« Where Top-Down Meets Bottom Up | Main | "Teaching the Carceral State" »

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

The Angsting Thread (Law Review Edition, Spring 2013)

Friends, the time has come when Redyip is visible.  You know what that means. Feel free to use the comments to share your information (and gripes or praise) about which law reviews have turned over, which ones haven't yet, and where you've heard from, and where you've not, and what you'd like Santa to bring you this coming Xmas, etc. It's the semi-annual angsting thread for the law review submission season. Have at it. And do it reasonably nicely, pretty please. Maybe Redyip will even tweet a little this spring.

Update: here is a link to the last page of comments.

Posted by Dan Markel on February 13, 2013 at 01:08 PM in Blogging, Law Review Review | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef017ee87cef85970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Angsting Thread (Law Review Edition, Spring 2013):

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

BU Ding. Off expedite.

Posted by: Early Feb | Mar 15, 2013 5:02:20 PM

Early Feb, how long until your expedite expires?

Posted by: Anon | Mar 15, 2013 5:03:59 PM

Question about expediting. So I have an offer from a T90 general law review and I expedited almost all the way up, including to the top speciality journals in my field. I withdrew from all lower and equivalent ranked general reviews but didn't withdraw from specialities. I have since received an offer from a relatively low ranked speciality, which is sort of peer-reviewed. The second offer expires after the first one but I don't think I would choose it so it isn't worth expediting to get extra time. However, do you think it is worth emailing at least the other speciality journals to confirm the expedite and let them know I have an additional offer? Signalling more interest maybe?

Posted by: anonymouse | Mar 15, 2013 5:10:55 PM

I still have several days left.

Posted by: Early Feb | Mar 15, 2013 5:18:09 PM

Would anyone take a T10 online offer over a T100? I'm considering it because of the name, expedited editing, etc. while other wouldn't publish until a full year from now. This is a 5000 word essay.

Posted by: FirstTimeEssayist | Mar 15, 2013 5:42:19 PM

@firsttimessayist, I would take a t10 online for an essay, yes.

Posted by: princess and the pea | Mar 15, 2013 5:44:05 PM

Penn ding, not off expedite. I don't remember seeing Penn mentioned in this thread. The message said they enjoyed my article, but somehow I don't believe them.

Posted by: T4TP | Mar 15, 2013 5:51:08 PM

FirstTimeEssayist, for what it's worth, I'd likely take the T10 Online offer. My piece under submission is also an essay (6K words), so I've given this some thought.

Posted by: Retired articles editor | Mar 15, 2013 5:52:47 PM

Me thinks Penn enjoyed all the articles that came through...

Posted by: ANon | Mar 15, 2013 5:59:26 PM

anonymouse- FWIW- I think you should. Have you asked for an extension for your existing (soon-to-expire) offer? You might consider that. But I don't think it's unreasonable to send a direct email to say that you hope that they are still considering your article and that you have another offer. If they've already rejected you, then shame on them for not notifying you; I wouldn't be concerned about annoying them. And if they are still considering your article, how can it hurt you? If anything, it should "help" them be more confident in your piece. And to someone who says that journals don't think about other offers (and that they do their own review and don't care who else is interested) .. that's just plain naive.

Posted by: ANon | Mar 15, 2013 6:22:09 PM

Woohoo, just received a T50 offer! One question for withdrawals... I'm withdrawing from roughly all lower-ranked (USN) schools but just wanted to double-check before withdrawing from Cardozo. I've heard before that their law review is very well-respected, and it ranks 23rd on W&L (despite the school ranking 58th). Is Cardozo a special case? Thanks, as always!

Posted by: newbq | Mar 15, 2013 6:39:33 PM

@newbq, IDK the answer, but it seems anomalous enough to refrain from withdrawing. If it comes down to a decision between your current offer and cardozo, you can seek more opinions (and won't be bound to take it just b/c you didn't withdraw).

Posted by: vapnanigans | Mar 15, 2013 7:18:12 PM

Yes, Cardozo is special. Also, this page of comments is the reason why simply using the handle "anon" doesn't work. I couldn't follow half of what was being said in the confusion over unethical expedites, which seemed to be talking past each other based on totally different premises.

Posted by: BG | Mar 15, 2013 7:22:27 PM

Thanks for the T10 online thoughts. It seems like the previous authors are super impressive compared to me. ;)

Posted by: FirstTimeEssayist | Mar 15, 2013 7:36:46 PM

uva

Posted by: anon | Mar 15, 2013 8:09:25 PM

anon (4:47 PM), huh? Looking at the last year of issues, I see exactly one half of one article by a member of the Chicago faculty in Chicago's law review (not counting symposium contributors, who are not selected by the editors). Chicago publishes fewer issues and articles than comparable law reviews, which I expect accounts for the lower W&L ranking; that site's methodology just counts total cites, not cites per article.

