Former law review editor taking questions

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )

Will you participate in the law review write-on competition?

 
Total votes: 0

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:01 am

felicity00 wrote:in a joint write-on, do you think people tend to invariably put the law review as their first choice? during out meeting with current editors they never said law review is the best and the secondary jorunals do sound more interesting. I wouldnt have known that law review is better than the rest if I did not frequent this board.

It seems that they take 10 more law review members each year in anticipation of some of them tranferring out ....


Almost invariably, the flagship journal at a law school is the most prestigious one. "Flagship journal" = [name of law school] Law Review/Law Journal/Law Quarterly.

Being on the Texas Law Review is a much bigger deal than being on the Texas Journal of International Law [I don't know if this journal exists]. Although specialty journals may sound more interesting --- and may very well be more interesting --- turning down law review to be on one of them is like turning down a much higher ranked law school for a lower one. That is, you'd better have a compelling personal reason for doing so.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:03 am

bwv812 wrote:
patentlaw wrote:
bwv812 wrote:
monkey34 wrote:if i get onto law review, but then transfer.. is it beneficial at all to state that I got on law review at my previous institution on my resume?

Umm.... do you think? Of course it's good.
You just list it under your 1L school: "xxxx Law Review, invited," or something along those lines (Career Services at your new school can tell you).


I'm going to disagree on this. I've seen this on resumes and it just seems like reaching by the student. I know that you're a transfer, and I assume your grades were good (my baseline assumption is that most schools have grade-on spots although mine did not). It makes me think negatively of the applicant, like they're trying to take the credit for something that they didn't do the actual work for. I realize they're just saying "invited", but that's my take on it.

I don't care what you were invited for, and I personally do kind of see it as a Yale situation.

Edit: I'm not saying it's unacceptable, just that when I've seen it, it lessens my opinion.


Our Career Services recommends including it, and I know that many other schools do, too. I don't think this is really comparable to Yale or anything because it's not something you've decided not to do; it's something it's not possible to do (if a non-transfer indicated an invitation was extended, but declined, that would be another story). Perhaps you'll write-on at your new school, but the competition happens after OCI, there are fewer slots available (if any), and the invitation usually reflects your writing ability. I think the baseline expectation at better schools (and those who interview there) is that pure grade-on is not possible, though I do wonder how many schools have pure grade-on slots, and if they tell invited students how they qualified; this uncertainty is another reason to include the info, because it's unlikely the person reviewing your resume will know how you qualified for law review, or how that law review extends invitations.


My two cents (to the extent this topic is not already exhausted) is this: include it. Having the words "law review" on your resume can do nothing but help you, even if it includes the words "invited."

patentlaw
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:29 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby patentlaw » Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:48 am

bwv812 wrote:
Our Career Services recommends including it, and I know that many other schools do, too. I don't think this is really comparable to Yale or anything because it's not something you've decided not to do; it's something it's not possible to do (if a non-transfer indicated an invitation was extended, but declined, that would be another story). Perhaps you'll write-on at your new school, but the competition happens after OCI, there are fewer slots available (if any), and the invitation usually reflects your writing ability. I think the baseline expectation at better schools (and those who interview there) is that pure grade-on is not possible, though I do wonder how many schools have pure grade-on slots, and if they tell invited students how they qualified; this uncertainty is another reason to include the info, because it's unlikely the person reviewing your resume will know how you qualified for law review, or how that law review extends invitations.


I think it could go either way, but as someone who has and will interview students mostly from at least one top school, my baseline expectation is that any transfer would have been able to make their own school's LR. I may be in the minority when it comes to interviewers, but I still don't like to see it.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:30 pm

patentlaw wrote:
bwv812 wrote:
Our Career Services recommends including it, and I know that many other schools do, too. I don't think this is really comparable to Yale or anything because it's not something you've decided not to do; it's something it's not possible to do (if a non-transfer indicated an invitation was extended, but declined, that would be another story). Perhaps you'll write-on at your new school, but the competition happens after OCI, there are fewer slots available (if any), and the invitation usually reflects your writing ability. I think the baseline expectation at better schools (and those who interview there) is that pure grade-on is not possible, though I do wonder how many schools have pure grade-on slots, and if they tell invited students how they qualified; this uncertainty is another reason to include the info, because it's unlikely the person reviewing your resume will know how you qualified for law review, or how that law review extends invitations.


I think it could go either way, but as someone who has and will interview students mostly from at least one top school, my baseline expectation is that any transfer would have been able to make their own school's LR. I may be in the minority when it comes to interviewers, but I still don't like to see it.


