emphasis on rules without giving the underlying fact pattern for such rule.   

In this regard, I strongly advise the use of reviewers which are in Q&A form or which give examples or illustrations of the rules.   This reviewers will serve the dual purpose of being a review material as well as a training material for answering the bar which is substantially made up of problem-type or fact-based questions.  

I also recommend that you study the Q&As of the preceding ten bar examinations. This will give you a feel of the trend or style of the previous bar exams and of recurring fact-patterns and themes.   Who knows some of the concepts examined in these exams may be asked again?  In fact Abelarto T. Domondon claims that 5% to 20% of the concepts examined in the immediately preceding bar are repeated the next year. (EFFECTIVE BAR REVIEW METHODS 49).   The percentage will certainly increase if you study the preceding 10 bar exams.    Aside from its predictive value, this study will sharpen your fact-pattern recognition and analytical skills and increase your confidence.

PREPARE A BAR REVIEW SCHEDULE.  A bar-review schedule is your road-map to navigating the six months of bar review.  If you are enrolled in a bar review center, synchronize your schedule with that of the bar review center.  Otherwise you will not be reviewing effectively.  It’s not advisable to listen to the lecturer discuss negotiable instruments and then go home and read up on labor relations.  In this regard, choose a bar review center wherein there is a topical unity and continuity in the schedule, that is, where one particular bar exam subject is discussed at a time before proceeding to another bar exam subject.  Avoid bar review centers with a hodgepodge schedule where for example, negotiable instruments is discussed on one day, then labor relations on the next, and then civil procedure on the day after.  

My advice is that you study one bar exam subject before going to another.  Some advise reviewing one subject in the first half of the day (say remedial law) and then another (say commercial law) in the second half of the day.  The avowed purpose is to avoid ennui.  I think this sacrifices focus and effectiveness just to add variety.   One must simply have the self-discipline and drive to study one bar subject at a time.

If you are not attending or viewing bar review lectures, you have to prepare your own detailed schedule.   A rule of thumb in dividing your study time is to multiply the number of days available for review with the weight given to a particular bar examination subject.  Let us say that you have 156 days allocated for your review (May to October, excluding Sundays).  Political law has a weight of 15%.   156 days multiplied by 15% will give you 23 days.   So you allocate 23 days more or less for political law.  

In your review schedule, the last bar subjects that you should study should be labor law and then political law (the so-called “mirror schedule).  This will enhance the effectiveness of your review since political law and labor law are the bar exam subjects you will tackle on the first Sunday.     

You should also prepare a daily study schedule.   The latter is a detailed daily planner of your wake-up time, meals, breaks, and your “lights out” which you should follow strictly in order to get into the groove of rigorous studying.   

I recommend that your wake-up time should be at 4:30 a.m. and “lights out” should be at 9 p.m.     This is to make your body clock adjust to this schedule so that by November, you would be used to sleeping and waking up early.

After you have drawn up your schedule, stick to it at all costs!  If you see that you are running behind schedule, pick up your pace.   This is the reason why you should select and prune your reading materials.  Many reviewees make the mistake of being overly ambitious in their study load with the result that they fall behind schedule.   Study smart!  The point is that you are not studying to be a legal authority but to pass the bar.  The bar reviewers (with rare exceptions) will not quiz you on arcane areas of the law.  Leave the scholarly stuff for later after you have passed the bar and have decided to write a law journal article.      

ENROLL IN A BAR REVIEW CENTER.  There are advantages and disadvantages to enrolling in a bar review center.   Among the perceived disadvantages are the increased costs, which include the enrollment fee, the transportation and food costs, and accommodation costs for those who reside in the provinces.   Also quite some time is spent in preparing and dressing up and in going to and from the bar review center.  

Despite these considerations, I strongly recommend that a bar examinee enroll in a bar review center.   A law graduate does not have the degree of knowledge of the bar subject and the intuitive feel for what are the important topics and probable bar exam questions which an experienced bar review lecturer has.   Also a bar review center provides case and statutory updates, which because of time limitations, is often not provided by law schools.  

Take note that law and jurisprudence is in a constant state of flux and what you thought may have been good law last year or even last month may no longer be so.   Recent developments affect the law as a whole and not just specific or isolated provisions.  Hence these should not be taught or learned in a truncated or isolated manner but should be imparted to the reviewee in a holistic manner, that is, seamlessly woven into a bar review subject as an integral element thereof.    Only a seasoned bar lecturer, with his experience and intuitive feel of the law, is capable of performing this challenging feat.    A bar reviewee who relies on past review material and simply tries to incorporate “updates” into his study is playing with fire.          

