Innovations I’d Like To See In The Bar Exams

We have seen the MCQ come and go. Prior to that, we have seen memorandum writing and opinion writing too in the 2011 bar exams.

These innovations were supposedly introduced in order to increase the bar exams passing rate. Interestingly though, and perhaps even ironically, even though the 2011 bar exams saw a passing rate of 33%, the highest in years, the format was abandoned in the 2012 bar exams, at least the memorandum and opinion writing part.

MCQ or multiple choice question had a run for another two years but it was abandoned in the 2015 bar exams.

We cannot say for sure why the MCQ was abandoned. A lot of people say that when it was first used in 2011, the MCQs were fairly easy but in 2012 it became unfairly hard. Which is absurd because people say it is fair if it’s easy but unfair if it’s hard.

Anyway, most would argue that MCQ is not suited for the bar exams simply because it’s removing the “lawyer” in the examinee. In the MCQ type exam, the examinee cannot defend his answer and only the right answer is merited a point. Unlike in an essay type question where even the wrong answer or an answer different from what the examiner had in mind can be merited points if the examinee was able to defend his answer logically and with legal basis. This is the essence of lawyering after all, defending your client’s cause even if you are in a losing case.

Well, I’m glad we are moving on from MCQs. However, there are some innovations that I’d really like to be done to improve or at least change how the bar exams are conducted. Perhaps the goal should be to make it reasonable for the examinee and not necessarily to increase the passing rate.

1. Decentralized Bar Exams

Of all the innovations I listed here, this is perhaps the least likely to happen. Let us face it, the foremost reason why this cannot be done is the fear of leakages. The bar chairman can only trust so many people. Once the bar exam questions are in transit to the satellite bar sites, there’s no telling what’s going to happen to them.

But, having multiple bar sites will definitely help a lot of examinees. When I took the bar, it was really inconvenient for me to be taking it in Manila. I came from Baguio and I am not used to the Manila weather. Examinees from Mindanao also complained about the distance they had to travel. Add to that the anxiety of being thrown in unfamiliar territory and then getting to know the place. Not all of us can afford to stay for months in Manila before taking the bar. Most of us will have to go there during the bar month itself. I truly believe that this is one of the reasons why a lot of examinees from provincial schools fail the bar. Physical preparedness is as vital as mental preparedness in the bar. And for examinees coming from outside Manila, a lot of their wind is taken away by the cost of travel alone.

2. Surplus Questions

There are at least 20 questions being asked per bar subject. And you have to answer all of them. But what if you can choose the questions to answer say out of the 25 questions, you are only allowed to answer 20 questions. You can choose which 20 questions to answer. Thus, you can avoid the 5 questions which you think you cannot answer properly. You will only be graded for the 20 questions you answered and if you answered more, you will not be merited any extra point.

This, I believe, is a good innovation. This may be absurd to some and for the purist out there this is an insult to the bar exams.

But this innovation is premised on the generally accepted principle that not even the smartest lawyers can know all the laws. Such too is the case of the ordinary examinee. By giving the examinee a leeway, you can gauge the ability of the student and at the same time give him breathing room. You can also judge the student’s performance by the type of questions he chose and the questions he avoided. If he answered the 20 questions correctly he gets a 100% rating. But just imagine if he is forced to answer all and he happens to answer wrong the 5 questions he avoided. That would just be an 80% rating for him. See the difference?

Will this make bad lawyers? I do not think so. Even lawyers avoid taking cases which involve difficult questions of law and we see nothing wrong with that.

Anyway, I admit there’s a lot of nuances in this suggestion so a lot of brainstorming should be put into it before it can be integrated or even considered. (I would love to hear your thoughts on this in the comments section below).

3. Lesser Bar Subjects

There are currently 8 bar subjects. Each bar subject has a multitude of subtopics. If you have a copy of the latest bar syllabus on each subject, you’ll notice just how broad the scope is. Compare that to the one page syllabus of the various State bar exams in the United States. In fact, most State bar exams in the U.S. only have one one-page syllabus for the entire bar exams. Unlike here, where there is a multi-page syllabus for each bar subject.

The bar exams is simply too broad. How about if we just narrow it down to several subjects. Or, retain the 8 subjects but only include a few subtopics. For instance, in Civil Law, just include Obligations and Contracts, Family Code, Property, and Succession. Or something like that. Point is, we don’t have to include that many subjects or subtopics. In this way, the examinee would  not have to unduly read all of those.

With the current scope of the bar exams, it almost appears like the bar exams is just a test to find out who knows the most laws or legal provisions but not necessarily who may be a good lawyer.

I really see no point of having a multi-page syllabus. We all know that they will just be picking a handful from that syllabus anyway. The examiner may not even follow the syllabus! On the other hand, there is really nothing wrong of having a narrowed down scope in the bar exams. The goal anyway is to test the wit and argumentation skill of the examinee and how he uses the law in resolving a legal issue.

4. Retake on failed subjects only

There should be a rule where if you fail due only to a particular bar subject, then you should only retake that particular subject where you failed. Or more liberally, if you fail in two subjects, then just retake those two subjects. If you still fail, then that’s the time that you must retake the entire bar exams again.

This is to give the examinee the benefit of the doubt. Some examinees fail the bar not really because they do not know the law but simply because when they took a particular exam, they were not feeling well. But regardless of the examinee’s failure, I think it is reasonable to give him this leeway if we’re talking of just one or two failed subjects.

5. Make February the bar month

Yeah, make the love month the bar month. Why not? Especially so that there’s a already a shift of the academic calendar (August-May).

February is ideal because the weather is still cool, typhoons are lesser, and that will give the examinees more time to review.

Well, there you go. Those are some innovations I could think of. I was actually thinking of suggesting that the bar exams should be made digital too. But then I realized that may create certain problems. So I guess let’s stick to the written exams.

How about you? What innovations would you like to see? Do you want the bar to have an oral exams portion? Would you like the MCQs to return? Or legal opinion writing? Memorandum writing? How about a debate-like exams where you are rated according to how you argue a certain issue?

Well, write your comments below and hopefully the powers that be might read this page and hopefully consider our suggestions the next time they think of innovating the bar exams.

*Image used in this post is originally from ”