Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 8)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 8)

by 

Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

Despot

The Examiner is the absolute despot in the manner of appreciating the examinee’s answer; he can pass or fail a candidate at his whim, or he can downgrade a perfect answer, at his caprice.

And the worst scenario of all, he can execute all these without being accountable for, nor being subject to, judicial review. The Examiner is more powerful than the Supreme Court! He is above and beyond certiorari.

Full time vs. Part time

How can a practicing lawyer or senior government official, as an examiner, give justice to an examinee’s notebook by checking 30 essay answers per notebook and correcting 50 notebooks every day without fail for 16 weeks? A retired judge maybe, but for a working official? The examiner is most likely to take shortcuts in checking, and that’s the first sign of possible injustice.

While the poor candidate resigned from his job and spends almost P300,000 just to review and prepare for the bar for half a year, the exhausted examiner simply skims through his booklet and gives a round of grade for 50 for his entire notebook, without individually look at each answer. A grade of 50? How can an examinee recover from that?

Correction

I have gathered these from various sources. The correction is a cloak and dagger operation. Within 10 days after the exams, the Bar Confidant will deliver to the examiner, personally, at a secret place (not in the Supreme Court premises) and time, 250 answer booklets in a sealed and locked canvass bag. The balance of the 5,000 or so answer books are kept in a vault in the Supreme Court. One key is given to the examiner and one key is given to the Bar Confidant. Thus, the answer books are safe.

The examiner is given one week to correct 250 notebooks. That’s about 50 per day, or 25 in the morning and 25 in the afternoon. It’s a very boring, tiring job. Each week, the examiner will hand over 250 checked notebooks and get 250 more to check. For 10 weeks, that 2,500 and 20 weeks for 5,000 answer books.

Can you imagine checking 25 answer books every morning and 25 every afternoon for 20 weeks? That’s close to 5 months of non-stop checking of 50 booklets per day. And don’t forget each answer book as 30 questions and answers.

Is this sustainable for a working lawyer or judge? Hardly; even for a retired judge with nothing to do. Thus, this weakness alone tends to dispense injustice to an examinee’s answers.

(End of Part 8)

to be continued

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 7)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 7)

by Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

Mastery by unfair advantage

By knowing all his questions, as a professor, in political law, or criminal law, as the case may be, you are already assured of “mastering” in advance that particular topic. Since an examiner is going to prepare 50 questions, how many of his favorite “trick problems” as a law professor, do you think will be part of that 50? Maybe 20 problems out of 50? Remember, there is no way, that particulare professor will only give a basic problem. He will always give a “tricky” problem, one that looks so obvious on its face but is actually an “exception to the exception” problem.

That focus on those so called favorite topics alone and mastering them in advance is an unfair advantage of his former alma mater and frat members.

What about the provincial candidates who didn’t have him as professor? These unfortunate candidates will have just to pray for luck in having the “mastery” of any questions that will come out in the bar.

Considering that in Civil Law alone, an examiner could ask any of 5,000 possible questions, how could you expect the candidate to be an expert on those 5,000 topics? And that’s for Civil Law alone!

Thus, any advantage of knowing the favorite topics of the examiner is already an unfair advantage with extreme consequences. And that’s just one of the “not-so-obvious” reasons. There are so many but we will not discuss them here.

Distribution of topics

Maybe the Philippine Association of Law Schools (PALS) should be given a chance to suggest the distribution of topics, this  could be percentage-wise, to avoid too much concentration on certain topics and neglect of other topics. For example, avoid overconcentration on the topics of obligations and contracts in Civil Law. However, there is a real problem here. How can you allocated topics with only 10, 15 or 20 questions?

Whimsical questions

The Chair of the Bar Committee should not select whimsical questions which serve the purpose of ego-tripping on the part of the examiners rather than to test the fundamental knowledge of the candidates; to avoid memory and enumeration type of questions; and, for example, avoid using names susceptible of confusion such as “Humpty” and “Dumpty.” These names might be cute but their similarity tends to create confusion than to avoid confusion.

Level of Expertise

Here are the two most important issues when it comes to formulating the bar problems. First, there must be a realistic time allotment for questions and to allow for analysis time. Maybe the examiner himself should write down in his own handwriting the correct answers to his own questions and time himself. Then add an extra time for analysis and composition of thoughts for an examinee.

And the most important issue of all, in the entire bar process: What level of expertise is being sought in a candidate to hurdle the bar exams?

