PhiLSAT exam

To continue PhiLSAT or not?

The Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the Legal Education Board (LEB) to explain its memorandum centralizing entrance examinations in law schools. The high court required the LEB to answer a petition filed by retired Makati Regional Trial Court Judge Oscar Pimentel questioning the conduct of the Philippine Law School Admission Test (PhiLSAT).

The petition questioned the constitutionality of Republic Act 7662, the Legal Education Reform Act, which became the basis for the issuance of LEB Memorandum Order No. 7 for the conduct of PhiLSAT.

Pimentel, a member of the University of Sto. Tomas faculty of Civil Law, urged the high court to stop the implementation of the LEB order.

The first PhiLSAT examination was held on April 16 in seven pilot sites: Baguio City, Metro Manila, Legazpi City, Cebu City, Iloilo City, Davao City and Cagayan de Oro. See complete list of PhiLSAT passers here.

A total of 6,575 out of 8,074 pass the first ever Philippine Law School Admission Test. For the first PhiLSAT, the passing grade was adjusted to 45% as consideration because the examinations have limited review materials. 

What do you think should be the decision of the SC? Should the entrance exams be centralized?

 

 

Click here to go know more about PhiLSAT registration. For PhiLSAT reviewer, visit www.uplae.com.ph

 

12 thoughts on “To continue PhiLSAT or not?

  1. for aspiring law students who didnt pass the philsat on april 16 , in consideration for the pilot examinees should allow to enroll in law school bec. some of the passer do enter only to laW SCHOOL BECAUSE THEY JUST WANTED TO. Some aspiring students didnt pass the philsat but they want to become a lawyer as for this should allow them to enroll.

    1. Nice points you got there. Since this is a pilot exam, those who didnt pass can still enroll in the law school they prefer. It is the prerogative of the school to accept them or give them another set of exams.

  2. The Supreme Court should be the one to administer entrance examinations, if needed. Why is LEB conducting the exam when it is not directly linked to the Supreme Court itself?

    1. Legal Education Board (LEB) is mandated by law to administer the legal education system in the country in a manner consistent with the provisions of R.A. 7662

  3. Admission tests should be administered, but I don’t think it is the LEB who should be in charge of that. It would be better if the law schools themselves develop a standardized exam to determine who has the aptitude to go to law school.

  4. The PhilSAT is useful and will allow potential students to gauge whether or not they are fit to attend law schools. Better to find out earlier than later.

  5. The intent is good, but I think the exam fee is too high. If they want only qualified students to enroll, then let the exam be based on merit, not on the ability to pay the fee.

  6. For me, it’s not a question of whether or not it is constitutional, but whether or not it will help produce better lawyers.

  7. They should have a way for the exam fee to be waived in the case of poor but deserving students. UPCAT has that, I think PhiLSAT should, too.

  8. PhiLSAT is a Money Generating Mechanism to increase funds.
    but what will happen to incoming second years on their first year A.Y. 2017-2018 they flunked the same PhiLSAT exam?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *