The Language of Law School This page intentionally left blank

Elite/Prestige
2
0.90
1.20
-.30
8
1.50
1.70
-.20
5
1.30
2.30
-1.00
Regional
4
1.40
1.30
+.10
7
0.90
1.10
-.30
Local
1
1.00
1.10
-.10
6
1.10
0.80
+.30
3
1.00
1.00
0
Average change in female-taught classes
+.03
Average change in male-taught classes
-.32
Ratios are calculated by dividing the men’s participation rate by the women’s participa-
tion rate. 1.0 is the figure that would represent equal participation by women and men.
Figures over 1.0 represent an imbalance toward male participation; figures under 1.0
represent an imbalance toward female participation.

---

196
Difference
Summary
This study’s findings on gender tend to support the picture that has emerged from
other research on classroom dynamics, albeit with a few interesting wrinkles sug-
gesting some directions for further study. Overall, women students participated at
lower rates than men, a difference that was still worse when we examined only
volunteered turns. This fits with previous observational studies of law schools and
with many (although not all) of the self-report studies as well. Survey studies such
as those conducted at Minnesota and New Mexico did not find the kinds of attitu-
dinal and reported differences between men and women that had been found in
much other research. The authors of one of these studies suggested that particular
aspects of the law school atmosphere—notably, positive attitudes regarding diver-
sity—might be affecting the result. I have throughout this discussion echoed this
focus on context, urging that we examine our results in terms of particular class-
room and school contexts.
One such particular context is provided by the status of the school. The three
more comprehensive observational studies performed in elite law schools to date
(Yale, University of Chicago, Harvard) have not found the kind of positive influ-
ence of women professors on women students’ participation that has been docu-
mented in some other educational settings. In the one class taught by a female
professor at an elite/prestige school in this study, women also participated less than
did men. On the other hand, in two nonelite law school classes taught by female
professors in this study, women participated at nearly equal or slightly higher
levels than did men. It is obviously cause for concern if something about the at-
mosphere or classroom dynamics in our nation’s elite and prestige law schools
undercuts women law professors as role models or their support for their women
students. Of course, we cannot draw any generalized conclusions from this set of
case studies, but these findings together certainly suggest that the interaction of
school status and gender might bear further examination. This is also particularly
interesting in light of the contrary picture that emerged from this study regarding
race: two classes taught by professors of color (one of whom was also the woman
discussed in this paragraph) at elite schools were characterized by high participa-
tion rates on the part of students of color, a result apparently unaffected by status
of school.
96
Another interesting aspect of context is that created by classroom discourse
style. Previous studies had indicated a possible negative effect of Socratic teaching
on women’s participation, as well as of voluntary participation (women being less
likely to volunteer or to raise their hands quickly). Again, we found mixed sup-
port for this picture, with some new complexities to consider as well. On the one
hand, women’s overall participation rates in the more elite and more highly Socratic
classrooms of this study were lower than men’s. On the other hand, if the class-
room was more heavily Socratic, women participated at higher levels in longer,
Socratic exchanges than in shorter, volunteered colloquies. So we have another
interestingly complex result: the most Socratic classrooms are biased overall in favor
of male participation, but in those classrooms women participate more in the ex-
tended Socratic exchanges. Our findings on volunteered versus called-on turns

---

Student Participation and Social Difference
197
suggest that in some, but not all, Socratic classes, this dynamic may be fed by
women’s tendency not to volunteer (which would differentially exclude them from
the more voluntary, less formal, shorter exchanges). Thus, if a professor is going
to use a more heavily Socratic teaching style, a higher percentage of extended, struc-
tured exchanges might produce more egalitarian results than frequent interrup-
tions of those exchanges for shorter interjections, particularly if those interruptions
rely primarily on volunteered turns.
Complicating the picture further, we find that the most egalitarian classes
in the study in terms of gender, and also the two classes in which women pre-
dominated slightly, were taught by women professors at nonelite schools using
relatively informal discourse style structured around shorter exchanges. How-
ever, there is a slight difference between the two classes: one falls at the lowest
end of the informality continuum (with the highest percentages of times and turns
spent in shorter exchanges in the study), but the other had significantly fewer
shorter exchanges.
97
 Thus, categories such as “modified Socratic” and “short
exchange” themselves need to be supplemented by examination of other aspects
of discourse style and structure. Similarly, the class in which male students pre-
dominated to the greatest extent was also taught by a woman professor using a
relatively interactive, informal discourse style. So we see that although a less
Socratic style may in some circumstances encourage more female participation,
this is highly circumscribed by other aspects of the classroom setting. In one case,
informality may encourage less aggressive speakers; in another, it may give ag-
gressive speakers freer rein. It seems likely that this might vary in part depend-
ing on subtle aspects of professorial control.
These complexities, however, do not obscure an overall pattern in which male
students predominate in law school classroom discussions. Although the contours
of the patterning differ from those found when we examined race, in both cases
we find some indications that, in combination with findings from other studies,
point to continued differential effects of gender and race on inclusion in law school
classrooms.
Student Perspectives
In our group interviews with students, a number of interesting themes emerged.
98
In one sense, they point to differences in position and perspective between profes-
sors and students, differences that are reflective of the distinct enterprises in which
they are engaged. But in many respects, some clear continuities of perspective are
already emerging between students and teachers regarding a shared enterprise in
the classroom. Here we examine some of these differences and similarities, with
an eye to comparing across the different kinds of schools and teachers in the study.
One obvious difference is the degree to which students are concerned with strat-
egies for succeeding and surviving, at both the intellectual and the emotional level.
Thus, although they also talk about the content of what they are learning—at times
with considerable enthusiasm—they are clearly focused on strategic considerations.
They speak of strategies for handling class, homework, and overall balance:

---

198
Difference
See, I just go for the easy question.