Many law professors use a modified version of the Socratic method to teach not only the principles of the cases you are reading, but also to teach the students the kind of legal reasoning they will need as lawyers.  The idea behind this method is that students actively participate in thinking through the problems raised by the cases and analyze the way particular facts together with a legal principle lead to certain conclusions, and how new facts will require different conclusions. It is important to remember that the professor is putting individual students on the spot not to humiliate them but to encourage the kind of logical legal analysis that you must employ when reading the cases and answering exam questions.  A skillful practitioner of the Socratic method can use the student’s answer to engage the students in a rigorous analysis of the issues of the case without humiliating individual students.  As long as you have read the assignment and have been present for the classes, you should not be worried about being called on in class.

Note:  Some teachers useless common methods to teach first-year classes, however.  As but one example, some professors may use problem-solving approaches to learning law, such as having students work through case files instead of reading.   Because such teaching methodologies may be unfamiliar, and are not generally discussed in materials introducing beginning students to law school, students may at first find these methods disorienting or frustrating.  But such teaching methods replicate precisely the kind of thinking students are expected to demonstrate in an exam essay question, applying legal principles to facts.  Thus regardless of the methodology employed in the classroom, it is likely by the end of the semester students will be expected to demonstrate the same range of skills in most or all of their first-year classes.