Posted by: Chicagoan | Mar 15, 2013 9:46:43 PM

Thanks, vapnanigans and BG! Out of curiosity, are there other "special" schools?

Posted by: newbq | Mar 15, 2013 10:02:51 PM

What makes Cardozo special? I've never heard that.

Posted by: vappy | Mar 15, 2013 10:40:10 PM

Chicagoan, w&l does count cites per article, as well as how quickly articles get cited. Of course, it also counts total cites. All of these factors are taken into account.

Posted by: AnonP | Mar 15, 2013 11:23:18 PM

@newbq, my gut says maybe brooklyn

Posted by: vapnanigans | Mar 15, 2013 11:41:16 PM

@newbq, Fordham has been mentioned as one. Following on the last comment, it sounds like it's a New York thing. So the question is, why would NY schools be special in this regard?

Posted by: Anon | Mar 16, 2013 1:43:47 AM

Cardozo used to be special in that it was a top 50 law review at a "Tier 2" school, back when US news did not rank beyond the top 50. Now the law review moderately outperforms the school's overall US News rank, but not by a huge margin. A few other law reviews also outperform their school's US News rank by small amounts. For example, BU is considered a top 25 law review even though it ranks 29 this year.

Posted by: anonprof | Mar 16, 2013 5:41:40 AM

Thanks, anonprof! Though 23 (W&L) v. 58 (USN) doesn't seem like that small a margin for Cardozo...

Posted by: newbq | Mar 16, 2013 7:10:32 AM

Conn. is another. It's ranked about 40 in W&L, but higher in USN.

Posted by: anNN | Mar 16, 2013 8:07:54 AM

Conn. is another. It's ranked about 40 in W&L, but higher in USN.

Posted by: anNN | Mar 16, 2013 8:07:56 AM

Florida ding after a week of silence.

Posted by: anoff | Mar 16, 2013 8:44:13 AM

There are others that go in the opposite direction.
Arizona State is USN #29, yet the journal is W&L 90s.
BYU is USN #44, but in the 70s.
Richmond is USN #53, but in 80s.

So, that leads to the question.... would you take an offer from:

(1) a USN Top-50, but that has a W&L in the top 100

OR

(2) a W&L Top-50, but that had a USN in the top 100?

Posted by: Vote: 1 or 2 ... | Mar 16, 2013 9:32:13 AM

(1). Hands-down.

Posted by: anoff | Mar 16, 2013 9:34:16 AM

So, what's the current thinking on certifying versus not certifying an offer on ExpressO?

Posted by: Patience | Mar 16, 2013 9:43:06 AM

Patience- I'd be interested in hearing from people like RAE and other editors because they are on the other side of the table. For my part (as a submitter), I asked for my first offer to be certified since I figured that the journal (T3) wouldn't be surprised/insulted that I was expediting. But for my subsequent better offers, I didn't request it. And upon reflection, I won't do it in the future. Maybe I'm being naive but since I'm a TTprof with a couple articles under my belt (from good journals), they should know that it's highly unlikely I'm making up an offer.

Posted by: anon | Mar 16, 2013 10:14:23 AM

One thing about certifying is it gives you a time deadline as well as a date. In the past, people on this thread have posted about whether to treat a deadline (e.g. "one week" or "by March 20") as open until 5pm, midnight, etc. With certification, it appears the journal determines the time (and I assume the journals to which you expedite it can see it). So if you set it for a day or two early to give yourself time to choose a la Dreaming On, or if you set it for 11:59pm to max out the window, it may be contradicted by the certified offer.

Posted by: anne VAPaway | Mar 16, 2013 11:53:08 AM

Patience - I asked to certify, and the journal did it (I think so anyway; shortly after I requested it, they sent an email via Expresso saying I had an offer, and a green check mark showed up in the offer column). Every journal knows we are all expediting between offer date and deadline (it does not take a week to read and think about the offer terms), so I do not think they will take offense.

Posted by: Westie | Mar 16, 2013 12:41:45 PM

anyone submitting to international law journals? have you heard anything?

