1. If there is a sentence, read it twice and look for context clue/s.

2. Ask yourself if you can relate the word with an object, an idea, a person or an experience. For example,
solemnity is associated with praying, mass or church. Therefore, any word that suggests roughness,
loudness or improper action must be eliminated.
3. Test for consistency in part of speech. For example, a noun will require a synonym that is also a noun.
The other choices that are not nouns may be eliminated. This concept, particularly when used in
constructing sentences, is called parallelism.
4. Determine the tone or mood of the word. Words may suggest a good, positive or upbeat tone. Its
synonym must exhibit the same.
5. Try to replace the word in the sentence with the choices given, then do a final process of elimination.
Choose the best answer.
Finding the Error
1. Remember that there may or may not be an error in a given sentence.
2.The error must be in any of the underlined parts of the sentence.
3. Look for the most common errors first. Start by checking the spelling of words. You should also watch out
for redundant words.
4. Check for any possible error in grammar by checking the subject-verb agreement in the principall as well
as the subordinate clauses. Other errors in grammar maybe verb tense, pronoun-antecedent combination,
comparative forms of adjective or adverb, wrong conjunction or preposition, punctuations, and wrong usage
of words like these, this, its, its, etc.
5. Read the whole sentence again and check for any error in sentence construction (parallel construction,
logical construction).
6. Always assume that the test questions have undergone proofreading, and are therefore completely
accurate. If there is an error, it is probably not a typographical error and is therefore intentional.
Reading Comprehension
1. Scan the paragraph to get the main idea before turning to the questions. Others look at the questions
first. This is a choice one has to make based on his experience or what works for him/her.
2. Read the questions. Identify the kind of question. Is it a main idea question, a detail or an inference
question which requires logical thinking and reasoning.

3. Search for the specific details for a detail question. Make sure you answer this correctly.
4. Read the sentences and recognize the clues that can help state the implied idea.
5. Always consider all choices. Do a process of elimination and choose the best answer. If the passage is
hard to understand, answer the detail questions and move on to the next passage. Remember to go back if
time permits.

Vocabulary

word meanings

homonyms, synonyms and antonyms

words that people commonly confuse

Grammar and Composition

punctuation

capitalization

modifiers

sentence construction

sentence correction

spelling

parts and figures of speech

analogies: similes and metaphors

phrases and clauses

voices (active and passive)

essay writing (may not applicable for all college entrance exams)

Reading and Comprehension

poetry

essays

articles

short stories

mythology and fables

speeches

local and international literature

famous authors

literary/textual criticism: plot, themes, style, summaries, etc.

inference

NCAE Tips: Basics of NCAE

Posted on September 11, 2011 by admin

Whoever said that life it a test knew exactly what he or she was talking about. Its easy to think
that college entrance tests are the only major tests to look forward to (or to shy away from), yet there is at
least one other test that deserves mention: the National Career Assessment Examination or NCAE.

The Nature of the Exam

The NCAE first saw the light of day in 2007, when it replaced its predecessor, the NCEE. Developed by the
DepEd National Education Testing and Research Center (NETRC), its main purpose is to reduce or prevent
the occurrence of unemployment due to employee-career mismatch. The government surmises that people
are most likely succeed if they pursue endeavors that suit their natural talents and abilities, and the exam
aims to steer them (particularly third year high school students) in the right direction.

As its name suggests, it is also a government tool for checking what students strengths are. It measures
their skills and aptitudes and calculates the best-fitting field or discipline for the test takers to pursue.
Besides general scholastic aptitude, the NCAE also takes entrepreneurial skills and technical-vocational
aptitude into account. It also has an interest inventory.

Besides career guidance, the NCAE also serves at least one other purpose: it is one of the requirements
involved in the CHED and TESDA scholarship application process. The scholarship option is open to fourth
year high school students, provided they meet the criteria below.

Requirements
If youre going for the scholarship, please take note of the following:

Academically speaking, applicants must belong to the upper 10% of their fourth year high school

population.

They must have a minimum general weighted average of 80.

Their parents gross annual income must be no higher than 300,000 pesos.

They must present a letter of intent to apply for a CHED or TESDA scholarship.

