It has to go in a custom footer (not html module) to work*. The source, which also has some interesting thoughts on the desirability of disabling right click, is below: http://javascript.about.com/library/blnoright.htm *Using in a custom footer:replace all code in xslt box with this: ]]>

« Home | DoLE stops nurses’ oath-taking » | CA asked to reconsider nursing board ruling » | Nursing groups seek reconsideration of CA order » | Palace stops oath-taking of new nurses » | Nothing settled » | COVER-UP SA LEAKAGE » | PAKI CHECK NAME NYO YUNG MGA NAGTXT AT D2 SA CHAT... » | Measures against fraud in licensure exams ordered » | Petitioners challenge nursing board retake order » | PRC calls off oath-taking of nursing board passers... »


QUICKLINKS : CHAT RULES / PINOYBSN FORUM

UST nursing faculty, 2 other groups ask CA to reconsider ruling

UST nursing faculty, 2 other groups ask CA to reconsider ruling
By REY G. PANALIGAN

The University of Santo Tomas (UST) College of Nursing Faculty Association and two other groups yesterday asked the Court of Appeals (CA) to reconsider its decision on the selective re-taking of Tests III and V of the Nursing Licensure Examination (NLE).

Joined by the League of Concerned Nurses and the Binuklod na Samahan ng mga Student Nurses, the UST group also asked the CA to address the leakage issue with "a more definitive ruling."

They contended in their 16-page motion for reconsideration that all examinees should be ordered to re-take Tests III and V to protect and save the integrity of the nursing examinations.

They pointed out that a selective re-taking of the tests by the 1,687 examinees would violate the right to equal protection of all those who took the examinations.

"The decision raised more questions than answers. It did not address the issue of the leakage itself and how it affected and continues to affect the integrity of NLE…. On the matter of selective re-take of Tests III and V of 1,687 examinees, it seems that these examinees were given undue advantage over others who did not pass…," they said.

"To solve this issue, petitioners prayed for a retake of Tests III and most especially, Test V. Indeed, the CA ordered a selective re-take for the two tests but it discriminated against those who passed but did not cheat, and those who did not cheat, and it favored those who passed and cheated," they also said.

In a decision issued on Oct. 13, 2006, the CA ordered the selective re-taking of Tests III and V among the 1,687 examinees whose names were included in the list of successful examinees following the implementation of PRC’s Resolution No. 31.

Resolution No. 31 provided for the invalidation of 20 items Test III and the re-computation of the scores in Test V.

At the same time, the appellate court ordered immediate oath taking of the 17,324 nursing graduates who originally passed the NLE.

The CA said that the PRC and Board of Nursing abused their discretion in issuing Resolution No. 31 that resulted in the increase of the passing rate of the June 11, and 12, 2006 examinations from 41.24 percent to 42.42 percent.

"Such increase of 1.18 percent which benefited 1,687 examinees who actually failed (as their names did not appear in the unaltered results) but who resultantly passed when the Ibe Formula was introduced, constitutes a clear case of grave abuse of discretion," it said.

However, the appellate court noted that the implementation of the formula under Resolution No. 31 resulted in the dropping of 1,186 new nurses from the list of successful examinees.

It declared "whimsical and capricious" the issuance of Resolution No. 31 because the order allowed the 1,687 examinees to pass "without satisfying" the standards set by the Nursing Act of 2002 on how examinees may be rated in a licensure examination.

http://www.mb.com.ph/MAIN2006101777212.html

Nursing retake advocates urge further court probe
By JENNY F. MANONGDO


Groups in favor of the retake of the nursing licensure exams yesterday filed a motion for reconsideration to the Court of Appeals (CA) which issued an order for the retake of tests 3 and 5 to 1,687 graduates who passed after the Professional Regulation Commission recomputed the scores.

But Rene Tadle, president of the faculty association of the college of nursing of University of Santo Tomas (UST), said National Bureau of Investigation report on which the CA ruling was based, failed to consider vital issues related to the controversy- ridden June nursing board exams.

