Confession of an examinee
Confession of an examinee
By Dennis Cesar Alba Bautista
Inquirer
Last updated 08:56am (Mla time) 08/20/2006
http://opinion.inq7.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view_article.php?article_id=16252
Published on page A12 of the August 20, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
AFTER graduation, I enrolled at the Pentagon Review Center on España Boulevard in Manila for the comprehensive review course and at the R.A. Gapuz Review Center Manila for the final coaching course in preparation for the June 11-12, 2006 nursing licensure exams.
I also attended review classes at the Inress Review Center on C.M. Recto Avenue in Manila. Inress is considered the in-house review school of the Philippine College of Health Sciences Inc. (PCHS).
Review classes of Inress are held at PCHS. As graduates of PCHS, we’re encouraged by the school to take our review course only at Inress.
On or about June 6, 2006, I went to my school and learned that Inress would conduct a “final coaching” on June 8 and June 9 in the morning at SM Manila. So, on those dates, I went to the mall.
Before starting the “final coaching,” George Cordero, whom I know as the president and owner of PCHS and Inress, and president of the Philippine Nurses Association, welcomed all of us present and made a roll call of the different schools and colleges he had invited.
Topnotchers
Cordero said, “Last year our passing rate was high. Last sem our rate was average but we had four topnotchers. This time I want a high passing rate again and many on the top 10. If you’re on the top 10, I will return your tuition. But the doctors [who took up nursing] are excluded.”
Afterwards, Cordero told us that the topics included in the final coaching were only psychiatric nursing and medical-surgical nursing. Psychiatric nursing will be on the first day while medical-surgical nursing will be on the second.
In substance, he told us, “These are the items included because these are the difficult parts of the exam. You can handle the remaining three topics because you studied them at the review classes. We have 500 questions in psychiatric nursing, 100 questions will come out in the test.”
Then, the “final coaching” proceeded. The 500 questions were projected on the screen through a Powerpoint presentation. A review instructor read each question and the four possible answer-choices as they flashed on the screen. After reading the possible answers, the instructor would tell us the correct one, and, correspondingly, the correct answer on the screen was highlighted.
Keyword
At times, when the instructor told us what the correct answer was to a particular question, the crowd reacted loudly, impressing on the instructor that the answer given might be wrong. And so the instructor would just tell us “Basta, that’s the answer. If you see that keyword, that’s what you should answer.”
On June 9, Cordero again welcomed all of us and made a roll call of the different schools and colleges he had invited. He told us, “For medical-surgical nursing, we only have 300 questions because you discussed the others at your review centers.”
Just like the previous day, every time the instructor heard a loud reaction from the crowd when it gave the correct answer, the instructor said, “That will be your answer when you see the keyword.”
During the two-day final coaching, some of my friends were able to write down the questions and situations and the suggested answers that were flashed on the screen. At first, I took down some notes, but because I got tired writing I decided to just listen. Later, I asked my classmates and friends for photocopies of their notes or I had their notes photocopied. So, after the final coaching, I was able to get a photocopy of the questions and situations and their suggested answers.
On June 11, the first day of the nursing board exams, I was surprised when I took the exams because around 25 items in Test III (medical-surgical) were similar to the questions that were flashed during the final coaching at SM Manila. The situations and the names of persons given in the exam were exactly the same as those flashed on the screen at SM Manila. When I went home, I checked my photocopies and confirmed that the items given at the exam were indeed similar.
Similar
On June 12, the second day of the nursing board exams, I was again surprised that in Test V (psychiatric nursing) around 90 items were similar to the ones which were flashed on the screen during the final coaching at the SM Manila cinema.
The situation and the names of persons given in the exam were exactly the same as the questions flashed on the screen during our final coaching. When I went home, I again checked my photocopies and confirmed that the items given at the exam were indeed similar.
While waiting for the results of the board exams, I learned from the news that there was a leakage in the board exams. So I texted some of my classmates, fearing that we might be asked by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) to retake the board exams.
