« Circuit split on public officials' Twitter accounts | Main | Tulane Forrester Fellowship 2021-2022 »

Friday, January 29, 2021

Submission Angsting Spring 2021

This is the post to share information or ask questions about submitting to law reviews.

The comments can be used to share information, complaints, praise, etc. about which journals you have heard from, which you have not, and so forth.

Additionally, a spreadsheet to gather information is here (and embedded below).

I won't update or watch the spreadsheet. You can go ahead and add your own information by going to the spreadsheet here. The spreadsheet is editable by anyone, except that a few columns and a row (the ones highlighted in yellow) are locked, either because they auto-calculate or because tampering with them has caused a problem in the past. (If something about them needs to be changed post a comment, and I will change them, but please be patient.)

Posted by Sarah Lawsky on January 29, 2021 at 11:48 AM in Law Review Review | Permalink

Comments

When will reviews (especially T30) open for the next submission season? Is it early or late July?

Posted by: anon | Jun 27, 2021 2:47:17 PM

So - while the season isn't officially over (a small number of law reviews are still accepting) here is the latest Scholastica malfeasance to look out for:

They have Cincinnati open (but Cincy is closed) - here is the link: https://uclawreview.org/publish-with-us/

Ditto for Syracuse: https://lawreview.syr.edu/contact-us/#Submissions

Hmmm. Perhaps a symposium on the ethics - or lack thereof - of scholastica might be a good idea

Posted by: AngryCrimLawProf | May 14, 2021 12:21:16 PM

According to Penn Law Review's website, it is open for submissions.

Posted by: anon | Apr 24, 2021 1:02:39 AM

@PostDocGuy

Yes, as soon as we got the final acceptance I closed offers. So no money was wasted. Still...it's frustrating on your end.

Posted by: anonT100CAE | Apr 22, 2021 3:28:41 PM

Oddly enough, things are still ongoing in some journals. I've got an offer in the past week from several specialties. I've also got rejections from some flagships journals in the T60, and even one of the T10s that only upon expediting got to actually read my submission (after two and a half months). Who knows what will happen.

Posted by: meemee | Apr 21, 2021 8:22:28 AM

Looks like Stanford is still going. They just accepted a piece yesterday according to Twitter. What a weird cycle.

Posted by: Anon | Apr 20, 2021 4:32:18 PM

Probably going to pull the plug on my submission this week. It's been two and a half months with 40 rejections, and zero indication of interest from the other 40 journals to which it has been submitted.

At this point it probably makes more sense to just resubmit this summer after revising. $500+ to Scholastica for a whole lot of nothing. . . there's no way people would tolerate this if we all had to reach into our pockets to fund the "costs" of sending an email with an attachment.

Posted by: Angsting Prof | Apr 19, 2021 2:21:56 PM

Over? - the cycle is not over. This past week I decided not to use Scholastica and e-mail the law reviews directly. There are a few in the T-25 to T-125 range that are still considering and accepting new articles. Of course, if you follow Scholastica you will be steered to waste your or your school's monies, because the site is inaccurate. But, if you are only willing to publish in the top 10 or tope 25 then the cycle is likely over.

Posted by: AngryCrimLawProf | Apr 18, 2021 6:21:20 PM

Is the cycle now fully over? I've heard nothing but silence and a few "we are full and have (not) read your Article" for the past 2 weeks

Posted by: Over? | Apr 18, 2021 1:36:37 PM

AngryCrimLawProf - Scholastica could deny mens rea elements 1 and 2 by claiming they have no idea this is happening, it's a technical error, it's an automated system, no one has complained or the complaints are lost in their system such that they effectively have no notice of the situation, it's our own fault for paying, etc. Also perhaps there is something in the terms and conditions putting us on notice that they can keep money paid in error.

Carefully crafted "willful blindness" (or perhaps genuine blindness) could mean Scholastica is not liable for setting up a system designed to harvest funds paid in error.