The knowledge of a first year law practitioner? Or the knowledge accumulated over 20 years of experience by an expert practitioner or professor? In the case of the 2014, the problems were of the latter type.

(End of Part 7)
(to be continued)

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 6)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 6)

by Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

Why luck is a huge factor in essay type

After each bar exam, if you survey examinees to comment on the bar questions. Among their responses would be: “Of the topics covered in the Bar Review, only 10% came out.”

This reveals their frustration about over-preparation yet only 10% came out. Is this comment valid?

My opinion? Their sentiments are reasonable but they got the percentage wrong.

The topics that come out is less than 10%, more likely, less than 1% of what the Bar Review covers. Yes, only 1% come out.

Look at Civil Law alone. There were 30 questions in the 2014 bar, but it is very possible to have about 5,000 questions on the ten law school subjects (yes, ten) under the umbrella of Civil Law. That’s 30/5,000 =0.6% only.

And of that 0.6%, you are required to have “20-year expert level” of mastery not merely “fresh graduate” level. Finding a needle in a haystack is utterly easier than passing the bar!

That’s why leakages, and knowing the “favorite questions” of Bar Examiners are extremely unfair advantages that could spell victory or disaster to entire legal careers. You have to be lucky that the topics in the 30 questions are the ones that you have “mastered.”

Please note that I have the used the word “mastered.” If you have not mastered the topics in each of the 30 questions, say goodbye to your lawyerly dreams. Why? Each of those questions are written by experts and can be answered only by experts.

The bar questions over the years are questions which do not ask for your “foundation of basics” but for your “mastery of the exceptions” and the “exceptions to the exceptions.”

There is no way that a “bare knowledge of basics” will get you over the bar. No way. You have to be an expert to get 75% in the bar. Even law professors would have difficulty getting that 75%.

Thus, the candidate has to be lucky to answer, (perfectly!), 23 out 30 questions (75%). Perfectly! Who can get perfect answers? Will the examiners give perfect scores for each question?

Unfairness of Manila-based Examiners

It would be safe to say 100% of the examiners are based in the NCR. Once their identities are revealed, advertently or inadvertently, either by the examiner himself to his frat or alma mater contacts, or revealed by his or her spouse or relatives, there is the obvious temptation to yield to pressure.

And then there is the “not-so-obvious reason” of unfair advantage due to “inheritance exams.”

By inheritance exams, I mean this. Once you know Examiner’s identity, you will spend all your bar ops team’s efforts in digging up copies of his old exams as a professor over the last 20 years. Each professor has his own favorite angle and this will show in his exams.

(End of Part 6) 
To Be Continued

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 5)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 5)

by Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

The Examiners

The Chair of the Bar Committee, which is rotated each year, rightfully keeps the examiners anonymous due the immense pressure from examinees and their fraternities to obtain any form of advantage such as leakages. But when a lecturer suddenly goes on official leave the year before, he is immediately suspected as the next year’s examiner.

A bar examiner may be tempted to construct questions that are meant to impress the candidates with his supposed expertise rather than test the latter’s knowledge of the law. Some questions have questionable logic or questionable validity as a metric of the candidate’s knowledge. However, since discretion is given to the examiner, it is almost impossible to assail the appropriateness of such a bar question.

The examinee is afraid that the bar examinations will not test him on what he knows; he is afraid that the examiner will test him on what he does not know.

Based on information from various sources, each examiner is supposed to give 50 questions personally to the Chairman of the Bar Committee (who is a sitting Justice) at least 45 days before the exams. The questions are preferably in the handwriting of the examiner. By the time he has prepared 20 questions, he will have run out of questions to ask. And this probably tempts him to ask outlandish questions.

Of the 50, the Chairman will select 20 questions or, the latter may reject all questions and make his own.

Weakest Link

Remember I said that I will share my discovery of the weakest link in the entire bar exam operational cycle that remains unrectified to this day, and may be have caused tremendous injustice to the examinees?

The Supreme Court spends millions to protect the integrity and streamline the bar examination process, and over the years they have developed an impressive template. Yet, ironically, in my opinion, they have not given attention to the weakest link of the entire process: the correction of the examinees’ answers.

This is not the place to fully discuss each factor that makes the correction phase as the weakest link but I will just summarize some ideas.

