222 Conclusion
Furthermore, the law school classroom is itself arguably the site of more than
lessons about technical law. As Weinstein notes, educational research has demon-
strated that how we structure classroom interactions affects how we “create set-
tings in which students can learn lessons of caring, justice, and self-worth.”^57 Studies
from educational settings where teachers and researchers have sought new solu-
tions, rather than giving up on students of color, have shown us that changes in
pedagogical structure and philosophy can make an enormous difference.^58 The
benefits from successful racial integration in classrooms extend to white students
as well as students of color, and they also extend beyond more narrowly conceived
educational advantages (which have indeed been demonstrated), to wider social
benefits. The synergy between the educational and social advantages is only height-
ened in law school settings, where part of what nascent attorneys must learn is the
wider perspective needed to write, administer, and enforce laws in a diverse, demo-
cratic society. A study of Harvard and University of Michigan law students has
documented that the students themselves feel diversity in law school to be a vital
component of their legal education; as one student said, “I cannot see how law can
be properly learned without diverse perspectives and opinions.”^59 Another student
in the study noted that “cultural and ethnic diversity is more important in law school
than many other studies,” and this perspective was broadly shared by the majority
of the students surveyed in both schools.^60
Diversity in the classroom, then, is beneficial to white students, to the overall
project of legal education in our society, and to those students of color who suc-
ceed. Ironically, a recent study has raised the difficult question of whether it is
beneficial to those students of color who do not succeed.^61 The ensuing debate over
affirmative action in law school has raised a number of important issues that beg
for further study. One thing seems clear: the law school experience itself still seems
to be differentially damaging to some students of color. There is a fierce debate
over why. A question that has emerged from this debate is whether it would be
better for African American students overall if law schools were to abolish affir-
mative action.^62 There appears to be agreement that doing so would diminish the
numbers of African American students in elite law schools, a prospect that has raised
some understandable worries about the potential impact on the (already slow)
process of integration at the highest levels of our nation’s legal and political sys-
tems.^63 In this regard, an important concern raised by the present study is the pos-
sibility that lowering the size of the minority cohorts at elite schools would have a
cascading effect on even the students of color who are successful under the cur-
rent system, now left without the support of a cohort (and likely with diminishing
numbers of role models on the faculty and in the higher echelons of the profes-
sion).^64 Certainly, before giving up on real integration and facing major losses to
so many of their students and educational goals, law schools should consider the
paths that have been successfully followed in other educational settings, where
pedagogical innovation has benefited not only students of color, but all students
involved.^65 In this way, law schools could better serve all of their students, while
also providing an educational experience that best prepares all future lawyers for
the practice of law in a democratic state and diverse world.^66