Posted by: angstify x10 | Apr 17, 2021 6:16:54 PM

@Stephanie Farrior and @anon--thanks for the tips on publications that might be interested in my experiential refugee rights story.

Posted by: WriterProf | Apr 17, 2021 10:52:09 AM

@anonT100CAE thanks for your comment
Did you close the possibility to submit though? If the email says you are open and someone clicks and sees he can't actually submit that's OK. But if you didn't close the submissions, you are unfortunately a part of the problem.

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Apr 16, 2021 2:44:37 PM

anonT100CAE - I appreciate your comments. This is why I did not blame the law reviews. I have a lot of respect for the work that you do and I advise my school's law review as well. My anger is focused on Scholastica. It has become a racket. This is wire fraud generally and all but element 2 is easily met when Scholastica sends out an e-mail encouraging authors to submit to law reviews that are closed

(1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money;
(2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud;
(3) that it was reasonably foreseeable that interstate wire communications would be used; and
(4) that interstate wire communications were in fact used

I am sorry that we - the authors and the editors - are the victims of this system

Posted by: AngryCrimLawProf | Apr 16, 2021 10:40:03 AM

As a T100 chief AE, I'll just say that this whole Scholastica email thing is a massive pain. They require Journals to "opt in" a couple weeks early, but then there's no mechanism for withdrawing when we fill before the email is sent out mid-month. Very frustrating, and we get to deal with the (understandable) blowback.

Particularly frustrating with a cycle as odd as this one where many authors seem content to accept offers instead of expediting, meaning we fill faster.

Posted by: anonT100CAE | Apr 16, 2021 10:24:34 AM

Someone should write a law review article on Scholastica's potential criminal, tortious, contractual, and/or unjust enrichment liability - and submit the piece using Scholastica.

Posted by: angstify x10 | Apr 16, 2021 2:03:14 AM

IKJ - Actually they are not closed - they posted a comment in the Scholastica section. But Kentucky is closed and the e-mail went out this morning inviting submissions

Posted by: AnonProf-8808 | Apr 15, 2021 11:56:52 PM

IKJ - The whole thing about Tulane is a puzzle. They did post on the conversation that they were done accepting articles. I don't know how Scholastica works in terms of closing down the portals. But, sending out the e-mail notifying everyone that Tulane is open is wrong in light of what is in the conversation

Posted by: AnonProf-8808 | Apr 15, 2021 11:54:49 PM

But if Tulane closed, why didn't they close their portal on Scholastica?

Posted by: lkj | Apr 15, 2021 9:45:58 PM

@WriterProf:
You might also consider submitting to Oxford's Journal of Human Rights Practice. Their word limit is just 5K to 10K words, but if your essay is within this limit, it sounds as though your essay might be of interest to them. https://academic.oup.com/jhrp/pages/General_Instructions

Posted by: Stephanie Farrior | Apr 15, 2021 7:25:41 PM

This is not a criticism on law review editors. It is solely a blast at Scholastica. This morning they sent out an e-mail indicating that Tulane was still open and accepting articles. But the Tulane editors diligently placed in the "conversation" on Scholastica that they were closed for now. One has to wonder how many other journals this is true of in regard to Scholastica pocketing money. I do not think that an analogy of an airline overselling seats works here. When one thinks of a $6 plus fee per upload, it might not be "the crime of the century" but in the aggregate it is beyond irresponsible. And frankly, they ought to look at the elements of wire-fraud.

Posted by: AngryCrimLawProf | Apr 15, 2021 5:56:07 PM

@ghost It happens, much more than most on this thread care to admit. You really can't expect professional or even courteous treatment from AEs. (And they don't extend professional or even courteous treatment to the AEs at other journals either.) That's where peer review is very different. You might get a bad or an ill-informed review, but there's a level of decency in peer review that's missing in the law review process.

