SEX, RACE, AND CREDENTIALS - THE TRUTH ABOUT AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION IN LAW FACULTY HIRING

Affirmative action in law faculty hiring continues to provoke controve rsy. In this Article, Professors Merritt and Reskin seek to inform the ongoing debate by reporting results from the first comprehensive empi rical study of the effects of sex and race on tenure-track hiring at a ccredited law schools. Their analysis controls for educational credent ials, work experience, job search strategies, and a number of personal characteristics. By using all of these factors, Professors Merritt an d Reskin evaluate the independent effect of each factor on the prestig e of the school where a tenure-track professor was hired, on the initi al academic rank of the new professor, and on the courses the new prof essor caught. Their analysis indicates that white women and men of col or, but surprisingly not women of color, began teaching at somewhat mo re prestigious schools than white men with comparable credentials. The advantage, however, was relatively modest. Educational credentials an d work experience accounted for the bulk of explained variance in the prestige of schools where tenure-track professors were hired, and even job search strategies and personal characteristics such as age or mar ital status accounted for three times more of the explained variance t han did sex and race. Furthermore, the results suggest that sex bias a ffected other measures of job status. Men were more likely than women to begin teaching at a higher professorial rank. In addition, men were more likely than women to teach constitutional law, a high-status cou rse that can enhance a professor's career prospects. On the other hand , women were more likely than men to teach trust and estates or skills courses, both lower status subjects that may diminish a professer's c areer prospects.