The following day, I met a friend of mine and we talked about the news and the leakage during the board exams and the possibility that these would be nullified. My friend suggested that we ask Cordero about it so that we can have a reliable source. My friend gave me the number of Cordero and we texted him, asking about the news and the possibility of retaking the exam.
I was surprised that he called back my number. I received his call. He angrily said, “Who is this?” I was surprised and caught off-guard by his call. I said “I am Cesar Alba of Bataan Group (my knowledge is that Bataan Group refers to the schools in Bataan, which have the Inress Review Center as their in-house review school).
Cordero said, “I didn’t see it. What did it say?” So, I told him that the news said there was a possibility of the board exams being nullified and of the examinees retaking them. He replied, “I don’t know anything about that.” So I said, “Sir, if you want, I can forward to you other messages that I received.” He said, “Sige, please.”
After my first talk with Cordero over the phone, I continued to text him and forwarded to him messages I had received about the issue. For several days after our first conversation, he would call me after he received my text messages. I was surprised that he would call me, but it gave me the impression that he trusted me.
Dinner
On several occasions that Cordero called me, he said the following: “Hindi pwedeng mangyari ang retake kasi malaking gastos ’yun;” “I will schedule a dinner with members of the PRC and Board of Nursing;” “I will meet with owners of review centers. Don’t they want the NCLEX [National Council Licensure Examination] to be held here next year?”
I said to him, “Sir, be careful, you might be blackmailed.” Cordero said, “No, I have a lawyer. Gapuz is pointing at me because a PCHS student gave him the materials. The evidence that the PRC holds is the photocopy of the handwritten materials from my student. Walang kwentang bata ’yan. Do you know who the materials are really for? For my child [son].”
I replied, “Oo nga po, sir. Salamat po at hindi niyo ipinagdamot sa amin,” I then asked him, “Sir, bakit kaya niya kailangan ibigay ’yun?” Cordero said, “Eh para ano pa, eh di sa pera.” “Balita ko nga masama ang loob sa akin ng member ng BON na nagbigay, eh. Pag nagkaipitan naman, hindi ko sasabihin na siya. Sasabihin ko lang na may nagbigay sa akin, hindi ko kilala tapos binigyan ko kunwari ng P20,000.”
When I went to PCHS, I learned from our school registrar that the student who was mentioned by Cordero as the one who gave the photocopy to [Ray] Gapuz, [owner of a network of review centers] was Pamela Ortega, a second-courser student.
(Excerpts of the affidavit read by Bautista on Wednesday at the Senate hearing on the nursing exams leakage. He is a BS Nursing graduate of the Philippine College of Health Sciences Inc.)
FROM : http://opinion.inq7.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view_article.php?article_id=16252
By Dennis Cesar Alba Bautista
Inquirer
Last updated 08:56am (Mla time) 08/20/2006
http://opinion.inq7.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view_article.php?article_id=16252
Published on page A12 of the August 20, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
AFTER graduation, I enrolled at the Pentagon Review Center on España Boulevard in Manila for the comprehensive review course and at the R.A. Gapuz Review Center Manila for the final coaching course in preparation for the June 11-12, 2006 nursing licensure exams.
I also attended review classes at the Inress Review Center on C.M. Recto Avenue in Manila. Inress is considered the in-house review school of the Philippine College of Health Sciences Inc. (PCHS).
Review classes of Inress are held at PCHS. As graduates of PCHS, we’re encouraged by the school to take our review course only at Inress.
On or about June 6, 2006, I went to my school and learned that Inress would conduct a “final coaching” on June 8 and June 9 in the morning at SM Manila. So, on those dates, I went to the mall.
Before starting the “final coaching,” George Cordero, whom I know as the president and owner of PCHS and Inress, and president of the Philippine Nurses Association, welcomed all of us present and made a roll call of the different schools and colleges he had invited.
Topnotchers
Cordero said, “Last year our passing rate was high. Last sem our rate was average but we had four topnotchers. This time I want a high passing rate again and many on the top 10. If you’re on the top 10, I will return your tuition. But the doctors [who took up nursing] are excluded.”