"We feel that all the issues here were not tackled like who participated in the leakage. The best way to deal with this is to have a retake of tests 3 and 5 for all examinees," Tadle said.

Tadle cited the case of nursing student Dennis Bautista who claimed to have witnessed the alleged distribution of leaked materials by a review center to nursing students enrolled there.

"This was not considered by the CA but this is vital. This shows that the leakage did not only take place in Manila but in Baguio and Cebu as well," he pointed out.

Meantime, PRC Commissioner Avelina dela Rea said they deferred the oathtaking of new nurses yesterday after receiving a hold order from the labor department and the office of the Solicitor General. "We are in a bureaucracy, although it would have been better if the oathtaking pushed through for the benefit of all. We have to submit to due process required by law."

PRC also released yesterday the list of examinees who are recommended to retake exams 3 and 5.

Dagdag lang na kaisipan sa CA Ruling'
Galit na galit ang UST n co. sa pagbalewala ng CA sa kanilang inihain ne reklamo na ang dayaan ay malawakan.Even if the supposed leakage is widespread what everybody forget is that under PRC law leakage is legally defined as the official test question, hence i will venture that even if the CA tacled this issue it cannot rule this as leakage.WHY SO?.Because the system and protection sya so. Remmember?each examiner gave foo questions for total of 2500 questions for a computer to select. Technically even if you release all theses 2500 questions to examinees, they have tomemorize them but only 500 will come out. What more if you mixed this with thousands of review questions, hilong hilo ka na. Kaya marami ang may kopya ng leakage di nakapasa. Gimik lang ito ng review centers at corrupt na board examiners. Kaya ang NBI hirap na patunayan na may kopya ang examiners kasi ang nakha ay student notes at walang pormal at malawakang kopya na pagbabasehan na ito ay galing sa PRC kung hindi sa BON examiner.Madugo talaga pag pinatunayan mo isaisa kung sino nandaya. Ang maling argumento"dahil di malaman kung sino nandaya, retake na lang lahat. Baligtad!!Sabi ng korte, patunayan ninyo!Sabi ng UST n co. at iba pa sa gobyerno at nakikisawsaw na pulitiko at media. Hirap nyan ulitin na lang. Teka, pwede ba yon?

Dennis Bautista is not a reliable witness at all. Pa cute pa siya sa ANC na its very hard for him to come out in the open, feeling api siya. Totoo naman yong satellite na sinasabi niya, that's the usual practice of RA Gapuz but to say na nagdistribute si Gapuz ng leakage sa Cebu at Davao hindi niya mapapatunayan yon. Bakit nandon ba siya sa mga lugar na yon ng binigyan sila ng leakage? At sabi raw ni Gapuz dumaan kayo sa mga review centers after your first day of exam dahil may ipamimigay na allegely yong leakage so how come na ang MedSurg kasali sa kinukwesyon nila i tapos na ang exam ng MS sa first day palang? Ano pang silbi ng "leakge" sa MS? Gets nyo? Halata talaga na he is just fabricating his stories to benefit him and UST na hindi talaga makatulog dahil sa rating nila. So ngayon na considered na lahat ang 500 questions after the CA ruling, pumasa na ba mga matalino ng UST? Kasi pag hindi, tumahimik na kayo! Paki tingnan nyo nga mga pangalan nong mga taga UST kung pumasa na ba?

well di mo talaga maplease ang lahat.. hehehe.. mabuti na yung retake lahat kaysa sa selective.. admit it guys anu gagawin nyo kung kyo yung nasa listahan ng retake???

JUST na naman...

JUST GOT LUCKY..

Unlike sa mga anti retake.. sa pro retake walang iwanan.. nkit di rin kyo pumunta sa ANC sbhin nyo di totoo na may leakage.. makikita mo naman kung cno makasarili sa atin eh.. ung iba khit ala pang lisensya nag NCLEX na.. kita mo talagang For money lang ang profession na to.. oo nga nagsangla ng kalabaw.. pero admit it.. ung pinambentahan ng kalabaw eh napunta sa cellphone..
KAKAHIYA KYO..