A recent innovation is online bar review.  The bar reviewee need not go to a “brick-and-mortar” bar review center but can review in the comfort of his own home or wherever there is internet access.  This has the advantages of cost and time efficiency.  

In this regard, Jurists Bar Review is offering JURISTS COMBO, which combines the structured regimen and face-to-face coaching of the traditional review with the convenience and flexibility of an online review.

CHOOSE YOUR BAR REVIEW CENTER WISELY.  There are three important things which you should take into account in choosing a bar review center:  The line-up of lecturers, the schedule, and the existence of a coaching or mentoring program.

The line-up of lecturers is important.   Get the line-up and study this carefully. In appraising the line-up, get the opinion of successful bar examinees and your law professors.   Word usually gets around among the bar reviewees and the law academe about the outstanding and the mediocre or irresponsible lecturers.   Pay special attention to the lecturers in the subjects in which you feel you are weak.          

The schedule is also of capital importance.   Some bar review centers draw up their schedule based on the availability of the lecturers rather than on topical continuity.  As previously stated, avoid bar review centers with hodgepodge schedules.   This will greatly undercut the effectiveness of your study.

If you have taken the bar more than three times, ensure that the bar review center is run by a recognized law school or that it has an accreditation agreement with one.   The Supreme Court will not allow you to sit for the bar examination unless you get a certification from such a bar review center.  

TAKE MOCK BAR EXAMS AND AVAIL OF THE SERVICES OF A BAR-EXAM COACH.   Another thing to look out for is if the bar review center has a coaching program.   The program should not be limited to the mere administration of mock bar exams, but should provide for one-on-one coaching wherein a coach reads and evaluates the examinee’s answers and then sits down and discusses the same with the examinee, seeking to identify the examinee’s strong and weak points, to remedy the latter, to coach the examinee on how to read and answer the bar exam questions, and in general to improve and maximize the examinee’s test-taking abilities.     

See to it that the mock bars replicate the bar examination (that’s why they’re called mock bars) and that there is a series of mock bars and coaching sessions (not just one or two) so that there will be adequate feedback and performance monitoring.  

Professor Mario Mainero, one of the foremost bar prep experts in the U.S., advises thus: “taking a practice exam under exam conditions is the best way to prepare for an exam.  If you do not take them as actual run-throughs, your mind and body will not become used to taking law school [bar] exams, and you are more likely to freeze up or perform at a less-than-peak performance level.”  (Dennis Tonsing, 1000 Days to the Bar).     

Analyzing and answering bar exam questions is not a matter of gut feel or intuition.   The examinee who thinks that it is enough to just read and attend lectures when preparing for the bar is taking a huge risk.   A bar-exam coach or mentor would be most invaluable in helping the examinee acquire the necessary competencies for succeeding in the bar exam.

The high mortality rate in the bar examination is traceable to the sole or over-reliance on passive study and the absence or lack of training and practice on bar exam strategies and tactics.  This matter has been raised as early as 1959 by Dean Wenceslao G. Laureta in the preface to his classic Secrets on How to Pass the Bar Examination (Rex Book Store, 1959 ed.)

Thus, it may be proper to remind the bar candidates some of the myths involved in the domain of bar examinations.  Almost invariably the bar candidates have the mistaken belief that by – – (1) Attending the best law schools; (2) Listening to lectures of renowned bar reviewers during review classes; and (3) Memorizing the law or the  rules of procedure, including doctrinal rulings will guarantee his passing the bar examinations.

Wrong.

There is no question that the above circumstances will help to enable the bar candidate pass the bar examinations.  But the blooming secret in this regard is simply this:  Present good answers that will make the examiner take notice.  Good answers anchored upon logical reasoning, written in readable English and more importantly, justified by appropriate legal authority.  

…

It would do well for the bar candidate to study carefully the manner in which answers are framed and the corresponding comments given.  He will not fail to see why a given answer is poorly presented and the value of the corresponding remedy to improve it in a manner acceptable to the examiner.  He must not make the tragic mistake of assuming that he knows all these things.  He must supplement his reading by actual practice in answer framing.  After all, one may know all the techniques on swimming which he can master from books on the subject, but until he jumps into the water, he will never learn to swim.  [Emphases supplied]

Bar exam strategies and tactics is a nuanced field which cannot be acquired from merely reading books and listening to omnibus lectures. The services of a competent bar exam coach or mentor would be most helpful.  A mock bar and coaching program is also in line with the recent pedagogical trend of shifting stress to “outcome-based education” from the conventional “input-based learning.”