(End of Part 5)
To  Be Continued

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 4)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 4)

by Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

How algebra distorted the 2014 bar

Let’s proceed to another topic. The Philippine bar is probably the hardest in the world, but the 2014 bar is the probably the hardest in Philippine bar history, and you can blame it on algebra. Far-fetched? Let me explain.

The Supreme Court decreed that the 2014 bar should consist of 80% essay and 20% multiple choice questions (MCQ). And this is where the tyranny of algebra lies. How so?

Usually, there are only 10 bar problems per subjects (with sub-problems). Maintaining the 20:80 ratio would mean only 2 MCQ and 8 essay type. Only 2 MCQs in a bar exam is so insignificant it would be ridiculous to have any MCQ at all. Progressively, the ridiculous pattern continues: For 15 problems, 3 MCQs, 12 essays; for 20 problems, 4 MCQs, 16 essays; for 26 problems, 5 MCQs, 21 essays, for 30 problems, 6 MCQs, 24 essays.

Thus, as you can see, including only 3 or 4 MCQs would be ridiculous, so the Bar Committee has no choice but to include 5 or 6 MCQs. But at what expense? To maintain the algebraic ratio, the essay problems had to be 24 or 21 problems in the morning and in the afternoon. Can you imagine all that thinking, composing, and writing? From the usual 10 to 15 essays, it became 30! And that’s for the morning session only. Even a single additional problem can already wreak havoc in your thinking and writing process. That’s murder! That’s how algebra caused the 2014 bar to be up to 150% longer, and therefore, physically and mentally excruciating.

Suggestion adopted?

Remember, at the outset, I said that one of my suggestions was adopted for the 2015 bar? In early 2015, I wrote to the Supreme Court that there is a lesson to be learned: “Do not fix the percent of MCQ. Better don’t include MCQ because the MCQ in the 2014 Bar hardly matters (total of 5%-6% for 5 to 6 questions?)

Or, if MCQ is part of the exams, don’t advertise it because their presence hardly make a dent anyway.

The negative impact is that the public will think the bar has been watered down in difficulty having gone MCQ. This is very misleading. In fact, the opposite happened.”

The Supreme Court, coincidentally, removed the MCQs in the 2015 bar. Want another coincidence? In 2007, the Supreme Court amended Rule 65 Sec. 8, but that’s another story.

(End of Part 4) 

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 3)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 3)

by

Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

Cost of the bar

Wait, do you even know how much a provincial candidate spends for taking the bar?

Let’s see. Knowing the success rate is only 10%, that is, your probability of failure is 90%, you go to Manila in June to attend Manila’s best review school and rent a room for yourself for maximum concentration. Round trip air ticket, that’s about P8,000. The review fee is about  P33,000. For best concentration, you rent a unit for P15,000 per month for 6 months, that P90,000.

You want to obtain the bar materials from other schools. Assuming photocopy charges of P700 per subject, that’s P5,600 per school; for the bar materials of the top three schools, that’s a sum of P16,800. Of course, you want to buy your own review books on top of the bar materials, assuming P2,500 per book, then that’s P20,000 for eight subjects of the bar.

Now sometimes you want new textbooks because yours are outdated. You may had 30 texts in law school. Say, instead on renewing all your 30 textbooks, you only renew 6. Assuming P2,000 each, that’s a sum of P12,000. Photocopying of last minute exam tips, let’s say P500 per subject, that’s P4,000.

There are also special coaching and lecture sessions conducted usually in hotel conference halls, during the bar exam month itself, and that should set you back at least P2,500 per subject, a total of P20,000 for the eight subjects.

How about food? Assuming each meal is P100, that’s P54,000 for 6 months. Sometimes you relax with friends having pizza once a week or a buffet lunch, assuming you spend P500 per week, that’s P12,000 for 6 months.

Your cellphone calls and texts, about P1,000 for each of the 6 months, that’s P6,000. Your internet costs about P1,000 per month, that’s P6,000. Your transportation, two taxi round trips per week, P200 one way, about  P800, and bus trips about P200 per week. That’s total transpo P1,000 per week, that’s P24,000 for 6 months. Laundry is about P300 per week, that’s P7,200.

Now, probably once, due to a family emergency, you go back home for three days. That’s another round trip ticket of P8,000. Don’t buy new clothes.

Add miscellaneous expenses (like staplers, tapes, ballpens, birthday gifts, celebrations, etc) of P1,000 per month, that’s P6,000.

And the grand total is: P327,000!

