By Joseph Napoleon S. Matienzo
As confirmed in a Bar Bulletin recently released by the Supreme Court, the 2021 Bar Examinations will be conducted through a “digitalized, localized, and proctored modality.”[1] Presumably, the current pandemic may have been the catalyst in its decision to expedite this transition. In line with this significant reform made by the Supreme Court, it is also apt and timely to review the current state of formal legal education in the Philippines.
Traditionally, most legal education institutions in the Philippines resort to the “golden standard” of teaching law, i.e., the Socratic Method. Professors would assign reading materials in advance, and students need to master them before coming in to class. The professor will then test their understanding of the assigned topics. This routine was soon disrupted when the COVID-19 pandemic reached the country. Due to the lockdown and the prolonged period of class suspension, schools subsequently resorted to Open Distance Learning or ODL.
Here in San Beda College Alabang, we started using different video conferencing platforms such as Zoom and Google Meet. Realizing that the transition to online learning would be indefinite, the School of Law, in its guideline,[2] declared that it shall adopt a combination of synchronous and asynchronous learning method. Furthermore, the guideline provides that recitations would still be “conducted no differently from live classroom discussions.” The Socratic Method was to be adopted in online learning. As described in the said guideline, “synchronous learning is that method of education wherein all of the participants including the instructor, would perform their tasks in ‘sync’—all in one place and at the same time.” On the other hand, asynchronous learning “simply means that the student works through a self-guided atmosphere, also through a common platform.
According to a study of the Legal Education Board [3], “[a] majority of faculty respondents (56%) had stable internet, while only (35%) of student respondents answered the same. Significant portion of both groups (44% to 64%) had intermittent quality of internet access.” Furthermore, the most recent report[4] by the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) states that the percentage of individuals with access to the internet stands at 63.58%, while only 34% of households have internet connection. These numbers point out that internet connectivity and stability are real issues not only with the students, but also with the professors. This affects the application of the Socratic Method through synchronous online learning given such mode’s “bandwidth-intensive” nature. Given this challenge, one may ask, why is it then that recitations through synchronous learning, is still a priority given our current situation?
Bedan law professor Atty. John Jacome, explains that the Socratic Method is “student centered”, which means that “learning does not happen during the onsite or online classes”. He further explains that a teacher’s job is to draw out the knowledge from the student and that the content which needs to be studied in law is so voluminous that “if we [resort to] lecturing, we would be wasting time” and “we won’t be helping [the students] pass the bar exam”.
This correlation of the Socratic Method with passing the bar exam is also mentioned in a Philippine Law Journal article.[5] The author of the article Atty. Justin DJ. Sucgang, assistant professorial lecturer of the De La Salle University College of Law, stated that the Socratic Method remains untouchable because of its high correlation with achievement in the Bar Examinations. Explaining further the effectivity of the Socratic Method: “What makes the Socratic Method effective in facilitating learning is the immediacy of feedback—the subsequent question thrown by the instructor, the intonation, and even other non-verbal cues and gestures.” He further opined that this supposed benefit may be difficult to translate to online learning stating that “substandard internet access and reliability, employing this method certainly does not help the cause of online learning since synchronous learning is bandwidth-intensive.”
In compliance with the said guidelines by the School of Law administration, most professors implemented a combination of synchronous and asynchronous modes of learning. Nevertheless, even with such combination, the Socratic method prevails. Asynchronous learning, i.e., writing of digests, quizzes, reaction papers and other activities, serves as a supplementary mode of learning. On its face, implementing asynchronous methods of teaching may temper the problems of synchronous classes. Yet the student’s submission of these requirements would pose other challenges, again brought about by the inefficiency of our country’s internet providers. Furthermore, even in the early stages of the community quarantine, several students already had problems in having access to learning materials.
The challenge faced by legal education system today is apparent. How can legal education institutions maintain quality education given the limitations brought about by substandard internet infrastructure? The Supreme Court has already promulgated the rules on the conduct of a computerized bar examinations. Now is also an opportune time for legal education institutions to explore other methods of teaching the law. A silver lining that we may appreciate amidst this extraordinary time.◾
[1] Bar Bulletin No. 18, S. 2021 of the Supreme Court.
[2] SOL Guidelines for Online Classes , released September 16, 2020.
[3] Dimaano, A. M. (2020, April 17). Responding to a Pandemic: Refocusing on Welfare, Quality of Learning. Retrieved from Legal Education Board – Republic of the Philippines: http://leb.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/LEB-Policy-Paper-on-the-Pandemic-Response-1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1lbPhd3g6eXvMwJWL_dDd
[4] Department of Information and Communications Technology. (2019, December). Consolidated ICT Infrastructure Data. Retrieved from Department of Information and Communications Technology – Republic of the Philippines: https://dict.gov.ph/ictstatistics/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/NTC-data-as-of-December-2019.pdf
[5] Sucgang, J. D. (2020, August). Tipping Point: Will this Pandemic Mainstream Online Learning in Philippine Legal Education? Philippine Law Journal, 93(Special Online Feature), 183-197.