The test, however, is for high school juniors and seniors from either public or private schools. While the
NCAE is a tool for career assessment and prerequisite for a college scholarship, its results
arent mandatory by themselvestheyre recommendatory. Think of the test as a potential guide to a
matching course and a fitting future career, not just another test to be taken and passed at all costs.

Miscellaneous Details
The NCAE for this year will take place on September 28, 2011. It will be held between 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. at
the applicants very own high school. Beginning next school year, it will fall on every last Wednesday of
August.

NCAE Coverage:

1. GENERAL SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE

* SCIENTIFIC ABILITY [40 ITEMS]

* READING COMPREHENSION [60 ITEMS]

* VERBAL ABILITY [60 ITEMS]

* MATHEMATICAL ABILITY [60 ITEMS]

2. Technical-Vocational Aptitude
* Clerical Ability [20 items]
* Manipulative Ability [30 items]
Non Verbal Ability [30 items]
Entrepreneurial Skill [30 items]
Occupational Field of Interest

OCTOBER 27- MONDAY- MOVED EXAMINATION DATE

UPLOAD
Log in
Sign up

Browse
DOWNLOAD
STANDARD VIEW
FULL VIEW
OF 6
1

32

Torts - Teacher
Liability

Ratings: (0)|Views: 5,916|Likes: 34

Published by silosgr
Teacher Liaiblity
See more

Page
4
of
6
However, in
Palisoc
5

, although the
case involved an
arts and trades
school, Justice
Teehankee, via
afootnote,
indicated that he
agreed with

Justice Reyes'
dissent in the
Exconde
case.Finally, in
the
Amadora
6

case which
involved an
academic school,
the court held
that the provision
inquestion should
apply to all
schools,
academic as well

as arts and
trades.
It basically
adopted
JusticeReyes
dissent by
applying the
principle of

reddendo singula
singulis
, where "
teachers
" should apply
tothe words "
pupils and
students

", while "

heads of
establishments of
arts and trades
" to "
apprentices
."

Responsibility
over NonMinors
Does a student
need to be a
minor for
a teacher to be
liable? In the
Palisoc

case, the
defendant
Daffonwas of age
at the time
he caused the
death of Palisoc,
a 16 year
old student of the

Manila
TechnicalInstitute
, an arts and
trades school,
and yet, both the
owner of
the school and
the teacher-incharge wereheld

liable. This is one

of the differences
between a
parents
responsibility and
that of a
teachers. Under
Article 221 of the

Family Code of
the Philippines
8

, parents are
responsible for
their
unemancipated
minor children,
while Article

2180 of the Civil

Code does not
provide any
qualifications nor
age limit. Thus,
theliability of a
teacher applies
to all students,
even those of

age. Although
according to
Tolentino
9

, whoquotes
Plainol & Ripert,
the degree of
vigilance of nonminors is not the

same as over
minors. This view
issupported by
Articles 218 and
219 of the Family
Code.
Liability
Outside School

May a teacher
escape liability
for outings and
activities held
outside the
school but
authorized by
theschool? Art
218 states that

authority and
responsibility
shall apply to all
authorized
activities
whether inside or
outside the
premises of the
school, entity or

institution. In
the case of
St. Marys
Academy
10

,the Court held

that special
parental
authority and

responsibility
applies to all
authorized
activities,
whether inside or
outside the
school premises.

Liability of the
School in
General
Aside from the
teacher and head
of the school,
can the school
itself be made
liable? In general,

theliability of the
teacher does not
extend to the
school. This was
the ruling in
the case of
Pasco
11

where the

5 Palisoc v.
Brillantes, G.R.
No. L-29025,
October 4, 1971,
41 SCRA 548.6
Amadora v.
Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. L-47745
April 15, 1988,

160 SCRA 315.7

Palisoc v.
Brillantes,
supra.

8 Art.
221. Parents and
other persons
exercising
parental

authority shall
be civilly liable
forthe injuries
and damages
caused by the
acts
or omissions of
their
unemancipated

childrenliving in
their
company and
under their
parental
authority subject
to the
appropriatedefe
nses provided by

law.9 5
A. Tolentino,
Commentaries
and
Jurisprudence on
the Civil Code
of the
Philippines,
618(1992).10 St.