You maybe tempted to ask: But even without the bar, you spend for food, laundry, transpo, cellphone anyway? Yes, that’s true. But previously, you had a job and that funded your daily expenses. Now, you are on office leave without pay, or had resigned from your job. This means, you really need to have the cash amount of over P300,000 to pay for your personal expenses for six months.

And, by the way, have you forgotten your family? What are they supposed to eat, or how to pay for the aparment rent, the tuition of your children, their school projects, their transportation and school allowance, while you are reviewing? Assuming, your wife is working you would still have to allocate money from your end because it is unlikely she can afford those tuition fees and school projects. Let’s say, your family had a P50,000 monthly budget, and you have to allocate a small sum of P25,000 a month as your counterpart, that’s P150,000 for your family back home.

Therefore, overall, for the six-month ordeal you need to have around P450 or close to half a million pesos to support yourself and your family while you are not earning while preparing for the bar exam.

You didn’t realize it was that expensive? You might say my estimates are too high? Look at those assumptions one by one. Make your own spreadsheet.

Alright, you want to economize and you can shave off a third of the cost. That’s still around P270,000! You’re an extremely good  in budgeting and you can shave off half of the costs, that’s still P240,000. Okay, alright, you want to save 75%! That’s still P118,000!

And all these expenses that could run up to half a million pesos for a physically, emotional, and mentally draining endeavor with a 90% probability of failure. That’s not a happy prospect.

- End of Part 3 -

-To Be Continued-

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 2)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 2)

by Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

RP vs US Bar

The Philippine bar exam is the probably one of the hardest bar exams in the world. Why? The “real unadjusted success rate” of the Philippine bar ranges from 5% in 2007 to 6.7% in 2012 to 13.3% in 2013 and 11.4% in 2014. The usual range is between 5% to 8% real unadjusted success rate. That’s about 300 to 400 passers out of 6,000 takers. Due to this low success rate, the Supreme Court regularly issues an en banc resolution lowering the passing score from 75.00 to, say, 73.00, as in the case of the 2014 bar.

On the other hand, the American bar is supervised by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) which is a non-profit organization, not a bar association, and not the state or federal Supreme Court. The NCBE creates and scores the multiple-choice questions. In most states, the bar is only a two-day exam. On the first day is the written exam, and on the second day is the multiple choice test (MCQ).

This is not the time to discuss it fully, but the subject coverage of the Philipine bar covering eight major subjects is extremely broader than that of the American bar which has around four subjects only. And two of these subjects are just minor components of one Philippine bar subject. In terms of preparation and study time, the difference is huge.

By the way, the NCBE raised worrisome issues recently, because the performance of the American examinees have deteriorated. Typically, there are two exams per year in most states. In the last ten previous bar exams, the average success rate of the California bar is 48% (average number of examinees is 6,500 per bar) and that of New York bar is 58% (average of 7,700 examinees).

Particularly with respect to the 2014 bar, the US national bar success rate was 64%; with California 47% and New York 60%. The states with the highest success rates are Marianas Islands 88%, Missouri 84%, New Mexico and Iowa 83%, Kansas 82%, New Hampshire 81%, and Utah 80%. The lowest is Puerto Rico 39%. By the way, 33% of the NY examinees graduated from foreign schools such as the Philippines; California 14%.

As you can see, even their lowest in America is more than double the success rate in the Philippine bar. And they only have two days for the bar and the second day are MCQ only.

The Americans are worried about success rates from 80% to 88%? Is the USA a diploma mill of lawyers? That’s nothing compared to the Philippine 5% to 13% success rate. That’s how hard the Philippine bar is. You may be tempted to say that our examinees are not intellectually at par with the Americans but if you have systemic rate of unadjusted 5%-13% passers over the last 20 years, then that is no longer an “human intellectual level” issue but a “systemic difficult exam” issue.

Bar vs. Medical Board

The medical board exams is the comparable exam to the bar because both are given to post-graduate degree holders. In the last ten medical board exams the average was 64% success rate. In particular, for 2014, the success rate for medicine is 81% compared to 11.43% of the bar. So for 2014, only 19% failed the medicine board; only 11% passed the bar. That’s a diametrical pass-fail ratio.

But let’s look at actual head counts. Only 512 out of 2,730 failed in the medical board while only 684 passed the bar, or a mortality of 5,300 individuals out of 5,984! Remember our example at the outset of an examinee with a grade of 79 in the bar which would have been pathetic in the medical or CPA board? That person is among the top 85^th rank while 5,300 perished. That’s how impressive that grade is.