The Supreme Court itself recognized the salient role played by mock bars and bar exam coaching.  The Guidelines for the 2014 Bar recommend thus:

Practice Exams

A good practice for law schools/review classes to observe is to hold practice examination sessions with the Bar candidates, both on the Essay and the MCQ formats. In evaluating these practice exams, attention should be given to both the law and the Bar candidate’s presentation and use of English. In many instances, incorrect English is more serious as a problem than the lack of precise knowledge of law, and has been the cause of high failure rates. [Emphases supplied]

In line with the Supreme Court’s observation, Jurists has brought back the lecture “English for Bar Examinees” in order to train the bar examinees write in correct, readable, and concise English.  This would be especially helpful for those who need improvement in their legal writing and English proficiency as the course would provide them with helpful tips in order to surmount their challenges.  

FOCUS ON THE FUNDAMENTALS IN YOUR BAR REVIEW.  The key is not really studying more but studying smart.   It is simply impossible to read during the five months of review the entire code provisions of a law much less the texts or annotations thereon.   Besides some code provisions and comments are unimportant for purposes of the bar and are seldom if ever asked in the bar.   

During your review, you need to concentrate only on the primary review materials:  a bar reviewer, the code provisions, and the bar review materials provided by the bar review center.   In reading the code provisions, do not read the entire code but only those which are important.   You know a code provision is important if it was discussed by your professor or bar review lecturer or mentioned in your bar reviewer.           

A useful supplement to your reviewer is the Lex Pareto Notes written by Zigfred Diaz, Maria Patricia Katrina de Guia, Alrey Ouano, Louella Matsumoto, Ma. Salud Barillo, Danell Fernandez, Nolito Dayanan, and Helenytte Yu.    This is a breakthrough work wherein the authors, applying the Pareto Principle to the field of bar exam review and forecasting, have found that approximately 80% of the bar exam questions are derived from 20% of the law.  The authors have pinpointed this 20% of the law on which the reviewee should spend 80% of his study time thus optimizing the effectiveness of his review.

TAKE CARE OF YOUR HEALTH AND FITNESS.   Remember to exercise daily or at least three times a week.  Exercising improves blood circulation to the brain and makes one think more clearly.  It also builds up one’s resistance to sickness and infection and improves one’s stamina.  Remember that the bar exam is a grueling four-hour exam in the morning and another one in the afternoon. So I’m not greatly exaggerating when I say that it’s like training for a 20-kilometer run. I’m not saying though that you should train like a triathlete – – brisk walking or a short jog will do.       

Get enough sleep.  At least six, preferably seven hours of daily sleep is advised.  Lack of sleep will result in drowsiness and sluggishness when studying, aside from making you susceptible to sickness or fatigue.      

Proper diet is often overlooked but it is of the utmost importance.  Observe a balanced and healthy diet, not forgetting fruits and vegetables. Please take it easy on fast food especially instant noodles!  (Well, from time to time fast food is alright but don’t make it your staple food).  A diet which would send a cardiologist into fits is not likewise appropriate for a bar reviewee.  For coffee drinkers, black coffee is the best.  Take it easy with the popular “3-in-1” coffee preparations which tend to contain a lot of sugar and fat.  Drink plenty of water when studying.

In fine take care of your health.   Good health is the foundation of an outstanding bar review.  

IMPROVE YOUR HANDWRITING.  Handwriting is of capital importance in the essay exams.  Your answers may all be logical and correct but if your handwriting is illegible all your hard work will go down the drain.   If your handwriting is difficult to read, the examiner will most probably not take the time to decipher your booklet, taking into consideration that he has about five thousand other booklets to read.   

You may think that your handwriting is legible when it’s actually not.   Take a mock bar examination and show your booklet to another person and have him read it.  You may be surprised to find that your handwriting is actually difficult to read.  If that is the case, work on improving your handwriting.

DURING NOVEMBER AND THE BAR EXAM  

ATTEND OR LISTEN TO PRE-WEEK LECTURES.  Pre-week lectures are important.  This is where experienced pre-week lecturers condense or synthesize the law and concentrate on the topics or areas which are most likely to be asked in the bar examination.  As I earlier said, a law graduate does not have the degree of knowledge of the bar subject and the intuitive feel for what are the important topics and probable bar exam questions which an experienced bar review lecturer has.  A bar reviewee who forgoes entirely the pre-week lectures would be missing out on a vital area of bar exam preparation.

In line with its tradition of bar review leadership and innovation, Jurists Bar Review came up with another first in 2016: JURISTS PREWEEK ONLINE.