BTW.. ITS UNFAIR NAMANG ILABEL NYO SA UST UNG NAGPAPAHIRAP SA AGONY NYO.. BKIT DI NYO SBHIN YAN SA CA?? KUNG NUN PA PUMAYAG KYONG MAGRETAKE DI SANA MAY LISENSYA NA KYO!!
SA SIMULAT SIMULA PA AYAW NA NILA NG SECOND COURSERS!!! WEHEHE.. LIDER NG ANTI RETAKE 2ND COURSERS..
BADING PA..

Pro retakers always make sweeping statements and hasty generalizations. Sana matutunan nila ang fallacies ng mga statement na 'to.
"oo nga nagsangla ng kalabaw.. pero admit it.. ung pinambentahan ng kalabaw eh napunta sa cellphone..
KAKAHIYA KYO.."
irresponsible statement. i am a son of an ordinary government employee, who's working her butt off para lamang mapag aral kami.Baon na kami sa utang at lalo pang mababaon habang may ilang taong di matanggap ang failures sa buhay. these failures are supposed to make us a better person by learning from it, and not by dragging down those who succeed better.
"BTW.. ITS UNFAIR NAMANG ILABEL NYO SA UST UNG NAGPAPAHIRAP SA AGONY NYO.. BKIT DI NYO SBHIN YAN SA CA?? KUNG NUN PA PUMAYAG KYONG MAGRETAKE DI SANA MAY LISENSYA NA KYO!!"
In the first place, sino ba ang petitioners sa CA? sino ba ang nagpetition ng TRO? sino ba ang nag-aapeal pa ng decision ng court? Di ba UST faculty of nursing? tsk tsk
"SA SIMULAT SIMULA PA AYAW NA NILA NG SECOND COURSERS!!! WEHEHE.. LIDER NG ANTI RETAKE 2ND COURSERS..
BADING PA.."
Tsk tsk. wag na patulan to

last poster lam mo tama ka sa sinabi mo. well too bad for the passers still this issue is not yet resolved. anong petsa na? if i were them magfile na lang ako for december and start na magreview para whatever the decision will be prepared ka na. peace!!

"SA SIMULAT SIMULA PA AYAW NA NILA NG SECOND COURSERS!!! WEHEHE.. LIDER NG ANTI RETAKE 2ND COURSERS..
BADING PA.."

for someone who comments on this must be unethical. might have to review your ethics again iho/iha.

granting that he is a gay, i can't see nothing wrong with it. HE IS FIRM IN HIS DECISIONS AND HIS BALLS ARE INTACT WHEN HE SPEAKS!

-a mother of a board passer-

the gov't must put an end to this controversy. kaya siguro madami ang ordinaryong taong sumasama sa NPA dahil mabilis ang justice sa kanila.

kung patatagalin pa ito baka dumami ang nurses ng npa niyan!

WHETHER WIDESPREAD OR NOT, based on the number of leaked questions, subjects affected, and large enough number of remaining clean questions in the exams, THE LEAKAGE SHOULD NOT MATTER. Why?

There are two issues why retake is demanded by retake proponents. The first is COMPETENCE of the passers, so it should be looked at.

Case 1. The review center dished out some 1,000 questions without leakage. Some examinees passed, others did not. Are the passers incompetent? Of course not.

Case 2. The review center lectured the same 1,000 questions, but with some 20 or 90 questions as leakage. At the time of coaching, nobody--repeat NOBODY, including subsequent complainants--among the examinees knew for certain that some questions were in fact leakage. Some examinees passed, others did not. Are the passers incompetent? The more logical answer is NO!

In this case, we do not have an ideal situation--that without leakage--to go by, but based on the circumstances, there are still other ways of determining the passers' COMPETENCE. Stated differently, based on available other information that should not be ignored, there is no conclusive basis for saying that the passers are INCOMPETENT. Therefore, the passers should be given the benefit of the doubt and their rights respected.

