Study Finds Minority Women Less Satisfied in Law School
Researchers hope that new data on the experience of minority women in law school will prompt frank discussions on law campuses and more support.
June 16, 2020 at 02:11 PM
4 minute read
How are race relations on law school campuses?
The answer to that complex question depends on who you ask. A mere 40% of minority women students surveyed as part of a new study on their law school experience gave race relations on campus a positive rating. That figure was 70% among white male students.
That stark disparity is among the hundreds of data points compiled in "Women of Color–A Study of Law School Experiences," a joint research effort between the NALP Foundation and the University of Texas School of Law's Center for Women in Law. The report claims to be the first in-depth look at how and where the law experience of minority women differs from that of their white and minority male classmates. Researchers hope that the findings will spur law schools to examine their practices and find ways to better support their minority women students. That, in turn, may help bolster the number of women in the legal profession, they say.
"There was this hunch that there was a disparity and a difference in what women of color experienced as they went through law school, but no one had quantified that," said Veronica Vargas Stidvent, the executive director of the Center for Women in Law. "A lot of the focus has been on practitioners. This is the first study to look at: What happens in law school that begins to shape those legal careers, and disparities in the legal profession?"
Researchers surveyed more than 4,000 law students—nearly 800 of whom are minority women—on 46 law campuses during the 2017-18 academic year. The survey asked about everything from their classroom experiences and their employment support to their grades and expected level of debt from law school.
The overarching takeaway from the extensive study is that minority women are less satisfied with their law school experience than their white peers. Among minority women, 82% reported that they were "satisfied" with their law school experience, compared with 89% of white women. Just 30% of minority women said they were "extremely satisfied" with their law school experience, compared with 44% of white men.
Among other findings:
- Nearly a third of minority women, 31%, reported having seriously considered leaving law school, compared with 24% of white women and 22% of white men. Not enjoying law school; financial debt; and not fitting in socially were the most commonly cited reasons minority women gave for why they had considered leaving law school.
- Minority women expect to graduate with more educational debt than their white peers. Among minority women, 41% anticipate having more than $100,000 in educational debt, compared with 29% of white women and 28% of white men.
- More than half of minority women, 52%, said they have had adverse interactions with classmates or faculty that negatively impacted their academic performance. Just 21% of white men reported such interactions. Minority women also reported feeling less comfortable raising their hand in class than their white peers.
- Just 6% of minority women 2Ls said they applied for clerkships, compared with 21% of white men and 12% of white women. Among minority women, 47% said they were encouraged to apply for a clerkship, compared with 55% of white men and women.
One bright note among the data, according to NALP Foundation president Fiona Trevelyan Hornblower, is that minority women law students on the whole have more interaction with career services offices. The survey data show that they are more likely to attend career services events, and they reported having a supportive career services office as one of the most important factors in obtaining a job. White men, by contrast, were far more likely to rank grades as a key to finding employment. That disparity is one area that law schools can focus on, in terms of ensuring that all students understand the factors that employers tend to weigh most heavily, including the importance of grades, Vargas Stidvent said.
"This is a starting point for a lot of further discussion, because the data shows some interesting disparities in very different issue areas," she said. "This, I think, will generate a lot of conversations in law schools, with employers, and among students that really delve deeper into why these differences are occurring and what can be done about them."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readClass Action Lawsuit Targets 40 Private Colleges and Universities Over Alleged Price-Fixing
3 minute readEx-St. Thomas Univ. Law Professor Sues School Over Firing, Alleging Defamation
4 minute readPenn Law Professor Amy Wax to Be Suspended With Half-Pay for Discriminatory Speech
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250