This is a useful option for bar reviewees during the hectic pre-week review period. Instead of travelling to and from the pre-week review venue, reviewees can save valuable time by viewing the full 2017 Jurists pre-week lectures “off-site” via on-demand videos through their desktop computer, laptop, PDA, tablet, hand phone, or any other electronic device with internet access.

This 2017, another new program, JURISTS PREWEEK COMBO, will be made available to reviewees.    Jurists Preweek Combo combines the features of Jurists Preweek Classic with Jurists Preweek Online.  This would be attractive for reviewees who may want to attend some pre-week lectures on-site and to view others online, or those who would want to have a back-up measure in case they would be unable to attend some pre-week lectures on-site.

AVOID UNNECESSARY STRESS AND DISTRACTIONS.   Some stress and nerves is unavoidable during the review and exam week and in fact helps to drive you harder in your studies.  However undue and excessive stress and nerves is an enemy of the bar examinee as it results in lack of sleep and hinders proper thinking both while studying and taking the exam itself.  If you feel that you are unduly stressed or worried, learn relaxation techniques like yoga and deep breathing.   Prayer and meditation are powerful relaxation techniques.  

Ignore useless distractions.   Usually rumors of who the examiner is become widespread during this time and examinees worry themselves silly with the type of questions the rumored examiner usually asks and with obtaining notes and materials written by or about the rumored examiner.  This is just a useless exercise which would distract you from doing what should be done:  studying.  All examiners are in the main bound by an unwritten law that their questions should be on the basics of the law and on significant jurisprudence.   So just ignore rumors or information on the examiner’s identity and stick your nose to your review materials.   

The bar exam month features the annual frenetic paper chase by bar examinees.  Examinees go on a quest for the Holy Grail of the bar exams:  the red or blue notes from San Beda or Ateneo or the UP notes.   These notes are supposed to embody the answers or even “leaks” of bar exam questions.   This is balderdash.  I graduated from Ateneo and worked in the bar-ops.  I know that the so-called blue notes are simply compilations of probable bar questions with answers prepared by law students with a little assistance from the faculty.   While they are definitely helpful, you don’t have to wail and grind your teeth if you do not get them.   What is contained in the blue notes is more often than not also in your bar reviewers and review materials.  

One examinee I knew spent a lot more time looking for notes, tips, and leaks and compiling dossiers on the rumored examiners rather than actually studying.   He failed the bar five times and is now exploring career opportunities with the CIA.  

GET ENOUGH SLEEP ON THE NIGHT BEFORE THE EXAM.     This advice cannot be overemphasized.    Adequate sleep makes the mind sharper and allows us to recall what we have studied with facility.   So do not make the mistake of studying until the witching hour.   The extra hours of study is not worth it if you find yourself sleepy and thinking sluggishly during the bar exam.  

You should hit the sack by 9 p.m.   Do not panic if you find that you are unable to sleep.  Just relax and continue lying down in bed, at least your body will be rested.  But do not make the mistake of standing up and studying.   In that case you will lack both sleep and rest, and the chances of a disaster are multiplied threefold.   Ron de Vera slept for only an hour the night before the first Sunday exam and for only 30 minutes the night before the second Sunday exam of 2004.   He placed second.  (Lat et al., Bar Blues, p. 85).   Of course I’m not saying that you get only an hour’s sleep if you want to place in the top ten, what I’m saying is that there is no need for you to call 911 if you find yourself unable to fall into the arms of Morpheus.       

I advise against taking sleeping pills.   They often have the side effect of muddling up your thinking.  There was an examinee who, finding himself unable to sleep the night before the Civil Law exam, popped a sleeping pill.  He was able to sleep all right, but the next day he found himself unable to distinguish between loco parentis and crazy momma.  

REMEMBER TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS.  Before you start reading and answering the questions, take the time to first read and understand the instructions.  Quite a lot of examinees in their eagerness go straight to reading and answering the questions without bothering to read the instructions.  This could be disastrous.   

NEVER LEAVE ANY QUESTION UNANSWERED.   Even if you are clueless as to the answer to a question, give it your best try.   Never leave any question unanswered.   The examiner may feel slighted if you do not answer a question.  He may think that you felt that the question was not properly crafted that is why did not answer it.  Moreover a blank response will get you zero while giving it your best shot could net you 2 or 3 points which could spell the difference between flunking and passing.

MANAGE YOUR TIME WISELY.  Many examinees spend too much time on the first part of the exam only to find themselves rushing through the second part or worse running out of time and leaving some questions unanswered.    Learn to pace yourself properly.  Taking mock bar exams will help you learn how to pace yourself in an 18-to-20 question examination.  Aim to answer at least ½ of the total items plus 1 by the halfway mark.  Thus if the exam is from 8 am to 12 noon with 20 items, aim to answer at least 11 items by 10 a.m.  