Posted by: re ghost | Apr 11, 2021 10:34:31 AM

In your experience, how common is it for articles editors to express interest in your article, even asking you to get more time from another journal, and then ghost you (even once you've gotten them the extra time)?

Posted by: ghost | Apr 9, 2021 8:05:20 PM

@WriterProf: I would also recommend RefLaw (http://www.reflaw.org/), which is based at the University of Michigan and run by Prof. Jim Hathaway. They're an online only journal, but they're usually accepting of experiential-type essays.

Posted by: anon | Apr 9, 2021 5:05:34 PM

Looking for advice placing a very unconventional article. It is a long read essay about my experience doing volunteer asylum cases with refugees stranded in camps in Greece. The article is not at all academic, but rather is my effort to let people know what it is like to do that kind of work. Most of all, I want to describe the refugees I worked for and with (they served as interpreters and colleagues), and hopefully change the story told about who they are. I've submitted to human rights,immigration, and social justice specialty journals that appear receptive to this kind of essay. If anyone has other ideas about specific flagship journals that might find this interesting, let me know.

Posted by: WriterProf | Apr 9, 2021 4:56:47 PM

I don't think the journals should try to solve the system problem, but I do think they should feel empowered to make changes necessary to make the submission process work for them. The main problem, it seems to me, is that there are many more articles than there are slots. But that also means journals should not have to worry that they won't find the few articles they want to publish--there are plenty of articles that are good and not getting read. If the 3-4 AEs a journal has can only read 600 submissions, then that journal should strongly consider: (1) opening their portal when they're ready to begin review; (2) closing it when they hit 600 submissions; (3) ignoring expedites as they read through the submissions; and (4) filling remaining slots using a similar process in the fall season. For authors, who usually are ready to submit at various points over the fall season, that will mean fewer places to submit to. But that's fine.

Also: journals should feel free to summarily reject pieces that aren't done, don't have proper citations, etc. I've seen editors (quite rightly) complain about professors submitting insufficient work. (What appalling prof behavior!) The solution for AEs is: don't accept it. If the idea is really great, the prof can finish their own darn work and then submit.

Posted by: anon | Apr 9, 2021 7:55:31 AM

Stanford's been awfully quiet this cycle. Anyone receive an offer from them? Anyone even still alive?

Posted by: slr | Apr 8, 2021 7:38:35 PM

An individualist solution to a structural problem is never going to work.

Expecting AEs not to make use of the expedite system is deeply unrealistic. A lot of journals, even fairly highly ranked flagships, still have only four and sometimes even just three articles editors. If you do the math, they can't possibly spend more than an average of five or ten minutes reviewing submissions if they're reviewing them all, and of course the median amount of time has to be a lot lower than the mean, since any submission that's read in any depth is going to take a lot longer than that.

In fact it's almost certainly the case that the median amount of time spent reviewing a submission at most journals is zero minutes. That's just the practical reality of a system that allows and indeed practically requires unlimited simultaneous multiple submissions.

Telling AEs they should ignore expedites and just work through a pile that's quite literally impossible to read in even the most cursory fashion is ignoring the basic realities of the system as it exists.

Posted by: Angsting Prof | Apr 8, 2021 12:56:08 PM

Tips for AEs or Open Leter to AEs
Rather than waste your time rushing to read expedites, how about reading and offering to authors equally even those that do not play the expedite game? Just dont read expedites. You will get to the paper that "is being expedited" and consider it in due course. No line jumping. If the professor is rushing you dont you think he/she will just use your offer to "move up the chain"? Shouldnt you evaluate all the work maybe you are missing a great paper that will be cited to boosting your journal? And...you will save a lot of time and energy and you wont be used by the professors who do play the expedite game. Many of us only send to journals we would accept from.