Afterwards, Cordero told us that the topics included in the final coaching were only psychiatric nursing and medical-surgical nursing. Psychiatric nursing will be on the first day while medical-surgical nursing will be on the second.
In substance, he told us, “These are the items included because these are the difficult parts of the exam. You can handle the remaining three topics because you studied them at the review classes. We have 500 questions in psychiatric nursing, 100 questions will come out in the test.”
Then, the “final coaching” proceeded. The 500 questions were projected on the screen through a Powerpoint presentation. A review instructor read each question and the four possible answer-choices as they flashed on the screen. After reading the possible answers, the instructor would tell us the correct one, and, correspondingly, the correct answer on the screen was highlighted.
Keyword
At times, when the instructor told us what the correct answer was to a particular question, the crowd reacted loudly, impressing on the instructor that the answer given might be wrong. And so the instructor would just tell us “Basta, that’s the answer. If you see that keyword, that’s what you should answer.”
On June 9, Cordero again welcomed all of us and made a roll call of the different schools and colleges he had invited. He told us, “For medical-surgical nursing, we only have 300 questions because you discussed the others at your review centers.”
Just like the previous day, every time the instructor heard a loud reaction from the crowd when it gave the correct answer, the instructor said, “That will be your answer when you see the keyword.”
During the two-day final coaching, some of my friends were able to write down the questions and situations and the suggested answers that were flashed on the screen. At first, I took down some notes, but because I got tired writing I decided to just listen. Later, I asked my classmates and friends for photocopies of their notes or I had their notes photocopied. So, after the final coaching, I was able to get a photocopy of the questions and situations and their suggested answers.
On June 11, the first day of the nursing board exams, I was surprised when I took the exams because around 25 items in Test III (medical-surgical) were similar to the questions that were flashed during the final coaching at SM Manila. The situations and the names of persons given in the exam were exactly the same as those flashed on the screen at SM Manila. When I went home, I checked my photocopies and confirmed that the items given at the exam were indeed similar.
Similar
On June 12, the second day of the nursing board exams, I was again surprised that in Test V (psychiatric nursing) around 90 items were similar to the ones which were flashed on the screen during the final coaching at the SM Manila cinema.
The situation and the names of persons given in the exam were exactly the same as the questions flashed on the screen during our final coaching. When I went home, I again checked my photocopies and confirmed that the items given at the exam were indeed similar.
While waiting for the results of the board exams, I learned from the news that there was a leakage in the board exams. So I texted some of my classmates, fearing that we might be asked by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) to retake the board exams.
The following day, I met a friend of mine and we talked about the news and the leakage during the board exams and the possibility that these would be nullified. My friend suggested that we ask Cordero about it so that we can have a reliable source. My friend gave me the number of Cordero and we texted him, asking about the news and the possibility of retaking the exam.
I was surprised that he called back my number. I received his call. He angrily said, “Who is this?” I was surprised and caught off-guard by his call. I said “I am Cesar Alba of Bataan Group (my knowledge is that Bataan Group refers to the schools in Bataan, which have the Inress Review Center as their in-house review school).
Cordero said, “I didn’t see it. What did it say?” So, I told him that the news said there was a possibility of the board exams being nullified and of the examinees retaking them. He replied, “I don’t know anything about that.” So I said, “Sir, if you want, I can forward to you other messages that I received.” He said, “Sige, please.”
After my first talk with Cordero over the phone, I continued to text him and forwarded to him messages I had received about the issue. For several days after our first conversation, he would call me after he received my text messages. I was surprised that he would call me, but it gave me the impression that he trusted me.
Dinner
On several occasions that Cordero called me, he said the following: “Hindi pwedeng mangyari ang retake kasi malaking gastos ’yun;” “I will schedule a dinner with members of the PRC and Board of Nursing;” “I will meet with owners of review centers. Don’t they want the NCLEX [National Council Licensure Examination] to be held here next year?”
I said to him, “Sir, be careful, you might be blackmailed.” Cordero said, “No, I have a lawyer. Gapuz is pointing at me because a PCHS student gave him the materials. The evidence that the PRC holds is the photocopy of the handwritten materials from my student. Walang kwentang bata ’yan. Do you know who the materials are really for? For my child [son].”