What are the other means then of establishing the passers' competence?

First, and this is what everybody for retake refuses to recognize, THIS IS WHAT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND COMPLAINANTS FOR RETAKE NEVER REFUTED--that there were 390 clean and valid exam questions left, the passing of which is enough to show the competence of 17,000 passers--the lack of which is shown by 25,000 others who did not make it. This total number of clean questions is much more than the first 60 graded questions of NCLEX that can make an examinee pass. Of course, Dr. Dante Ang retorted that, in which case, then abolish the PRC exams if we will rely on other exams. The answer to that response is, then abolish also the final exams and issuance of diplomas by UP, UE, UST, etc. if we will still rely on PRC exams to determine the graduates' competence.

The point is, there is a number or quantum of evidence—not just one--that establishes the pattern of examinees' competence for HIRING purposes--and each one of the means or evidence is just part of an integrated whole. For example, why do NCLEX administrators admit Filipino nurse examinees even WITHOUT PRC licenses? (Yes, they do, as affirmed by the PRC Chairman herself in a front page news item in the Inquirer.) The answer is, they rely on the examinees' graduating in the nursing course as shown by their transcript of records and other documents. Unless the retake proponents can destroy the efficacy of the limited-question NCLEX system, or admit a hopeless case of COLONIAL MENTALITY, they have no basis for demanding retake by 17,000 passers on the ground of incompetence.

Second, when the examinees received coaching on a thousand questions, including the leaked questions, there was no distinction to them as to leaked and not leaked questions--because, as stated, nobody knew for sure which were clean and unclean questions BEFORE the exams. And what is important is, the competent among the examinees learned, or imbibed, the knowledge coached to them. Only the competent can do that--as borne by complaining examinees who, despite the leakage, did not pass! They--the complaining non-passsers with leakage--are the best proof that the leakage was not enough to make the less competent pass. So they have no right to pass insulting judgment of incompetence and need for retake on passers who performed better than them. The passers should be judged by at least their equal, not by non-passing complainants, for obvious reasons. Thus, passers may have imbibed knowledge through FAIR and FOUL means--but that is not their fault, and they should not be punished for it. It is the fault of erring examiners and reviewers, as well as of a reactionary government that would not regulate review centers unless something bad happens--thereby failing to protect the 2006 innocent examinees against unscrupulous reviewers and examiners. However, what counts in the issue of COMPETENCE is: the passers imbibed the expertise coached to them as shown by their passing the exams. In other words, there should be no issue on competence, because some of them might have learned by means FAIR and FOUL through no fault of their own, all right--but they LEARNED, they have become COMPETENT, and they passed the exams, which 25,000 others failed to hurdle!!!

The issue then, if at all, is integrity or DISHONOR. But how could dishonor be imputed to them? As stated, the suspected culprits are examiners and review centers, plus the government that did not think of instituting preventive measures before the scandal--but not the examinees who paid thousands of pesos to receive honest coaching, not leakage, and should not be held responsible for the evil acts of others and for the failure of the government to protect them. Should they refuse the coaching that they paid for?

On the other hand, after the exams, because they know that they reviewed hard for the exam, that they would have passed with or without leakage, why should they sacrifice themselves when what they need to do is to pursue the more urgent task of economic survival by looking for work and moving on with their lives? WHY SHOULD THEY WORRY--as Dr. Dante Ang, as well as UP, UE, and UST deans and teachers, etc. seem to foolishly do--about foreign recruiters and hospitals when they are veterans in the business and can very well take care of themselves. They know what they are doing, they are not babes in the woods, they are not OUT OF THEIR MINDS to accept nurse applicants on the basis solely of their having PRC licenses. Morally, it may be the passers' obligation to care, but our government should not rely on them. It should rely instead on its own officials to do not just their moral obligation but also their MANDATED DUTY to protect the nation's young examinees from wrongdoers with or without experiencing exam scandal. For example, is the government so blind and inept that it did not see the need to regulate review centers before the scandal--such as on possible overcharging in fees and overcrowding of reviewees per classroom?