Marys Academy
v. Carpitanos,
G.R. No.143363,
February 6,
2002, 376 SCRA
473.11 Pasco vs
Court of First
Instance of
Bulacan, G.R.

No. L-54357,
April 25, 1988,
160 SCRA785.
Page
5
of
6

Court held that

Art. 2180 speaks
only of "
teachers or
heads
." However, in
the
St. Francis
12

case, the
courtheld that
the school can be
held liable
under paragraph
5, rather than
paragraph 7 of
Art. 2180, as
longas it can be

proved that
the wrongful act
of the teachers
was within the
scope of their
assigned
tasks.Thus, the
schools liability
is that of an

employer via the

principle of
respondeat
superior
which holds
theemployer
responsible for
the wrongful acts
of its

employees.In the
later case of
St. Marys Case
13

, it was held that

For a school to
be held liable,
there must be
afinding that the

act or omission
considered as
negligent was
the proximate
cause of the
injury
causedbecause
the negligence
must have a

causal
connection to the
accident. In this
particular case,
thenegligence of
the school was
only a remote
cause, so the

school was
exculpated.
Liability of the
School on Acts
of a Stranger
In the
PSBA
14

case, although
the person
injured was a
student of PSBA,
the person that
caused theinjury
was not a
student of
PSBA. Art. 2180

on quasi delict
would naturally
not apply as it
requires thatthe
damage should
be caused by a
student of the
educational
institution.

However, the
Court also
heldthat
although 2180
does not apply,
the schools
liability can arise
from a breach
in contract as

when
aneducational
institution
accepts students
for enrolment,
there exists
a contract which
is one
imbued withpubl

ic interest. This
contract
produces
bilateral
obligations, and
one of the
schools
obligations
is toprovide their

students with an
atmosphere that
is conducive in
furthering their
primary purpose
which is toimpart
knowledge. A
similar ruling was

adopted in the
case of
Regino v.
Pangasinan
Colleges of
Scienceand
Technology
15

where it upheld
the schoolstudent
relationship as
contractual in
nature. In the
case of
Soliman
16

,although the
Court held that
the school was
not liable for the
acts of the school
security
guardwhose
employer was
a security

agency, the court

still upheld the
school-student
contractual
relationship.
In Custody
Art. 2180
includes the
phrase so long

as they remain
in their custody.
Does this mean
that a
studentneeds to
live with the
teacher or board
with the school
before the

teacher may be
held liable? In the
Mercado
17

case, the Court

held that it was
indeed a
necessary

condition, but
in the
Palisoc
18

case, thisholding
was reversed
when the Court
held that
students need

not live with the

school teacher
for the latter to
be liable for the
formers tort.

12 St. Francis
High School v.
Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 82465,

February 25,
1991, 194
SCRA341.13 St.
Marys Academy
v. Carpitanos,
supra.

14 Philippine
School
of Business

Administration
v. Court of
Appeals, G.R.
No.84698,
February4,
1992,205 SCRA
729.

15

Regino v.
Pangasinan
Colleges of
Science
and Technology,
G.R. No. 156109,
November18,
2004, 443 SCRA
56.16 Soliman, Jr

v. Tuazon, G.R.
No. 66207, May
18, 1992, 209
SCRA 4717
Mercado v. Court
of Appeals,
supra.

18 Palisoc v.
Brillantes,

supra.

Page
6
of
6
The fact that the
student is
currently enrolled

in the school or
that a student is
present in the
school doesnot
signify that the
student is
automatically
under the
custody of the

teacher and
does not
guaranteeliability
on the part of the
teacher.In the
Amadora
19

case, the student

is considered in
the custody of
the school
authorities for as
long as heis
under the control
and influence of
the school

and within its

premises,
regardless of
whether
thesemester has
started or has
ended. In the
Palisoc

case, the Court

held that the
teachers
responsibility isto
provide
supervision
during the whole
time that the
students are at

attendance in the
school,
includingrecess
time. And in the
Salvosa
20

case, the court

clarified that
recess does not

include dismissal,
andthus, being
enrolled or being
in the premises
of the school
without more,
does
not constitute

attendingschool
.
Defense
Against
Liability
To avoid
responsibility and
liability, the
teacher must

prove that due

diligence was
observed. As to
thekind of due
diligence, the
last paragraph of
Art 2180 is
clear The
persons must