I replied, “Oo nga po, sir. Salamat po at hindi niyo ipinagdamot sa amin,” I then asked him, “Sir, bakit kaya niya kailangan ibigay ’yun?” Cordero said, “Eh para ano pa, eh di sa pera.” “Balita ko nga masama ang loob sa akin ng member ng BON na nagbigay, eh. Pag nagkaipitan naman, hindi ko sasabihin na siya. Sasabihin ko lang na may nagbigay sa akin, hindi ko kilala tapos binigyan ko kunwari ng P20,000.”
When I went to PCHS, I learned from our school registrar that the student who was mentioned by Cordero as the one who gave the photocopy to [Ray] Gapuz, [owner of a network of review centers] was Pamela Ortega, a second-courser student.
(Excerpts of the affidavit read by Bautista on Wednesday at the Senate hearing on the nursing exams leakage. He is a BS Nursing graduate of the Philippine College of Health Sciences Inc.)
FROM : http://opinion.inq7.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view_article.php?article_id=16252
hay nako.. basahin nyo nga. Parang napaka imposible na isang reviewee eh pagsasabihan ni cordero ng mga sekreto...
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:40 PM
Mr. Bautista nag tour ka pala sa mga review center!
Pumasa ka ba?
Posted by
Anonymous |
9:36 PM
here's teh truth kahit tingnan niyo pa sa list ng passers...di limabas ang pangaln niyang si dennis cezar bautista...bagsak yan...nangangailangan ng pera yan kasi naswindle yan ng 400,000 kaya malamang nagpabayad yan...
Posted by
Anonymous |
12:09 AM
But isn't it though na pumiyok siya kaya nga lumabas ang issue ng leakage? So how can we say na nangailangan ng pera? To begin with hindi pa nya alam ang result nung pumiyok siya, one of the few ata siya sa Pilipinas na may konsensiya. At saka natural retake gusto ng hindi pumasa, ano ba choice nila eh di mag exam uli.
Posted by
Anonymous |
1:49 AM
anong dahil s knya,lumabas ang isyu ng leakage?nku,dong, 2days after ng exams,lumabas n may leakage tlga.
Posted by
Anonymous |
2:09 AM
tigilan nyo na yan at walang nagagawang maganda sa pilipinas yan.kung bagsak tayo lets just accept the fact. kung pumasa naman tayo ng milagro, makonsensya tayo. retake na kayo.
Posted by
Anonymous |
6:32 AM
THIS IS THE QUESTION. BKIT MAY MGA BUMAGSAK YET THEY WERE ABLE TO GET HOLD OF THE LEAKAGE? ANG SAGOT DYAN: THE LEAKAGE FROM TEST 3 AND 5 WAS NOT ENOUGH FOR ONE EXAMINEE TO PASS THE BLOODY BOARD EXAM. COME TO THINK OF IT! THE FACT THAT WE STILL PASSED DEPSITE THE STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF PRC THAT MEANS WE'RE REALLY THAT GOOD HAHAHAHA IMAGINE INALIS NA NGA UNG LEAKED QUESTIONS PUMASA PA RIN TYO. GRABE ANG GALING TLGA NATIN PASSERS!
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:22 AM
If dennis bautista is really concern in changing the system or at least cleanse the system sana nung araw pa lang na ipinakita ung leakage sa kanya sana he had taken actions para mapigilan ang leakage bkit kelangan pa niya patagalin ito at sana before nilabas ang result ng exam nagreklamo na din cya..Siguro he expected to pass and to be one of the noptochers kaya hndi cya nagsumbong......Nakakatawa kc halos lahat ng review centers inikot niya na......bkit kaya? Nagaantay cyang bigyan ng leakage?!!! tsk..tsk...Kung ako nasa position (senator) pinaimbestigahan na din kita!