Posted by: anon | Mar 16, 2013 4:11:31 PM

Thanks, everyone. I remember reading earlier in the hundreds of messages here about ExpressO not sending the notice of the request for expedited review to ANY journal until it could certify the offer, thus reducing the window even for the vast majority of journals that do not ask for certification. Is there truth to this? It's why I clicked "no." If my decision was wrong, then is there any way to go back and click "yes"?

I am getting concerned because I have had no acknowledgement of my expedite request from any journal, nor has it shaken loose any rejections, and my offer is from a solid top-50 journal. In past years, a request for expedited review has always (almost immediately) shaken loose a few rejections and drawn acknowledgements from at least half the outstanding journals. Have journal practices just changed that much in the past year, or has my failure to ask for certification placed my request in permanent limbo?

Posted by: Patience | Mar 16, 2013 4:37:21 PM

anon (10:14), I can't say anything about the ExpressO certification feature because I haven't dealt with it. I will observe that the feature seems unnecessary.

Posted by: Retired articles editor | Mar 16, 2013 5:20:45 PM

I asked for certification and my offering journal never sent it. Nevertheless, it does appear that at least some of my expedite requests went through.

I agree with RAE: the certification system is unnecessary.

Posted by: Early Feb | Mar 16, 2013 5:25:23 PM

Patience-
I have a pending expedite due next week (from a T50) and I haven't heard from about 25 out of the top 50. If your numbers are similar, I wouldn't worry about not hearing back. My latest dings were Cardozo and Davis (via Sch). Also, I don't think that a lack of certifying holds things up. I think it's just a preference that the journals select.

Posted by: ANon | Mar 16, 2013 5:40:02 PM

How do you tell if a journal sent the requested certification?

Posted by: vappy | Mar 16, 2013 5:42:25 PM

vappy- A big green check mark will appear next to the school making the offer in your Active Express O window (where all the journals you sent your article to). Generally, it will appear at the top (and then the rest will be in alpha order)... Express will also automatically generate an email notifying you of the offer.

Posted by: ANon | Mar 16, 2013 5:45:23 PM

How should Illinois be considered? It has suffered a precipitous drop in the rankings (from 21 to 47). Is it closer to a T25 journal, or a T50 journal? (I suspect someone will reply by citing W&L rankings, but as I and others have said earlier, those seem irrelevant.)

I'm also concerned that, although the students and faculty at Illinois are undoubtedly wonderful, the school itself seems to have a cloud hanging over it, after the political admission scandals and the GPA/LSAT misreporting. Is publishing in Illinois Law Review going to look like publishing in the Enron Law Review?

I suspect that this will all blow over in the long run, but if you're a VAP or something and will be on the market next year, I could see why it matters.

Posted by: Abraham L. | Mar 16, 2013 5:47:56 PM

@newbq--I wasn't talking about the W&L rankings, which are utterly irrelevant and basically equivalent to the Cooley rankings of law schools. Cardozo is better regarded than its US News rank, but it is a 45-50 or so law review, not a top 25 law review. If you don't mind taking Columbia over Yale or Cardozo over Chicago, then go ahead and use W&L.

Posted by: anonprof | Mar 16, 2013 6:02:34 PM

Thanks once again, everyone! Very helpful, especially ANon. I agree with RAE and Early Feb. One more question for the group: Have you all noticed that, when you delete an earlier-deadline expedite from Scholastica (to avoid Scholastica designating that earlier deadline as "preferred") the journal gets a notice that you have "canceled" your expedite? The notice does not seem to have the appropriate context--do the journals know what we are doing here, or will they think that there is now NO request for expedited review?

Posted by: Patience | Mar 16, 2013 6:03:38 PM

anonprof- Of course, there are blips in the W&L rankings (like you point out), but to call them "utterly irrelevant" is a gross overstatement, to say the least.

Posted by: ANon | Mar 16, 2013 6:26:23 PM

I'd take Columbia over Yale any day of the week.

Posted by: AnonAsstProf | Mar 16, 2013 7:00:56 PM

I would be supremely excited to get an offer from either of them.

Posted by: Early Feb | Mar 16, 2013 7:14:31 PM

ANon--the W&L rankings are irrelevant to lawprofs, in the sense that I have never heard a single lawprof colleague mention them. We have our own sense of the prestige of journals. The W&L rankings are an absurdly imperfect reflection of that gestalt. They might be slightly useful to people who are new to this and don't have a good sense of the gestalt, but even then the blips make that highly risky. Most importantly, however, the W&L rankings only seek to *capture* the gestalt, they do not help *shape* it.

