IN CASE A PROFESSOR OF LAW FAILED TO INFORM HIS STUDENT IN HIS GRADING SYSTEM, IS IT THE OBLIGATION OF THE STUDENT TO ASKED THE SAID PROFESSOR?

NOTA BENE: i raise this question because the Dean of our college of law, said it in defense of a professor who flunk us in one of the our review class.

teachers (includes professors in a law school) has a contractual obligation to the school of which he/she is teaching, hence, in the language of the supreme court in U.E. v.s. Jaden, it is acting as an agent of the school. Logically speaking, it is not a defense not even of your dean to excuse the said professor, by simply asking the method of which he used to evaluate you and your classmates are nothing more but an exercise to inquire in coming up with a grade. The school can compel the teacher to explain and even impose a system of evaluation and grading if they wanted to. With regard to the question, a student may deem it as an obligation to inquire/ask a professor in the manner they were evaluated, and a professor must in the very first day of the class must inform them of his grading method.

thanks for the reply.

yep, i came across that case in our Legal Ethics. i certainly agree with what you said. in fact, all those arguments were raised during our informal talk with our Dean. but sad to say that they've never given us the chance to redeem ourselves. we even raised the notion that "if they (teacher & dean) believe that we are stupid then by all means give us a removal so that we will see whose right or wrong."

i also believe that that obligation is on the teacher to inform the grading system. but with the reply of our dean, it would seem that the absence of the teacher to inform the student of his grading system it is construed against the student. wtdfck!

FYI: the teacher who flunk us in our review class only handled our endterm. the prelim and midterm was handled by another teacher who gave us our grades using the correct method of computation of grades.

I share the same sentiment as a law student some teachers are mere ego trippers fully knowing that they are "masters" of their respective classroom, but some law professors are not up to the standard of teaching if we will imposed teaching evaluation onto them, you may fully exercise your right to confront and appeal to the next tier but considering that this will further cause animosity, it may push you and your classmate between-a-devil-and-a -deep-blue sea scenario and relaying in your statement it is quite clear that the dean and your prof are singing the same tune, you may have a paper victory in the end but what if the same prof eventually handle the same subject and that is more than double jeopardy, it is double death penalty to you and your classmates if this happen. sadly, we know the processes and procedures and are govern by them, we may sometimes cry wolf but to the dean and some professors, where are novitiate to the legal profession and must obliged to the rules, try not to get it into your nerve though it is really affecting you and your classmates, but remember there is always poetic justice, as one general said, better lose a battle than losing a war.

I agree there are ego trippers. My professor (now SC Justice) failed me in evidence apparently because I made an argument with him.Unfortunately, when I took the evidence for the second time, I was not spared again because he was again my professor.He flunked me again.

It did not move me to stop my law school. Now, I'm a practicing litigation lawyer. My TOR may not be a good one because of my failing marks. What matters most is you passed the bar. I have classmates who are dean's listers but did not make it to the bar.

Good luck on your studies.

@ red pula: your points are well taken. and you are very correct when you said that we are in a precarious situation - the-devil-and-the-deep-blue-sea. they've already prejudged us and decisions were already made before this controversy happened.

what made us oozing with anger was that fact that we were not given due process. patent injustice was done to us! and that was thru grave abuse of discretion.

the funny thing was, during the informal talk with our dean, "penersonal" nya ang talk at he asked my classmate, "do you believe you can pass the bar?" my classmate replied: "of course, sir." he replied: if you can pass the bar, then lets see if you can answer me, question is, how do you perfect the contract of correspondence?" my classmate, fortunately, substantially answered his question correctly.

my point is, why do we have to resort to that kind of points/questions well in fact that's beside the point? lets go back to the issue of whether or not our professor was correct to use the method of computation? that's the only issue!

moreover, the irony was after that q&a from our dean, that classmate of mine asked him "sir, what is tort?" to our surprise, our dean was mum. he couldn't answer that is why he just said, "here we g again." (fcku!!!)

as ive told my classmates, article 19 of the new civil code, as amemnded, states that "Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith."

I rest our case.



@ lawdesign: your words are inspiration to us. may the good Lord shine a light on you and bless you in your practice of law.

No worry if you flunk as a Law student but worry if you flunk as a barrister.