International Journal of Education and Research Vol. 5 No.

2 February 2017

READING EFFICIENCY AND ACADEMIC ERFORMANCE IN

LAW SCHOOL

Maria Teresa F. Calderon, Ph.D.

Eduardo O. de La Cruz Jr., Ed.D.

The ability to read well is a critical, indispensable skill that can make or break
the academic career of any aspiring lawyer. (McKinney 2005)

Critical reading skills are key to law success. In fact, reading skills may be more
determinative of law school success than LSAT scores. However, some students
arrive at law school with deficient reading skills or with undergraduate skills that
do not translate into good reading skills in law. (Grise’ 2014)

James Stratman, an experienced reading researcher, suggests that legal educators

incorrectly assume that law students enter law school with “intact literacy skills”
and those skills can be “readily transferred to the texts of law.”

A beginning law student’s success with legal text is based upon both general reading
skills and an understanding of the law. (Dewitz 1990) Professor Ruth Ann McKinney
summarizes the importance of legal reading to the beginning law student as follows:

Law students-and lawyers-who read law well are getting something from their
reading that is not shared by those who read law less proficiently. Starting with
the first days of class, what law students understand about the reading process
itself has a major impact on how they read their assignments. How they read
their assignments determines what they are able to get from those cases and
statutes, what they are able to bring to class discussions and take from class
discussions, and ultimately – what they are able to learn for exams.

In her 1995 study, Dorothy Deegan, one of the pioneers of legal reading research,
inquired: If it could be empirically demonstrated that variability in reading
correlates with performance as assessed by grades, then the law school community
would be hard-pressed to continue to ignore factors concerning individual
differences in student reading.
In her empirical study on legal reading (published in 2007), Christensen suggests a
correlation exists between the reading strategies of the top law students and their
first semester grades.
41
 ISSN: 2411-5681 www.ijern.com

Research Aims_________________________________________
The study addressed the following research questions:

1. What is the reading efficiency of the first year law students?

2. What is the general weighted average of the first year law students?
3. Is there a relationship between the reading efficiency and general
weighted average of the first year law students?

Method_______________________________________________

Participants
This study included the freshman law students for school year 2015-2016 who
completed the Nelson-Denny Reading Test Form G at the first day of the first
semester; only students whose general weighted average (GWA) were obtained at
the end of the first semester were included in the study.

The majority of students were female (56%). Average age was 26.6 (SD=6.16, range
20 to 57). All participants are Filipinos, sufficiently fluent in English.

Measures
The Nelson-Denny Reading Test (NDRT) Form G was administered to classroom
groups and yielded scores for vocabulary, comprehension and reading rate.
The Nelson- Denny Reading Test is a reading survey test for high school, college
students and adults. A two-part test, the Nelson-Denny measures vocabulary
development, comprehension, and reading rate. Part I (Vocabulary) is a fifteen-
minute timed test; Part II (Comprehension and Rate) is a twenty-minute test. The
first minute of the Comprehension test is used to determine reading rate.
The Nelson-Denny consists a vocabulary section comprised of 80 multiple-choice
questions and a reading comprehension section; on the latter section, a reading rate
score (cased on the first minute of the test) can be obtained. The reading
comprehension section consists of seven reading passages and a total of 38 multiple-
choice questions (each with five possible answers). Examinees are instructed to read
completely through a passage before answering the questions; they are also told that
they may look back ot the passage but should not puzzle too log over any one
question. The passages are divided into three types: Humanities, social sciences, and
science. The 38 comprehension questions are divided equally between “primarily
literal” items and “largely interpretive” ones.

42
 International Journal of Education and Research Vol. 5 No. 2 February 2017

Procedures

The researcher administered the Nelson-Denny Reading Test Form G at the

beginning of the 1st semester 2015-2016 on August 2015 at the Arellano
University School of Law, Manila to the incoming freshmen.

The test administrator was responsible for scoring the tests. The study adopted
the scoring guidelines for native English speakers and non-native speakers of
English from the NDRT Manual for Scoring and Interpretation as provided by
Houghton Mifflin Company.


Analyses
For statistical analysis of data, mean, standard deviation and Pearson r were used.
The computed value of r was interpreted at 0.05 level of significance.

Results_______________________________________________

Overall Performance

1. What is the performance of the students as regards vocabulary,

comprehension and reading rate?

Reading
Vocabulary Comprehension Rate
Stanine N % N % N %
9 0 0 0 0 2 1.8
8 0 0 2 1.8 5 4.5
7 2 1.8 9 8.11 11 9.91
6 11 9.91 30 27.03 26 23.42
5 24 21.62 48 43.24 21 18.92
4 31 27.93 19 17.12 26 23.42
3 32 28.83 3 2.7 8 7.21
2 8 7.21 0 0 11 9.91
1 3 2.7 0 0 1 0.9
Total 111 100 111 100 111 100
Mean 3.95 5.26 4.9
SD 1.28 1.33 1.39

43
 ISSN: 2411-5681 www.ijern.com

2. What is the GWA of the students?

GWA Grade Total

% N %
1 99- 0 2 1.8
100
1.25 96-98 0 5 4.5
1.5 93-95 0 11 9.91
1.75 90-92 0 26 23.42
2 87-89 1.61 21 18.92
2.25 84-86 14.52 26 23.42
2.5 81-83 14.52 8 7.21
2.75 78-80 32.26 11 9.91
3 75-77 37.1 1 0.9
Total 100 111 100
Mean 79.4
SD 4.54

3. Is there a significant relationship on paired profile variables of the students?

Variables Computed r Tabular r at Description Decision

0.05
Vocabulary and Comprehension 0.63 0.1946 Significant Reject Ho;
Accept Ha
GWA and Vocabulary 0.32 0.1946 Significant Reject Ho;
Accept Ha
GWA and Comprehension 0.36 0.1946 Significant Reject Ho;
Accept Ha
Vocabulary and Reading Rate 0.23 0.1946 Significant Reject Ho;
Accept Ha
Comprehension and Reading Rate 0.23 0.1946 Significant Reject Ho;
Accept Ha
GWA and Reading Rate -0.05 0.1946 Not Accept Ho
Significant

44
 International Journal of Education and Research Vol. 5 No. 2 February 2017

Discussion____________________________________________
The overall purpose of the current study was to assess the reading efficiency of the
freshmen law students and investigate the relationship between reading efficiency
and general weighted average.

The vocabulary scores of the respondents revealed an average raw score of 52 from
a total of 80 items (65%), stanine 3.95. The comprehension scores of the
respendodents revealed an average raw score of 28 from a total of 38 items (74%),
stanine 5.26. The average reading rate was 207 words per minute, stanine 4.9. The
mean GWA of the respondents at the end of the first semester was 79.4.

The results revealed the significant relationship of paired profile variables:

vocabulary and comprehension, vocabulary and reading rate, comprehension and
reading rate, GWA and vocabulary, GWA and comprehension.

Some students arrive at law school with deficient reading skills or with
undergraduate skills that do not translate into good reading skills in law. (Grise’
2014) One of the most important skills in law school is to read a judidcial opinion
efficiently and accurately. Yet there have been relatively few empirical studies
researching how law students read legal text. Not only are legal texts “largely
incomprehensible” to novice readers, law schools do not always spend sufficient time
instructing students about how to read legal text. Instead, we assume our students are
good legal readers upon entering law school. (McKinney 2005)

Legal reading is a challenging task for a new law student. To comprehend legal text
requires knowledge of legal terminology and an understanding of both case
structure and legal theory. Although there are many students who adapt quickly to
legal reading, there are others who continue to struggle with legal reading
throughout law school. (Lundberg 1987)

Legal educators can no longer assume that all law students are good legal readers
simply because they were successful before law school. In addition, just because
students did well before law school does not mean they will be successful in the
study of law. (Christensen 2007)

45
 ISSN: 2411-5681 www.ijern.com

Future research

Given the distinct fluency groups identified in this exploratory study, future
research may validate instructional methods and curriculum for use with each
group. We anticipate that additional experimental and descriptive studies can help
disentangle the relationship of skill level and the value of targeted interventions.

Conclusion____________________________________________
A positive and substantial relationship exists between reading efficiency
and academic performance in law school.
Adult educators may be able to help many law students achieve greater academic
success by teaching how to read law efficiently, effectively and powerfully.
Fortunately, the ability to read law well (quickly and accurately) is a skill that can
be acquired through knowledge and practice. The sooner the student masters these
skills, the greater the rewards. (Deegan 1995)

Funding

The author(s) received financial support for the research, authorship,

and/or publication of this article.

46
 International Journal of Education and Research Vol. 5 No. 2 February 2017

REFERENCES

James L.Brown, Fishco, V.V., and Hamma, G. Nelson-Denny Reading Test: Manual
for Scoring and Interpretation, Forms G and H, Chicago, Illinois: Riverside, 1993.

Leah M. Christensen, Legal Reading and Success in Law School: An

Empirical Study, 30 SEATTLE U.L. REV. 603, 627 (2007).

Leah M. Christensen, Legal Reading and Success in Law School: The Reading
Strategies of Law Students with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), TJSL Legal
Studies Research Paper No 1475033, (2009).

Dorothy H. Deegan, Exploring Individual Differences Among Novices Reading in a

Specific Domain: The Case Of Law, 30 Reading Research Quarterly 154, 157 (1995).

Courtney Lee, Legal Skills for Law School & Legal Practice, Pacific McGeorge

Skills Hour Series, University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law.

Jane Bloom Grise’, Teaching First-Year Law Students to Read So Carefully

That They Discover a “Mistake” in a Judicial Opinion, (2014) Law Faculty
Popular Media, Paper 4, University of Kentucky.

Mary A. Lundberg, Metacognitive Aspects of Reading Comprehension: Studying

Understanding in Legal Case Analysis, 22 READING RES. Q. 407, 409 (1987).

Ruth Ann McKinney, Reading Like a Lawyer: Time Saving Strategies for
Reading Law Like an Expert (2005).

47
 ISSN: 2411-5681 www.ijern.com

Jay Mitchell, Reading (In the Clinic) is Fundamental, 10 CLINICAL L. REV.

297, 313 (2012).

James F. Stratman, The Emergence of Legal Composition as a Field of Inquiry:

Evaluating the Prospects, 60 REV. EDUC RES, 153, 235 (1990).

James F. Stratman, When Law Students Read Cases: Exploring

Relationships Between Professional Legal Reasoning Roles and Problem
Detection, 34 DISCOURSE PROCESSES 57, 77 (2002).

48