Posted by: Tipsfor AEs | Apr 8, 2021 6:26:49 AM

Anyone still here? I recently got an offer out of the blue from a T75 journal, after two months of silence. I wish it came earlier, as I think 50% of the emails I got were in the line "we did not get to read your article, please resubmit in...". Oh well. Still, an offer (which I will happily accept; unlike many others here, I only submit to journals I want to publish in).

Happy. Surprised this is not over yet.

Posted by: meemee | Apr 8, 2021 4:35:24 AM

Some authors believe that a benefit of posting a draft's early version on SSRN (before submitting it to law reviews) is so you can claim that space. If others come up with the same idea, the theory is that you can preempt them. I'm a bit dubious about that, but some profs swear by it.

Posted by: Axel Foley | Apr 7, 2021 12:35:44 PM

@CueAnon Thank you so much for your detailed guidance!

Posted by: Anon | Apr 7, 2021 11:45:34 AM

For law reviews I have not yet heard from, the following are the number of entries on the spreadsheet (reject or accept) for each:

Baylor – zero, BC – 8 (mostly rejections), Brooklyn – 1 (a rejection), Case Western – zero, Connecticut – 1 (an acceptance), Georgia State – 3 (all acceptances), Harvard Law & Policy – 1 (a rejection), Iowa – dozens, Kentucky – 13, Loyola LA – 15, Missouri – 2 (one of each, nothing since March 11), Oregon – 8 (one an acceptance), Pepperdine – 4 (nothing since 3/25), Rutgers – 1 (an acceptance on Feb 25), SMU – 7 (nothing since 3/25), Temple – 1 (an acceptance on Feb. 25), Tennessee – 15, Texas A&M – 4 (nothing since 3/24), Tulane – 7, Illinois – 9, Kansas – 3, Pittsburgh – 1 (an acceptance on 3/21), W&L – 4 (nothing since 2/28).

Does anyone, authors or AEs have insight to offer on what is going on now with journals that have less than ten entries? Some authors have lost energy for reporting, and some have placed and gone away, but still, one would expect far more activity on the spreadsheet. How could any that purport to be open have zero entries, or one?? Like Rutgers and Temple, what have you been doing since Feb. 25?? Did you fall asleep reading a submission that wasn't about criminal procedure or the 1st Amendment or impeachment?

The ultimate question, of course, for those of us with articles not yet placed, is: Are any editors still digging into the pile and pulling out some for review even though not expedited? Y'know, some of us only submitted to journals we would be happy to publish with, so if you're waiting for expedites from East Nowhere LJ, you might be missing something better.

Posted by: puzzled | Apr 6, 2021 11:14:49 PM

Do journals ever make offers after an expedite deadline has passed? Do expedite deadlines ever cause editors to pass on articles they would have otherwise considered simply because the timeframe for the expedited review is too short?

Posted by: Newhere | Apr 6, 2021 9:46:43 PM

Another possible solution to the back-up of submissions: deter authors from resubmitting cycle after cycle (maybe after 2). Scholastica could easily show editors prior submissions. I am aware of people who are submitting pieces to the T30 for the 6th, 7th, 8th times. I’m aware of people who have “hit” on the 4th or 5th. This is really bad and slows things up for everyone. I think that this past year (and this fall) are going to be insane in this regard as people who were displeased with placements resubmit en masse.

Posted by: Anon | Apr 6, 2021 9:11:49 PM

@Anon -- I almost always post a paper draft on SSRN post-acceptance, but usually after maybe a round or two of edits. It's just a great way to have your work read, cited, and distributed (via the SSRN/LSN networks).

I also usually upload the final copyedited version to SSRN, once it's available (if the law review allows) or a close enough version to it.

Download #s is another, if flawed, metric for impact. At the very least, it let's you know people are reading.

I don't usually post on SSRN before acceptance, just because it retain exclusivity for the publishing law review.

However, there may be benefits to that practice as well. Indeed, this year there was a paper that was accepted by Yale LJ in literally a single day (it's in the spreadsheet and you can find reference to it by the author on Twitter)!