The success rate in law is so small that it is just equivalent to the failure rate in medicine. Can we say that, as a group, the barristers are not as knowledgeable as the medical graduates? Or that the Philippine barristers are not as well-equipped as their American counterparts? Or, is there something wrong with the current bar format that reflected a high systemic failure rate?

(End of Part 2)
To Be Continued

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Statistics on the 2014 Bar (Part 1)

Statistics on the 2014 Bar Examinations

(Part 1)

by
 Thads Bentulan

thadsbentulan@gmail.com

If you obtained a grade of 79% in the 2014 bar examinations, what was your ranking? The Supreme Court does not tell you that, but the truth is, you ranked 85^th place, among the top 3.06%, among the top 183 successful examinees out of the 5,984 who actually took the exams.

Now, that’s exceedingly impressive. Which is impressive - the score of the bar candidate, or the fact that we know his ranking details? The answer is: both.

Can you imagine being in the top 3.06% of what is probably the hardest bar examinations in the world? Yes, with a score of 79, you can claim to be a legal genius. Ah, yes, probably, this is the first time you ever heard of a ranking outside of the top 10. Yes, exactly right, you heard it here the first time.

In contrast, if you obtained 79% in the medical board exams, this grade would have been pathetic. See the difference in overall difficulty between the two post-graduate exams?

Look at your 2014 bar scores. Ah, you say you scored 80, and you want to know your ranking? First, I’m going to bet a peso that you didn’t get a score of 80. Why am I almost certain? Because only 114 examinees (1.91%) obtained a grade of 80.00 and above, and I don’t think you are one of those brilliant 114 out of all the 5,984. I bet you’re one of those exactly 5,300 who failed.

But you may ask, how did I know such ranking information? Probably, this is the first time in its 114-year history, since the first bar in 1901, that the statistical results is made available to an outsider. Continue reading if you want to know your rank.

In summary, originally, only 684 out of 5,984 (11.43%) passed the 2014 Bar Exam with a grade of 75.00 and above. And yes, you read it here for the first time, because the original success rate of only 11.43% was never publicly released by the Supreme Court. Yes, exactly right, you read it here the first time.

As had been the practice in recent decades, the Supreme Court lowered the passing grade from 75.00 to 73.00, thereby allowing an additional 442 (65% more) candidates to pass, totaling 1,126 (18.82%), one of the lowest in a decade. Think of this for the moment. The SC added, not 10%, nor 20%, nor 50%, but 65% more passers only to attain an upgraded success rate of 18.82%, the second lowest success rate in the last 14 years, next to 2012’s 17.76%?

   

In this article, I will compare some statistics between the Philippine and the American bar, between the bar and the medical board exams, and more detailed statistics of the 2014 bar exams results. Along the way, I will discuss why the 2014 bar exams was unusually difficult, and how algebra caused this distortion.  I will also discuss the pitfalls of the current bar exam format. And most importantly, I will share my discovery of the weakest link in the entire bar exam operational cycle that remains unrectified to this day, and may be have caused tremendous injustice to the examinees for over a century. As a sidelight, I will tell you what suggestion of mine was carried out in the subsequent 2015 bar exams. Overall, I will justify why the 2014 bar is the most physically exhausting, emotionally draining, and mentally exhausting exam in recent memory.

(End of Part 1)
- to be continued -

Part 1     Part 2     Part 3     Part 4     Part 5     Part 6     Part 7     Part 8 

Part 9     Part 10     Part 11     Part 12     Part 13     Part 14     Part 15     Part 16

Part 17

Portrait of the Street Strategist as Bar Examinee: Part 1

Portrait of the Street Strategist as Bar Examinee

Part 1

by Thads Bentulan

(streetstrategist@gmail.com)

I am the Street Strategist. And this is the portrait of the Street Strategist as bar examinee. Furthermore, I am the most famous bar examinee taking the 2014 bar. And I am going to flunk the bar. 

(This coming Sunday will be the last day of the bar exams, and by writing this, I’m wasting precious time away from the most dreaded subject – Remedial Law. And I assure the Supreme Court, that in this series, I will not mention anything about a particular answer of mine in the exams that will cause the examiner to identify that such is my notebook he is checking.)