DO NOT BE FLUSTERED BY “SHOCK AND AWE” QUESTIONS.   Those who took the 1991 Bar Examination (like me) will never forget the infamous first question in Political Law:  “What is the Writ of Amparo?  Discuss its constitutional basis.”     Considering that the only Amparo we knew of was Amparo Muñoz (the 1974 Miss Universe who won her title in Manila, if you’re a Millennial), the question had the effect of a sneak punch to the solar plexus.   I can still picture in my mind the bar exam room at MLQU, with everyone’s jaw plunging to the floor in utter shock.

Of course, now every law student knows what a writ of amparo is, but back then in 1991 B.G. (before Google), only a law student or law professor who had travelled to Latin America could have known of this most extraordinary writ.   

Other “shock and awe” questions include one which asked who the current president of the International Court of Justice was, one which asked for the meaning of the acronym ACID (from a speech of Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban), and another which asked the examinee to define the Denicola test in intellectual property law.

“Shock and awe” questions were trending in the 2015 Bar. In Political Law, bar examinees were asked to discuss the “evolution” of jus sanguinis under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions.  In Labor Law, the word of the day was “equity of the incumbent,” an anachronism whose term of office had long ago expired.  In Civil Law, they were asked to define “depecage.”  In Commercial Law, the shock-and-awe word to define was “Jason Clause.”  In Remedial Law,  the examinees were confronted with the common-law terms, “larceny” and “voir dire.” It did not help any that “larceny” was used in a fact-setting which did not involve any unlawful taking of property but rather violence and sexual abuse, while “voir dire” is a term that a Filipino lawyer would be unfamiliar with unless he is an aficionado of American jury trials.

The examiners’ penchant for throwing screwball questions put the bar examinees in a serious funk. Many spent quite a bit of time accumulating a glossary of legal gobbledygook in the various bar exam subjects instead of studying the fundamentals and important jurisprudence.  I even heard a story (probably apocryphal) that a law school engaged a lexicographer to beef up its bar ops.

This brought back memories of the 1991 bar examination.  After the examinees were torched by the Amparo question in political law, the succeeding preweek reviews were turned into a Gobbledygook chase.   The fad back then was the M&A (mergers & acquisitions) craze in Wall Street (remember Michael Milkin and Ivan Boesky with his infamous “Greed is Good” mantra).  In the mercantile law preweek, we parroted terms like “hostile take-over,” “leveraged buy-out,” “white knight,” “junk bonds,” and a plethora of other investment-bank junk rather, jargon.  I think this was partly to blame for the dismal pass rate of 17.81%.   An examinee who flunked the bar “leveraged” his experience to apply for and land a job in the M&A department of a leading investment bank.     

My advice is that a bar candidate should not spend precious time burning the midnight oil with Black’s Law Dictionary. A cost-benefit analysis would lead one to conclude that time spent on looking for and even studying obscure legal nomenclature would only result in dividends that are well, de minimis. Better to just study the basic legal principles and significant jurisprudence and encounter legal terms in the course of such study.

Moreover, screwball questions are not really expected to be answered correctly by the majority of the examinees (and even law professors) but are meant more to test the resolve and fortitude of one who aspires to be a lawyer.    Do not panic or lose hope if you do not know the answer to the question.  Just give it your best try and proceed to the other questions.

AFTER THE EXAM

DO NOT DISCUSS THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS.   After you have taken a bar exam in a particular subject, forget about it and concentrate on preparing and studying for the next bar exam subject.   After all you cannot undo what you have already written.   Avoid discussing the probable answers and avoid people who delight in discussing them.  The time spent on arguing and discussing the probable answers is better spent relaxing and preparing for the next exam.

CONCLUSION

To paraphrase Bobby Knight, the key is not the will to pass.  Everybody has that.  It is the will to prepare to pass that is important.  

The bar exam is a formidable challenge but like any other hurdle it can be surmounted by assiduous planning and preparation.  The following quote from Steve Nash, a player of less than imposing physical attributes but who went on to become one of the NBA all-time greats, is inspiring:

You have to rely on your preparation.  You got to really be passionate and try to prepare more than anyone else, and put yourself in a position to succeed, and when the moment comes you got to enjoy, relax, breathe and rely on your preparation so that you can perform and not be anxious or filled with doubt.    

When your moment comes, enjoy it!

March 2017

-oOo-