Truly insane, yes (1 day acceptance) but the author surmised that perhaps the editors had seen an early version of the paper on SSRN, to explain the extremely quick turnaround...

Posted by: CueAnon | Apr 6, 2021 5:55:35 PM

I am wondering what is the pros and cons of posting articles on SSRN.

Posted by: Anon | Apr 6, 2021 5:33:11 PM

CueAnon, after two months I haven't gotten a flicker of interest from any of the 80 or so journals to which I've submitted.

I did place a general interest version of the piece with a national magazine though, which will come out in late summer or early fall.

If any AE reading this should want to take a look at what you're missing out on, I can be contacted at [email protected]

Posted by: Angsting Prof | Apr 6, 2021 1:13:35 PM

Junior Anon,

Current AE here. You should absolutely respond to the offering journal as soon as possible to acknowledge the offer. We know that you're probably courting other journals and we won't be offended to hear that you'll need some time before making your decision. What's frustrating to us is radio silence, which gives the impression that you don't think much of the offer!

Posted by: Celaeno | Apr 6, 2021 11:27:37 AM

@Angsting Prof: Ah, great points. Right, so the number of publications/placement spots have increased overall, but the scarcity of "prestigious" placements has likewise increased at the same time -- more submissions, but no change in the # of placement spots.

Also, by the way, did you end up placing your work? If not, it's too bad, as it sounds quite interesting -- I'm always interested in original historical/archival finds or discoveries that cast new light on laws, legal principles, statutory/constitutional text and meaning.

Posted by: CueAnon | Apr 6, 2021 11:17:48 AM

@Angsting Prof: Ah, great points. Right, so the number of publications/placement spots have increased overall, but the scarcity of "prestigious" placements has likewise increased at the same time -- more submissions, but no change in the # of placement spots.

Also, by the way, did you end up placing your work? If not, it's too bad, as it sounds quite interesting -- I'm always interested in original historical/archival finds or discoveries that cast new light on laws, legal principles, statutory/constitutional text and meaning.

Posted by: CueAnon | Apr 6, 2021 11:17:48 AM

When you get an offer that you may or may not accept, do you respond to the offering journal right away to acknowledge it and say thanks? Wait until the deadline to just accept or decline? Expedite first, see if you get any expressions of interest, and then email to ask for more time? I feel rude not responding, but also feel rude responding in a way that makes it clear I'm still shopping around.

Posted by: JuniorAnon | Apr 6, 2021 10:10:20 AM

CueAnon here are some thoughts on the bottleneck problem with publication:

About ten years ago I looked at the increase in law review publication between 1970 and 2010. The number of articles being published per year had gone from about 1,500 to about 9,000. Now obviously this means that the number of available slots had increased by that much.

BUT . . . what counts as a sufficiently prestigious/respectable placement hasn't changed nearly as much as the total number of venues available for publication. This is analogous to how while the number of people going to college in the US has exploded over the past 50 years, the number of slots at elite institutions hasn't changed nearly as much. So you have far larger numbers of people chasing a good (prestigious placement) whose quantity has changed comparatively little.

Add to that the technological changes that you reference, and it's IMMENSELY harder to publish in a top law review now than it was X years ago, with the difficulty factor rising with every extra year you add to X. Again, this is analogous to how much harder it is now to get into an elite college than it was back in the 1960s or 1970s (much, much harder -- hence all the frantic gaming that goes on in both systems).

Posted by: Angsting Prof | Apr 5, 2021 4:05:30 PM

@Angst943 - that's actually a really interesting empirical question. Law faculties have certainly grown over the years, but have the number of law review placement spots (issues per year, etc) and the size of law review editorial staffing kept pace?

Also, technology has played a huge factor -- first, emailing became easier than mailing in submissions; and then in the last decade, mass submission via Expressio/Scholastica significantly contributed to the problem, leading students to try to manage the ridiculous via the expedite system and (unfortunately bad) predictors/proxies for publication-worthiness, like letterhead bias, past placement, CV, etc.