US News is different. US News has the power to shape the gestalt. If a school goes down in the US News rankings, its prestige falls independently of any other variable. If Bob Morse next year just feels like screwing Cardozo and drops its ranking by 50 places for reason whatsoever, then Cardozo Law Review will suffer a major hit--not the full 50 places, but a major hit nonetheless.

A good way to think about it is that US News defines the presumptive baseline, and a few law reviews such as Cardozo manage to deviate from the baseline in significant ways. But consulting the W&L rankings is unlikely to tell you which law reviews those are and by how much. It is correct to think that Cardozo does better than its USNews ranking. It is incorrect to think they are remotely close to No. 23. So if you want to use the W&L rankings and commit those mistakes, then go ahead.

Posted by: anonprof | Mar 16, 2013 7:27:38 PM

anonprof- Well, my school does talk about W&L rankings. And I'm not disagreeing with you when it comes to wide disparities like Cardozo ... And I'm not saying that W&L rankings should be consulted exclusively. But to say that they are "utterly irrelevant" is - respectfully - a ridiculous statement that stands to mislead non-profs out there. Thus, the counter-point.

Posted by: ANon | Mar 16, 2013 8:08:32 PM

Has a dean ever sent out an email criticizing or explaining a fall in W&L rankings?

Would you really publish in Iowa rather than Chicago?

Posted by: Homely | Mar 16, 2013 9:58:57 PM

ANon, is your school W&L by any chance? Flippant response aside, I think we have nothing more left to say. I stand by my assertion that a non-prof is more likely to be misled by relying on the W&L ranking than by ignoring it altogether and sticking by USNews exclusively. Apparently there are other lawprofs who disagree.

Posted by: anonprof | Mar 16, 2013 10:09:23 PM

When I was in practice I had offers to publish a piece from a school in the USN 30s / W&L 100s (at the time) and a school in the USN 50s / W&L 30s. Every professor I asked said to ignore the W&L numbers and publish in the journal with the better USN ranking.

Posted by: vappy | Mar 16, 2013 10:37:47 PM

Patience, I wouldn't be worried about the cancellation notices. To the editors, they appear like this: "XXX cancelled an expedite request for 'YYY'" in the journal's activity log. While I see how that might not communicate the right message, I think it is readily apparent that the author is just pruning and updating expedite requests. Various editor viws show expedite dates prominently, so it is hard to imagine any editors would conclude that expedited review was no longer required.
Nonetheless, when I talk to the Scholastica folks, I will suggest changing it to "XXX updated an expedite request for 'YYY,'" language that is accurate for any true cancellation as well as the more-common update.

Posted by: Retired articles editor | Mar 16, 2013 10:42:16 PM

Thanks, RAE--we've been fortunate to have you as part of this discussion. Good luck in your discussions with Scholastica!

Posted by: Patience | Mar 16, 2013 11:08:23 PM

I've been a law prof for 7 years now. No law prof talks about W&L rankings. Trust me, I have no doubt that the standard is US News. W&L is a distraction and it's sad that so many people here seem to pay that much attention to those rankings.

Posted by: LawPrawf | Mar 16, 2013 11:53:59 PM

Citation counts are a weak proxy of article quality. But they're still a better proxy than any of the factors that go into the U.S. News ratings. When journals do unexpectedly well in the Washington and Lee scores (given their school's US News rank), there's almost always a reason. Both scales are relevant in the Keynesian beauty contest that is article placement.

Posted by: James Grimmelmann | Mar 17, 2013 1:42:11 AM

Very quiet lately ... Has anyone heard from Vanderbilt, USC, Wash U, NW, GW, Alabama, Emory, Iowa, BC, North Carolina, W&M, Georgia, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Wake, Arizona, George Mason, Maryland, Florida State, Illinois, or Hastings recently? Thank you.

Posted by: waiting | Mar 17, 2013 12:51:51 PM

@waiting, haven't seen much action the last day or two, but vandy and wash have been dinging steadily (me included)

Posted by: vapnanigans | Mar 17, 2013 1:28:33 PM

Thanks, vapnanigans. I have an expedite request expiring this week and was hoping to hear from all of these... Was yours off of an expedite? Thanks again.

Posted by: waiting | Mar 17, 2013 1:34:38 PM

have heard reliably of iowa ding and emory & unc offers in last 10 days

Posted by: anonny | Mar 17, 2013 1:40:14 PM

thanks, anonny.

Posted by: waiting | Mar 17, 2013 1:43:38 PM

I have expedited to all of those places - twice so far - and have yet to hear from a single one...

Posted by: Anonymouse | Mar 17, 2013 1:57:08 PM

Post a comment