Impressions

In this series I am going to share my impressions about the bar.  In the beginning sections, I will discuss my impressions of the bar exams in general. Then followed by my general impressions of the 2014 bar. After that, I will skim over the highlights of the each of the eight bar subjects. Then, after that, I will discuss a little of the human side of my bar experience such as what ballpens I used and some trivial personal aspects, and in the end, I would write about ideas of mine about bar reforms.

Most Famous Unknown

Of course, you know I’m just kidding, right? When I said I am the most famous bar examinee, I mean. You know I’m just kidding.

But I am the most famous unknown. Yes, that’s my tagline – the most famous unknown. This time, I’m not kidding. But you wouldn’t be able to appreciate that tagline at this stage. Stick with me for a while and you’ll soon discover that I’m saying the truth, when I say, I’m the most famous unknown, I mean.

Now, before you invest your precious time and effort in reading this portrait, I would like to warn you in advance.

Don’t expect to find gems of brilliance in here regarding the bar, therefore, don’t waste your time any longer than now nor any further from here.

I am not going to top the bar. Only a former Dean of the University of the Philippines law school, whom I have never met, thinks I am going to the top the bar, if ever I took it. This he told my brother, upon knowing my brother’s surname.

I am not going to pass the bar. The dean of my own law school, who didn’t remember me ever being in school, practically disowned me as a graduate, and advised me not to take the bar unless I re-enroll for an entire year, the fourth year at law school.

Now, I’m not even sure if both Deans are referring to the same person. See that?

I am a famous unknown. I am so famous a former Dean of UP Law knows me just by name recognition alone. 

Yet, on the other hand, I am so unknown, my own dean of law school doesn’t remember me being a student. He had to call another official of the school to vouch for me before he gives me a Certificate of No Derogatory Record.

As I said, I am not going to be a bar topnotcher and I am not going to pass the bar.  

But I am currently taking the bar. And as they say, it’s not over until the fat lady – spins the roulette.

Topnotchers

Wait, I’m not going to be a topnotcher and I’m not going to pass the bar, yet why should you continue following this portrait of mine as an examinee? I don’t know with you, I already told you not to go any further.

But what would you rather read? A masterpiece from a bar topnotcher titled “How to Pass the Bar?” What? Why would you want to read a junk tome like that? What does a topnotcher know how to pass the bar? Nothing. I tell you, he knows nothing. He doesn’t know anything about passing the bar.

He knows how to top the bar, yes, I admit that. But passing the bar? He doesn’t know a thing about it, trust me, he doesn’t.  In that book, he would you tell you about so-called tips such as “master the basics” or “have a good foundation,” and all that rubbish. It’s easy for him to say that because he is a genius and he has memorized all the basics and had a good foundation being class valedictorian at law school. In fact, that’s why he was a topnotcher.

What I mean is that he is good in teaching you, how to be a topnotcher assuming you were class valedictorian. But do you really need that? If you have mastered the basics and had a good foundation in law school, then why would you need a book on how to pass the bar? Maybe you need a book on how to top the bar instead, not how to pass it. Now, that would be a book worth reading written by a topnotcher: How to Top the Bar.” (By the way, if I’m going to top the bar, I will write exactly that book: Portrait of the Street Strategist as Bar Topnotcher. Now that’s a book that will never be written.)

Reality

In reality, what you actually need are tips on how to overcome your lack of basics and how to overcome your lack of good foundation. That’s what you need. 

For instance, since I don’t have time to study all the subjects for this bar, under Civil Law, for obligations and contracts, to overcome my weakness in the basics and foundation, I relied on a small book in 2006 called “The Perfection of Contracts.” 

This thin book simply tells you how contracts are perfected and what the different types of defective contracts are, and how to cure them.

Passers

Anyway, I was telling you bar topnotchers are not necessarily the best persons to tell you how to pass the bar.

And of course, there are those who write about how they passed the bar. That’s good really. Now, that’s the kind of advice you should be reading about. Like studying non-stop for 20 hours daily for six months, or stuff like that. 

Whew, I can’t do that. And I never did that either. Six months? I could invent the cure for dengue given that time. There’s simply too much of an opportunity cost.

But have you noticed that they tell you how they passed the bar, after they have passed the bar? It’s fait accompli. There’s already an operative fact. They tell you how they did it, after they did it. Of course, it works because it already worked. Do you see what I mean?

How about this: Why don’t you guys tell us how you are going to pass the bar, before you pass the bar, without being a class valedictorian in law school? Now, that would be interesting: Say it before you do it.

Res ipsa loquitur

Now, where were we? Ah yes, we were about to answer why you would be following this treatise of mine. 