Posted by: CueAnon | Apr 5, 2021 2:53:02 PM

I am wondering what is the pros and cons of posting articles on SSRN.

Posted by: M | Apr 5, 2021 2:32:57 PM

Any thoughts on which offer to take between Texas A&M flagship, Penn J of Con Law, and Stanford J of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties? I’m a fellow planning to go on the market next year. Thanks!

Posted by: Anon fellow | Apr 5, 2021 9:16:18 AM

Is the increase in un-placed articles a structural issue - too many submissions for too few slots? Perhaps there are just too many papers and not enough publication infrastructure to handle them?

To connect this to a recently discussed topic - should profs remedy the situation by creating loosely peer-reviewed journals for their subfields, to soak up the heaps of rejected papers? Perhaps a generalist "Journal of Rejected Scholarship"?

Posted by: Angst943 | Apr 5, 2021 1:45:31 AM

I expect the fall cycle to be worse than this one. It seems from what I'm hearing that a much larger number of people than usual failed to place their papers, at least in a journal from which they would accept an offer.

I realize that some journals have committed to holding open slots for the fall, or more slots than they normally would, so that may explain the log jam, at least in part. But FWIW I would guess that the increase in the volume of submissions over the normal baseline will swamp that factor.

Posted by: Angsting Prof | Apr 5, 2021 12:27:09 AM

Getting back to the peer review vs. student review, here is a nice new paper about peer review:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/

Posted by: PostDocGuy | Apr 4, 2021 11:58:00 PM

@tealeaves: I do not take much from a journal asking for more time (other than that they read my expedite request and are at least minimally interested -- it is better than nothing but in my experience it only moves the needle a little).

Posted by: ICHTY | Apr 4, 2021 9:57:00 PM

When journals ask you for more time, do you typically wind up getting an offer--or typically not?

Posted by: tealeaves | Apr 4, 2021 8:26:22 PM

Looking ahead, what do you all envision for the next cycle? Is it going to be as insane as this one? And, if we are not back to normal by the fall, by when do you predict things will be back to normal?

Posted by: light | Apr 4, 2021 7:52:05 PM

I was and I am currently on a hiring committee and if we're hiring in a specific area, we make sure to educate ourselves about the journals in that field. My condolences that your hiring committee is so uninformed, AnonProf.

Posted by: AnonTT | Apr 4, 2021 2:37:23 PM

Once again, hiring committees are typically looking at hundreds of candidates (everyone in the FAR plus lateral candidates). If you think for one minute that the committee, for EACH of those people, is going to take the time to better understand each journal that those hundreds of people have published in (either by reaching out to others or, even more absurdly, looking up the journal on W&L), then you have clearly not been on a hiring committee in the past 20 years.

Yes, once they narrow it down to a much smaller group, then maybe -- but the most drastic cut is that first one, and some speciality that (to the average law prof) is an obscure journal isn't going to help you make the cut.

I do agree, though, that there are no hard and fast rules -- I share this merely as a counterpoint to those why seem to be suggesting that certain speciality journals are always the way to go. My best advice is look up the people in the academy who have traveled the path you'd like to take, and look at where they have published recently.

Posted by: AnonProf | Apr 4, 2021 12:42:36 PM

Some free advice for any AEs (or really online editors) reading this: make sure that your last several volumes, or at least the article titles and the names of the authors, are accessible online.

There are journals that I debated submitting to this cycle, but that I don't know a lot about. So I went to their sites to try and see who'd published with them recently and what they published. But they don't list recent ToC's from recent issues (or volumes), let alone PDFs of the articles. The websites barely have any information at all. I even tried to look recent articles in one of them up manually on HeinOnline without success (I'm sure there's a better way to do this, but I can't work out how). I ended up option not to submit.