Posted by
Anonymous |
9:44 AM
TAMA!!! DAPAT THE CREDIBILITY OF THE WITNESSES SHOULD ALSO BE INVESTIGATED. LAHAT YANG MGA KUMANTA MAY VESTED INTEREST YAN. ITSURA PALANG NI BAUTISTA HALATA NMANG IBA ANG HABOL EH.
Posted by
Anonymous |
10:37 AM
hay nako the fact still remains... na sa 3 documents, 2 from PRC at sa kanya e c cordero ang nadadawit... hindi nyo ba nakita? and issue d2 e talagang dnaya tayo... una dahil wala tayong leakage material at pangalawa ung sa stat treatment... at dahil dito hindi tayo makausad... dapat lahat tau e sa PRC, BON at kay cordero magalit dahil sila ang naging dahilan ng paghihirap natin....
Posted by
Anonymous |
2:57 PM
TO ALL HONEST BOARDPASSERS!
U N I T E !
GET UP! STAND UP!
LET US FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS!
LET JUSTICE PREVAIL!
Posted by
Anonymous |
3:58 PM
June '06 passers: let us not waste our precious brain cells to negative comments instead let us use them productively. let us fight for our rights! let us unite! U N I T E! we are not the culprits! we are the victims! we will demand JUSTICE!
Posted by
Anonymous |
4:06 PM
Eh kaya nga ata bumagsak dahil mas mahusay sa mga test questions na inalis. Hindi ako yun ha? May license ako.friend ko cry to death kasi parang hindi na ata maka afford retake for now, ni wala nga pamasahe papunta Manila. Eh si Bautista, remember nung nagreview sya, hindi pa nya alam iyun ang lalabas, paano sya magrereklamo before the exam.. I am trying to be objective looking at all sides. Ako for the truth, I admire Bautista if he is telling the truth,yung mga nakapasa walang leakage dapat hindi dina down ang hindi nakapasa kasi you never know kung talaga lang poor test takers pero pag nakapasa sila mahusay din naman magtrabaho, At this time, they dont need that kind of attitude from the ones who passed lalo they tried their best./
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:32 PM
Dapat ipunish lang yung nagleak. Kung inoffer sa kin yung tinapay bakit hindi ko tatangapin. From what I understand, hindi nga alam nung examineess yun ipinaflush sa screen iyun din ang lalabas, di ba sabi ni Bautista, minsan akala mga nagrereview hindi iyun ang tamang sagot pero they were told basta iyun ang sagot, eh di hindi rin nila alam .
Posted by
Anonymous |
8:47 PM
Ang issue naman talaga dito hindi yung kung kayang ipasa uli ang retest. Dahil kung kinaya nung una eh di kakayanin uli, that is provided wala talaga leakage. The real issue, let us admit it is yung time loss, income potential loss and most of all frustrations hindi kayang bayaran. Eh kung kayang magbayad ng 7million for a leakage bakit kaya hindi si Cordero at yung mga nagleak ang magpikap ng retake fees, pamasahe, boarding fess, etc etc etc plus dadagan ng potential income loss. Come up with a figure, very wild ang solution na ito pero malay nyo rin. New Jersey ako ayaw na rin tangap nurses galing jan, paano na kaya pamangkin ko who passed it with flying colors no leakage. Eh di panibagong padala na naman. On the other hand, Anak ng co worker ko nakakuha ng hand written test questions, malay nga ba nya iyun ang lalalabas sa test? Kasi kahit wala yun, sa husay nya talaga ipapasa pa rin nya. Paano yan kasama ba sya sa found guilty, she did not even ask for it, it sort of just landed on her lap.