The government should wake up and start protecting 17,000 passers instead of harassing them. The least that it can do if it is not high handed is to refute the grounds for no-retake that I emailed to the Office of the President and others concerned, now including the herein points, if it will continue to stubbornly think of retake. When the government ignored my request for its REFUTATION of the GROUNDS FOR NO-RETAKE--it ignored not just me but also the 17,000 passers and their families, friends, supporters, and sympathizers.

As I stated then, I am not recommending no-retake, I just want to see that there is no miscarriage of justice. I am just asking the government, which ignored the grounds for no-retake when it previously ordered retake, to tell the public why it brushed aside the arguments for no-retake by not mentioning these at all in the explanation of its previous retake order. There is as yet no answer, there is still no explanation to the public--but the government apparently still clings to the need for retake even after the CA decision was issued. For the government's lack of transparency, it has not yet convincingly shown the real need for retake. It is acting based on naked power, not defensible reason.

MT
October 17, 2006

wag ng patulan ang isang yan guys.BITTER lang yan kce kumampi satin ang CA. mabait pa din talaga si God.
and what's wrong with being gay. matalino naman sya. most of my teachers and reviewers na magagaling tlga eh mga gay.
hay naku, iaccept nyo nlng kce korte na ang nagsabi.wla naman kce kau matibay na evidence eh.puro painterview kau, AT HELLO! UN LEADER NYO KAYA NA TAGAUST NG GROUP EK EK NYO.UN CUMLAUDE, TANONG MO SA KANYA ANG SCORES NG.. AVERAGE NYA PO 69.5

WOW NAMAN. ANG GALING NG LIDER NYO.HAHA!KINAKAMPIHAN MO EH MERON GRADE NA 55 SA 2 TEST NYA. GRABEE.. SEE? YAN ANG ULTERIOR MOTIVE.NDE INTEGRITY NG NURSES ANG GUSTO NYA, INTEGRITY NYA.

wg mo awayin ang lider ng alliance dahil madame magtatanggol s kanya.mdame nakasuporta sa kanya. wla kme pakialam kung ano man sya.baka nga pagpinagharap kau at mgrevalida eh mukha kang kawawa.
tulungam mo nlng mgreview un myabang na bryant na yan. aabangan namin name nya sa dec pati yan si bautista na lahat n ng review cente ngenroll sya, ala lng..

sira na kaya kau.. tingin nyo pagpasok nyo ng hosp nde kau paguusapan ng mga co workers nyo as BITTER FAILURE.. kung inaccept nyo nlng kce kaya lang nsa fixation stage lng kau ng denial eh. hangng ngaun denial pa rin.. "para to sa mga proretake na bumagsak ah"
mrame kce akong mga friends na nakamove on na en preparing for the board in dec. unlike sa mga bitter bryant at bautista..

guys let's continue supporting our group.be it on txt by forwarding it or emails.

kakampi natin si God mga anti retake lam nya un mga paghihirap natin kaya lets continue praying.

TANONG KO LANG HA, IM ONE OF BOARD PASSER NA NKAPOST SA PRC LAST JULY 19 WHEN THEY ALL PUBLISH THE SUCCESSFUL NEW NURSES, THEN I HAD MY LICENSE AND OATH TAKING BEFORE THE TRO, NOW MY NAME IS AGAIN INCLUDED SA LIST NG MARERETAKE NG TEST 3 AND 5 BAKIT GANON WHAT REALLY HAPPENED,,, ANG DAMI NILANG IPINASANG MGA BAGSAK AT MY EXPENSE,,, THIS IS BULLSHIT PRC!!!! HINDI KO HININGI O BINILI ANG LICENSE KO KAYO ANG MISMONG NAG LAGAY NG NAME KO SA MGA BOARD PASSERS THE PINAYAGAN NYO AKONG MAG OATH, SO PANO YAN DONT TELL ME IREREVOKE NYO LICENSE KO WHERE IN ITS VERY CLEAR NA WLA KYONG BASELINE O GROUND PRA GAWIN YUN... CAN ANYBODY WHOSE KNOWLEDGEABLE ENOUGH TO ANSWER ME...........