But notice that you are still with me at this juncture. What does that mean? It means that I have justified myself. The fact that you are still following me up to this juncture is the justification why you should be following me. 

In law, there’s a maxim for that: Res ipsa loquitur – the thing speaks for itself. The reason why you should be following me is because you are now following me – res ipsa loquitur. 

Anyway, I am not going to tell you how to pass the bar because I already told you I am not going to pass it, unless the Supreme Court lowers the passing grade. But on the strength of the standard of 75%, there’s no way I’m gonna get that. Maybe 85%, not 75%. (Funny, how my friends do not that view that as a joke; but that’s a joke, okay? By the way, with 85% you can be first placer.)

The value of half-truth

But, I am now currently taking the bar, and I can share with you my impressions as an examinee. I do not profess to represent the average examinee but at least you can have a glimpse of my viewpoint. And that’s probably the value of what I’m going to tell you: Currency and reality. The bar is ongoing as we speak and I am actually the one taking it.

I cannot tell you the truth, nothing but the truth, because only God knows the whole truth. However, I can give you the half-truths. That’s the only one I know and the only one I can give.

Scenarios

On October 5, 2014, I entered the campus of the University of Santo Tomas in Manila.

As I was walking that long stretch from Gate 3 in España to the St. Raymund Building, some conversations playing out in my head.

The first is the conversation with my law dean. Not verbatim but the idea is the same.

My Dean (MD): “I don’t remember you as a student.” 

Me: “That was before you were the Dean, sir. And I barely passed my subjects. Teachers don’t remember me.”

MD: “I don’t think you are prepared. Even I have a hard time catching up with the latest changes. My advice to you is that you re-enroll in 4th year. We are maintaining a passing rate of our takers. You can bring the percentage down.”

The other conversation that ran in my head was this:

Former Dean of UP Law: “So you’re the one who talked about certiorari?”

My brother (MB): “No, sir. That was my brother.”

UP Dean: “So, where is your brother practicing now?”

MB: “He’s not a lawyer, sir, but he has a law degree.”

UP Dean: “He’s not a lawyer? I see. Your brother is a free thinker. He is creative and has original ideas. If ever he is going to take the bar, he’s going to be a topnotcher.”

Two deans. Two perceptions. One bar. One Street Strategist.

(to be continued; streetstrategist@gmail.com)

----- end of part 1 ----

Part 1 Part 2

Turnaround Strategy for Blackberry: Survival is the Reward of this Sacrilege

Blackberry, which was practically the first smartphone, and Research In Motion (later renamed to Blackberry Limited) practically invented the smartphone industry.

On Sept 23, 2013, Blackberry heard the tolling of the bell and found a buyer, Fairfax Financial.

Fairfax Financial's strategy is to break up Blackberry and sell off its assets one by one. For its patents and its cash holdings.

The death knell for the Blackberry phone rang throughout the world.

Without going deep into how he arrived at his turnaround strategy, which will soon be self-evident, even if sacrilegious, the principal consultant of Street Strategist Consulting explains the redemption of Blackberry in a single sentence.

Thads Bentulan, the principal consultant of Street Strategist Consulting, has conjured up the redemption of Blackberry, as a company, and as a product: "Blackberry Android. Survival is the reward of this sacrilege."

Yes, indeed, sacrilegious but self-evident.

Will consumers buy Blackberry with the heart of an Android OS? Why not?


PS.
After I posted this, several comments came my way.
Most of them do not agree with this turnaround strategy.
But most of their arguments have something to do with "emotional attachment" to Blackberry OS rather than a dispassionate analysis of the corporate survival of Blackberry Corp.
Many of them cannot separate the Blackberry OS from the Blackberry ownership and experience.
Remember that OS is not the end-all be-all of a service.
Blackberry Corp provides a "solution" to corporate and consumer problems. It does not matte whether Blackberry phones run on Blackberry OS or Android.
If Google bids for Blackberry, then would it be too illogical to expect a Blackberry Android? If Blackberry Android is possible then why wait til Google swallows up Blackberry Corp?
So why would Blackberry Corp be loyal to an OS and not loyal to its customers?
Blackberry's ability to service customers is independent of its OS. Therefore, the profitability of Blackberry Corp is not anchored on the Blackberry OS.
These ideas should have been self-evident upon reading the turnaround strategy above.
Blackberry has always been about providing solutions to customers, not about loyalty to an OS.