Posted by
Anonymous |
1:11 AM
sa poster 13, yap tama ka
un nga e, at first they didnt knew na leakage yun pero afterwards? hindi mo pwdng sabihing lucky lang sila to get that kasi lumabas na ang issue ng leakage... tolerating the mistake is like doing the mistake din...
sa totoo lng, dapat yang mga nag-leak ang dapat parusahan... sa PRC, alam na nilang may leakage, dapat di na nila pinalaki ang issue at nung una pa lang e nagretake without releasing the results...
sa computation kasi 1/9 lang psych e panu kung un ang forte mo? e d parang useless lang din na nag-aral ko ng psych kahit wala kang leakage...
at sure ba na itong results reflects na pumasa ka? minodify nga nila ung stat treatment dba?
either way basta sana maparusahan ang mga nagpasimuno ng leakage na yan... peste
Posted by
Anonymous |
1:20 AM
I salute yung nagsabi na dun sa mga nakapasa na walang leakage, sana naman tratuhin nyong tao rin ang mga hindi nakapasa. Kase malay nyo kung bumagsak yon dahil sa stat treatment at hindi dahil merong leakage? Bakit mga bagsak ang bineblame nyo? Magalit kayo sa PRC kasi ginagawa kayong puppet, di nyo ba napapansin, mga passers?
Posted by
Anonymous |
10:00 AM
Sa akin lang sana wag nyo naman parusahan mga passers dahil sa retake na yan, dahil hindi naman lahat nag cheat. Kahit nga yung nag cheat dami bumagsak kasi umasa lang dun sa leakage nila. Sa mga bumagsak pray ko pumasa kayo sa december buti pa kayo alam nyo gagawin nyo.
Wala kayong karapatan na sabihin na yung mga pumasa rin eh.. hindi sigurado pumasa dahil inalis na 20 questions sa test 3 and inalis test 5. Sign of immaturity yan ganyan dahilan. We deserve our glory and you know it. Dahil kahit ano pa computation nyo, pumasa kami kahit inalis yan. Kung forte mo eh psych lang.. eh wag no idahilan yun, hindi lang naman exam eh psych. HIndi ako galit sa mga bumagsak, bakit ako magagalit, may burden na rin sila. Pero wag naman sana masakit magsalita yung iba dyan na hindi kami deserving pumasa porke iba na computation. Ibig mo sabihin kayo competent, yung pasado hindi? dba?
Galit ako sa mga nagkalat ng leakage, sino man sila. Trabaho naman talaga ng review centers magbigay ng tips sa reviewees nila, kung may lumabas na 1 or 5 eh d swerte naman nila d ba. Pero wag naman sana BIGLA MAGING RIGHTEOUS YUNG MGA LUMABAS, na kamo sila ay victims, pwede ba may bayad final coaching. Ikaw nga dennis BAUTISTA, NAKA 2 OR 3 KA PA REVIEW CENTERS, kung hindi ka naghahanap ng leak ano pa dahilan mo?
Mahirap sabihin na kung pasado ka ngyon pwede mo i prove ulit sa retake. Ang yabang mo naman kung ganun. Yung sobra nga talino hindi alam ang results eh kahit gaano pa sya nadalian. So ibig mo sabihin pag hindi namin kinaya sa retake nag leak kami? Sobra naman kayo magsalita. Tandaan nyo, kahit gaano kayo katalino, gaano ka prepared, sa huli ang binilang lang eh yung araw ng exam mismo.HIndi nyo kami makukuha sa hamon na ganyan, porke takot or baka bumagsak? at least na prove nanamin sa una pa lang. wala na kami kailangan patunayan.
Posted by
Anonymous |
3:28 PM
For those who failed & those who passed, pare pareho lang tayong pinaiikot ng mga iyan. Let's not forget that no one can be prosecuted unless found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Kung tingin nyo me kasalanan ang PRC, IMHO, they have been fair to all. Bagsak na nag pwede pa mag retake eh, ayaw nyo pa ba yon? Remember this, me hidden motives din ang pro re-take groups, iba iba sila ng pakay so don't be fooled. UST for instance, gusto tumaas passing rate at top notchers. Bumagsak daw cum laude nila e. Malakas loob nila kasi me in-house silang reviewers na magaling at free sa re-takers nila. Meron din groups na gusto iba umupo sa board at PNA, para sila naman ang malakas. Don't watch ch 2, isa pang bias yan at hindi fair ang treatment. Watch ch 7 instead, mas fair to all ang reporting. Don't believe on heresays, we need proof to believe. To those who failed, again, be happy with the PRC's decision.
Posted by
Anonymous |
7:18 PM