prove that they

haveobserved all
the diligence of a
good father of
a family to
prevent
damage.In the
cases of
Amadora

and
St Francis
21

, the accused
parties have
proven that they
have exercised
thediligence
required of them

by law under the

circumstances to
guard against the
harm they
had foreseen
Waivers
Can a teacher or
school escape
responsibility by

asking parents to
file a waiver
during field trips
andoutings? This
issue is closely
related to
liabilities outside
school and Art
218 is clear that

authority
andresponsibility
shall apply to all
authorized
activities
whether inside
or outside the
premises of
the school,entity

or institution. In
the case of
St. Francis
, the Court still
held some
teachers
responsible
despite thefact
that the parent

permitted the
child to go to the
picnic.
Summary
The table below
summarizes what
principle to use
depending on
who is at fault.

Who Is at Fa
ultWho to Su
eWhat to Ba
se Liability
OnCase to A
dopt
S t u d e n t Te a c
her2180 par
7 - loco par

e n t i s Teacher
School2180 p
ar 5 - respon
deat superior
St. Francis A
cademy v. CA
S t r a n g e
r S c h o o l
C o n t r a c

t P S B A
.
C A

19 Amadora v.
Court of Appeals,
supra.

20 Salvosa vs
Intermediate
Appellate Court,

G.R. No. L70458, October

5, 1988, 166
SCRA274.21 St.
Francis High
School v.
Court of Appeals,
supra.

Activity (32)
FILTERS

Add to collectionReviewAdd NoteLike

1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads

Merlyn Valdez liked this

Louraine May Georfo liked this

Abegail Cadohay liked this

Dael Gerong liked this

Neil Mallari liked this

Buttz Rentillo liked this

Rudolf Casillan liked this

Mad Adrias liked this

Load more

Recommended

[3] PSBA v. CA, 205 SCRA 729 (1992)

FIDES DAMASCO

PSBA vs CA
MISSALDEA

Course Outline - Torts and Damages

KENT GARCIA

HB 4287 - Campus Press Freedom Bill

KABATAAN PARTY-LIST

Case Digest
JESSICA CASTILLO MOLDEZ

ethics digests copy

RAJ-POINT

gudani v. senga
CATHERINE_DELA_6518

14th Meeting Case Digest

RASABORNAY

Title 10 - Property
SUI

Compiled Digest Pfr - Rev.1

SHERYLLE ONG

Civil Law Case Digest

KRISTINE N.

civ_juris
SNIPER_GGE

Digest
RHOBIECORBO

Ateneo Central Bar Operations 2007 Civil Law Summer Reviewer

MIGAY TAN-PELAEZ

More From This User

factors affecting defect leakage.docx

SILOSGR

CMMI High Maturity L5.docx

SILOSGR

CMMI High Maturity.docx

SILOSGR

CMMI High Maturity

SILOSGR

CMMI High Maturity.docx

SILOSGR

Quevedo Notes on Negotiable Instruments

SILOSGR

CIR v Isabela Cultural Corporation DIGEST

SILOSGR

People v Delmendo
SILOSGR

CIR v Benguet Corporation DIGEST

SILOSGR

COMPLAINT Affidavit Bp22

SILOSGR

Project Builders Inc vs CA

SILOSGR

Download and print this document

Read and print without ads

Download to keep your version

Edit, email or read offline

Choose a format:
.DOCX

.PDF

DOWNLOAD

Recommended

[3] PSBA v. CA, 205 SCRA 729 (1992)

Fides Damasco

PSBA vs CA
missaldea

Course Outline - Torts and Damages

Kent Garcia

HB 4287 - Campus Press Freedom Bill

Kabataan Party-List
Previous|NextPage 1 of 4

.DOCX

.PDF

DOWNLOAD
ABOUT

Browse

About Scribd

Team

Blog

Join our team!

Contact Us
SUBSCRIPTIONS

Subscribe today

Your subscription

Gift cards
ADVERTISE WITH US

AdChoices
SUPPORT

Help

FAQ

Press

Purchase Help
PARTNERS

Publishers

Developers / API

LEGAL

Terms

Privacy

Copyright

Copyright 2014 Scribd Inc.

Mobile Site
Language:
English