Ganito yan. Nang maraming ngumakngak dahil sa leakage, to remove the effect of leakage from the exams, 20 leaked questions in test 3 were invalidated or cancelled, while the weight of test 5 with 90 leaked questions was downgraded from 20% to 10%. Nagkaroon ngayon ng restructuring ng weights ng mga subjects. Yung mataas ang grades sa downgraded test 5 at sa invalidated questions in test 3, na pull down ang average grade nila in all subjects, so naging non-passers sila. Ito yung 1,186 examinees. Yun namang mataas ang grades sa subjects na walang leakage pero FAILED under the original computation before removing the effect of leakage, dahil tumaas ang weight ng mga subjects without leakage where they have higher grades, na pull up ang average grade nila at naging passers sila.

Now, CA ordered the nullification of the recomputation of grades due to leakage and the restoration of the grades to the original ones before considering the leakage, on the ground that the cheating was not widespread--coupled with the order of retake for those proven to have benefited from the final coaching of three review centers involved--the grades went back to the original situation and the pulling down and pulling up of grades, depending on which subjects the examinees are higher, are thereby nullified. So the 1,186 passers under the original computation are now to be reinstated as passers, while the 1,687 failed but were converted to passers owing to recomputation, will be asked to retake, and they have no valid reason for not retaking.

Dante Ang, Rene Tadle, the writer of this column & all PRO-RETAKERS should be the ones to have a RETAKE.

A RETAKE of their IQ, because they seem to fall below the line.

A RETAKE of their psychiatric stability, because there is an imbalanced ego wherein their ID is dominant.

A RETAKE of subjects in logic, philiosophy & law wherein their display of reasoning skills are far below average. A well educated elementary student can clearly understand & practice basic simple analysis far better than they are.

A RETAKE of their spiritual impurities, as shown by their selfish, malicious & false intentions.

A RETAKE of examinations of their own profession, because their competency are the ones that are really doubtful.

You may think your better than the PRC, than the president & the justices. But definitely, GOD knows HE is better than you & whatever you do, GOD will not allow it...

You are all despicable!!

To see how bankrupt in logic the complainants are, they want a repeat of the 100-question test 3, when it had only 20 leaked questions, as against 80 remaining valid ones. In that case, why have a measly 20 leaked questions destroy the efficacy of test 3, instead of the more numerous 80 remaining clean questions sustain its validity?

At worst, retake of test 3 should be for 20 questions only, corresponding to the 20 leaked questions--not for the entire 100 questions. But if they admit that, then they will also addmit the stupidity of having a retake at all in test 3.

CHEAP SHOT FOR UST...

yun lang ba ang kayo ninyo, mag-file ng TRO????

the 2nd coursers can do better than !

watch out!

The simple reality is ....
The CA JUNKED resolution 31, the basis for "passing" of some of you. Sabi CA mali, illegal yon! Tama pala sa UST!
Mali ang PRC all along!

Now ask your self WHO IS TO BLAME?

The CA junked PRC Resolution 31, yes, but it did not order a retake of the 17,000 passers, a defeat for UST, which is why UST is again going to CA, yan ang maliwanag diyan, para sa mahinang umintindi!

PRC grudgingly issued its Resolution 31 to please the mob of pro-retakers, to show that it did something, but it stated in its pleading to CA that the resolution is in effect not exactly warranted because the leakage was not widespread. The Court believed PRC, so it revoked the PRC resolution and ordered it to go back to the original computation--without retake to the 17,000 passers--a resounding defeat to UST, yan ang totoo!