I don't need to see that titans of the field publish there (they probably don't, or I would know). But it would be helpful to have some context before deciding whether to accept, which in turn means I need to know before I submit.

Posted by: Free advice for AEs | Apr 4, 2021 12:05:14 PM

Just to add one qualification to my last post, to turn down the most read or cited specialty in your field for a T75 is in most cases bad advice. For a T50 that's a stronger case, but even then, as "ExperiencedProf" has said, do your due diligence first.

No rule is universal, of course. For example, if you're a junior scholar and you've already published in a top specialty in your field, then yes -- do the T75.


Posted by: AnonTech | Apr 4, 2021 11:49:39 AM

@AnonTT -- exactly. If a school's hiring committee is too lazy to do even the most basic legwork to understand the top journals in a field, then they aren't going to be good and helpful colleagues either if you're hired.

@ExperiencedProf -- agree 100%. It's absolutely outdated thinking and I would treat "advice" on here to turn down the top, most cited, and most read specialty in one's field as terrible advice.

Typically, law schools are looking for candidates in specific fields. The idea that a hiring committee would be looking to hire, say, an IP or tech law scholar without doing the most basic groundwork about the IP or tech law field, including the most read/cited law reviews, in scrutinizing candidates is just plain ludicrous.

Posted by: AnonTech | Apr 4, 2021 11:40:17 AM

No new entries on the spreadsheet for two days? Is it over?

Posted by: meemee | Apr 4, 2021 11:10:54 AM

Indeed, beware that some here are pushing exclusively "flagships" out of self interest. I'm all for flagships, they are great but times have changed. Anyone who describes the T14 tech or corporate journals or international as anything other than prestigious and highly sought is out of touch. Maybe this was true 30 years ago that landing an offer from a T14 tech or corporate or international may not have been difficult but today? But even 15-20 years ago those journals received way more submissions than slots. Some of the biggest names in corporate law have published in the T14 business and corporate law journals. Ditto for the intl law crowd. These journals have impact, look them up on [email protected] court citations way more than "flagships". Don't take advice from anonymous senior faculty who perhaps never was published in a JREG or UPenn business law or berkeley business law journal. Top corporate faculty publish in these as well as Iowa's JCL and DelawareJCL. The Berkeley and Stanford tech journals are very prestigious. The advice to automatically take a flagship over these so called "specialties" is wrong maybe even absurd. Who to take? It really depends on many factors such as your specific field, your institution, your Dean (crucial) and whether you are looking to stay or make a move. I am not saying don't take a flagship I am saying the decision shouldn't be automatic. Do your own due diligence as opposed to accepting "one size fits all "suggestions".

Posted by: ExperiencedProf | Apr 4, 2021 10:50:18 AM

Junior and aspiring prawfs,

Also be aware that several senior prawfs on here are giving bad advice simply to prop up the journals they’ve published with in the past. I think there’s a lot of “I’m amazing and, thus, if I published there that journal must be amazing.”

You can never go wrong aiming for the highest ranked flagship you can get. Most who publish in speciality journals did so simply because they didn’t receive a decent flagship offer. And hiring committees know that.

Look up those in the academy who are considered top scholars and almost all their pubs are in flagships.

Posted by: AnonProf | Apr 4, 2021 9:23:09 AM

Journal citations and reputation of your work in your field are the most important factors in advancement. The obsession on this board over "flagships over specialties" is outdated. Over the last 10 years, certain topics have become very crucial...tech, intl and business. These are not "specialties" with peripheral importance. They are integral to today's academia and anyone saying automatically take a T50 flagship without examining the issue further is making a serious mistake. If the tech or intl journal is highly cited with a high impact factor that is very important. Please juniors, don't don't solicit and simply accept the suggestions here. Do your own due diligence!

Posted by: ExperiencedProf | Apr 4, 2021 6:13:03 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.