Para matapos na ang gulo
a. dapat paretakin na ng PRC ang lahat ng taga UST lang para magkaroon sila ng pagkakataong makabawi.
b. dapat bigyan ng independent body ang UST para magkaroon sila ng sariling PRC, BON at sa kanila narin mageexam ang mga taga UST lang para naman maging 100% na ang rating nila at siguradong walang CUM Laude na babagsak sa kanila at nakakaawa naman sila dahil mukang mauubusan na sila ng korte na pagaappealan....
c. gawin nyo ng 90% lahat ng rating estudyante nyan para hinde na magngangangakngak yung proffesor nila.
d. At si Tadle dapat pagaralin ng nursing and im sure hinde papasa ng board yan, eh panu ba naman RIZAL lang ang inabot ng kokote nyan....

Astig MT,
You've nailed it right!

I'm a UST alumnus (first course).

Unang una, UST ang PIONEER na pandaraya sa Pilipinas.

1. 1st BAR leakage of 1981
2. PT/OT exams of 1996. Wherein 45% of the exam was leaked to UST. From Top 1-90 Straight UST students. PRC also did the same thing a RECOMPUTATION. Did they complain? NO, ofcourse they are the beneficiaries.

Tadle is JUST a Rizal teacher...isang frustrated lawyer, took up units, but never finished. (sabi nga ng former classmate nyan sa Law, lahat ng sinimulan nyan, di nya natapos).

Angelo Brant, the lider ng samahan ng Student Nurses. The Top student of UST who FAILED. Kung Top student material sya...kahit ano pang computation yan, AANGAT SYA. Bakit naman 83% of his classmates passed. As a UST alumnus, nakakahiya to for me. A top student of my university FAILED!

Earl Sumile, a UST Education reject, went to Nursing. Ayan kaya nagkaganyan Batch 2006 ng UST. Nakakahiya sa alumni ng UST Nursing.

Kung ang UST nag 100% this year, tapos gumawa sila ng eksena na ganto, mas CREDIBLE, but because they performed miserably (UST Standard) well totoo na merong Unjust and Selfish inTention.

Leakage in the NLE has been happening for so long now. Bakit ngayon lang? Kasi ngayon lang bumagsak UST? TIMING! why not react when they were on TOP!

Kung may retake. RETAKE lahat ng nag exam under the BON headed by Octaviano, si Dionisio matagal ng nagbebenta.

Si Dennis Baustista! Reviewed at INRESS, GAPUZ and PENTA, and he got all the 110 leaked Qs...BAGSAK pa din! Grabe! Ibang level ang ka okokan. Liar yan! he said noon PASADO daw sya! tapos he met lang Cordero thru text (tapos latest pinopormahan daw sya sa PCHS). Anong credibility meron tong star witness kuno na to!

Kung may leakage man sa GAPUZ, dapar si Earl Sumile na magpatunay kung meron talaga kasi REVIEWER sya sa GAPUZ!

Yung mga UST passers naman kasi MAGSALITA NA! Tama si Raul Gonzales na well behaved UST students...to the point na hindi na nagsasalita.

Hay naku, eto lang masasabi ko, kahit inhouse review pa! may leakage at leakage yan! In-house review kami nung first course ko! I swear almost 50 items ang LUMABAS!

GOD BLESS MY ALMA MATER!

Tantanan na ang June 2006 Passers!

Kung hindi na naniniwala ang UST sa PRC. Isarado na nila College of Nursing nila OR wag na sila mag take ng NLE.

Integritihin nila mga mukha nila! kung yun talaga ang RASON sana matagal na sila kumibo! hindi ngayon dahil sa bagsak ang summa cum laude nila.

To think UST is NOT EVEN the Best Nursing school in this country!

Wag mag feeling. Mas BASKETBALL na lang kayo!

Alam ninyo ba na si Earl Sumile ay isang Ten Outstanding Students of the Philippines (TOSP) Awardee? Ibig sabibin, bigatin siya. Wag tayong maging personal sa mga comments natin. Baka mamaya,yung mga iba, punahin pati mga gramar ng marami sa atin na talaga namang nakakasuka. Cool lang, mga kasama.

Post a Comment


PBSN Forum


Photobucket 

- Video and Image Hosting

Archives

Links