I guess I just don't understand the 'negative' of including "invited to join law review" on a resume. I can understand that an interviewer may not give any extra points for it, but how could it be a negative? I don't agree that you can assume that a transfer student was invited to join law review --- if it's not written down, I wouldn't assume anything. I also interviewed students for a judicial law clerk position (as well as went through over 100 resumes), and I can say that leaving ANYTHING off of a resume is a bad idea. Most interviewers spend only a few seconds looking over a resume before deciding whether it goes into the 'yes' or the 'no' pile.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:54 pm

felicity00 wrote:It seems that they take 10 more law review members each year in anticipation of some of them tranferring out ....

That number seems very high --- 10 law review members transfer out each year? In my school, the number was about 2 or 3 per year. I guess every school's different.

felicity00
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:37 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby felicity00 » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:12 pm

I am not sure if they take 10 extra, to be honest.
but last year they took about 40 and 34 people remained.

I checked the no of editors the year before, and they had only 27 editors (I suppose the difference was due to the number of people transfering out)

I am at a T20.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:32 pm

felicity00 wrote:I am not sure if they take 10 extra, to be honest.
but last year they took about 40 and 34 people remained.

I checked the no of editors the year before, and they had only 27 editors (I suppose the difference was due to the number of people transfering out)

I am at a T20.


Many law reviews fill the empty slots (due to transfers) with 2L applicants. Instead of a writing competition, 2Ls are typically requested to draft a "publishable" casenote or comment for review --- those who draft the papers deemed of the highest quality are invited to join law review. That's how they did it at my school, and I have heard similar accounts at other schools.

User avatar
grobbelski
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:50 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby grobbelski » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:38 pm

Wes Henricksen wrote:Each year, I answer students' questions about the law review, the write-on competition, and what it generally takes to get onto law review. Although the specific process varies from law school to law school, there are many similarities among all the write-on competitions.

If you have any questions, shoot.



OK this is a complete noob question, but what do people write about in the law review? Can I read other previous law reviews to get a feel on writing style and content?

felicity00
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:37 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby felicity00 » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:48 pm

but it seems not nobody got on via this route at my school.


Many law reviews fill the empty slots (due to transfers) with 2L applicants. Instead of a writing competition, 2Ls are typically requested to draft a "publishable" casenote or comment for review --- those who draft the papers deemed of the highest quality are invited to join law review. That's how they did it at my school, and I have heard similar accounts at other schools.[/quote]

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:59 pm

felicity00 wrote:but it seems not nobody got on via this route at my school.


Many law reviews fill the empty slots (due to transfers) with 2L applicants. Instead of a writing competition, 2Ls are typically requested to draft a "publishable" casenote or comment for review --- those who draft the papers deemed of the highest quality are invited to join law review. That's how they did it at my school, and I have heard similar accounts at other schools.
[/quote]

Every law review has a different method of selecting members. It may very well be that your law school's law review only takes on members from the 1L write-on competition (and based on 1L grades). You need to go to your law school's law review webpage and/or ask law review members to see what their policy is on taking 2Ls as members.

Sometimes the policy is that a law review will accept applications from 2Ls, but only if they are not already on another journal.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:26 pm

grobbelski wrote:
Wes Henricksen wrote:Each year, I answer students' questions about the law review, the write-on competition, and what it generally takes to get onto law review. Although the specific process varies from law school to law school, there are many similarities among all the write-on competitions.

If you have any questions, shoot.



OK this is a complete noob question, but what do people write about in the law review? Can I read other previous law reviews to get a feel on writing style and content?


Yes, you can get a very good feel of writing style and content by reading previous law review articles. In fact this is a great way to prepare for the writing competition. Just pick up a back issue or two of your school's law review from the law library and read a couple of articles. And pay particular attention to the footnotes. This activity will likely be very boring (student comments and notes are generally not entertaining), but it will help you get a feel for what will be expected of you in the competition.

patentlaw
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:29 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby patentlaw » Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:49 pm

Wes Henricksen wrote:I guess I just don't understand the 'negative' of including "invited to join law review" on a resume. I can understand that an interviewer may not give any extra points for it, but how could it be a negative? I don't agree that you can assume that a transfer student was invited to join law review --- if it's not written down, I wouldn't assume anything. I also interviewed students for a judicial law clerk position (as well as went through over 100 resumes), and I can say that leaving ANYTHING off of a resume is a bad idea. Most interviewers spend only a few seconds looking over a resume before deciding whether it goes into the 'yes' or the 'no' pile.


Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.

User avatar
cantaboot
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:12 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby cantaboot » Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:38 pm

patentlaw wrote:
Wes Henricksen wrote:I guess I just don't understand the 'negative' of including "invited to join law review" on a resume. I can understand that an interviewer may not give any extra points for it, but how could it be a negative? I don't agree that you can assume that a transfer student was invited to join law review --- if it's not written down, I wouldn't assume anything. I also interviewed students for a judicial law clerk position (as well as went through over 100 resumes), and I can say that leaving ANYTHING off of a resume is a bad idea. Most interviewers spend only a few seconds looking over a resume before deciding whether it goes into the 'yes' or the 'no' pile.


Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.


I know what you mean. definitely. I concur. It's like telling people that you were accepted to a prestigious PhD program but you decided to turn it down. IT's ok when you are chatting with friends, but it got pretentious when you keep reminding people of what you could have done ....

Turning down a prestigious scholarship is quite different, though, IMHO. It shows that you have the ability and it's the ability that counts. In law review, its ability PLUS actually doing the work.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:00 pm

patentlaw wrote:
Wes Henricksen wrote:I guess I just don't understand the 'negative' of including "invited to join law review" on a resume. I can understand that an interviewer may not give any extra points for it, but how could it be a negative? I don't agree that you can assume that a transfer student was invited to join law review --- if it's not written down, I wouldn't assume anything. I also interviewed students for a judicial law clerk position (as well as went through over 100 resumes), and I can say that leaving ANYTHING off of a resume is a bad idea. Most interviewers spend only a few seconds looking over a resume before deciding whether it goes into the 'yes' or the 'no' pile.


Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.


I understand your point. I agree with you that putting "invited to join law review" does not denote writing/editing experience. But it does denote one thing: the applicant was invited to join law review. What does that mean? Well, it usually means they had good grades and they were successful in the write-on competition. I think the fact that someone was invited to join law review is almost more important than the experience they got while on the journal. You can always learn research and editing skills elsewhere. But by being invited to join means that you have demonstrated the skills required to join.

patentlaw
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:29 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby patentlaw » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:10 pm

Wes Henricksen wrote:I understand your point. I agree with you that putting "invited to join law review" does not denote writing/editing experience. But it does denote one thing: the applicant was invited to join law review. What does that mean? Well, it usually means they had good grades and they were successful in the write-on competition. I think the fact that someone was invited to join law review is almost more important than the experience they got while on the journal. You can always learn research and editing skills elsewhere. But by being invited to join means that you have demonstrated the skills required to join.


I can see that. But the question is what skills does it demonstrate? You have the student's GPA, so you know their grades, but I don't know the LR requirements of any other school besides my own. So it could mean they just had high grades, or had a good writing sample, or were good at blueblooking, or a combination. So the only thing it tells you definitely is that they satisfied their own school's selection requirements, but nothing else. I guess the way I see it is, I want to know what your skills/experiences are, not what they could be. Putting down invited to law review seems like an attempt to equate that with some sort of skill/experience when it really doesn't to me.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:32 pm

patentlaw wrote:
Wes Henricksen wrote:I understand your point. I agree with you that putting "invited to join law review" does not denote writing/editing experience. But it does denote one thing: the applicant was invited to join law review. What does that mean? Well, it usually means they had good grades and they were successful in the write-on competition. I think the fact that someone was invited to join law review is almost more important than the experience they got while on the journal. You can always learn research and editing skills elsewhere. But by being invited to join means that you have demonstrated the skills required to join.


I can see that. But the question is what skills does it demonstrate? You have the student's GPA, so you know their grades, but I don't know the LR requirements of any other school besides my own. So it could mean they just had high grades, or had a good writing sample, or were good at blueblooking, or a combination. So the only thing it tells you definitely is that they satisfied their own school's selection requirements, but nothing else. I guess the way I see it is, I want to know what your skills/experiences are, not what they could be. Putting down invited to law review seems like an attempt to equate that with some sort of skill/experience when it really doesn't to me.


I agree with everything you said but the last sentence. It assumes an applicant is trying to misrepresent something, when that is not necessarily the case. By putting "invited to law review" does not equal a statement of "I have all the experience of spending two years as a law review editor." It is a representation of academic and writing qualifications from successfully being invited to join the law review; it is not--at least I hope it is not--an attempt to convey the experience of spending two years on the law review.

User avatar
bwv812
Posts: 548
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:18 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby bwv812 » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:39 pm

patentlaw wrote:Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.

So you should only include it on your resume if you're graduate, then? How else does an incoming 2L deserve to put it on their resume while in incoming transfer 2L doesn't? The only thing that either of them has done is get invited.


patentlaw wrote:I can see that. But the question is what skills does it demonstrate? You have the student's GPA, so you know their grades, but I don't know the LR requirements of any other school besides my own. So it could mean they just had high grades, or had a good writing sample, or were good at blueblooking, or a combination. So the only thing it tells you definitely is that they satisfied their own school's selection requirements, but nothing else. I guess the way I see it is, I want to know what your skills/experiences are, not what they could be. Putting down invited to law review seems like an attempt to equate that with some sort of skill/experience when it really doesn't to me.

I'm not sure that LR experience denotes any skill other than the ability to put in the hours; just being a LR member in good standing doesn't really mean anything other than that you like to eat pie.
Last edited by bwv812 on Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:42 pm

bwv812 wrote:
patentlaw wrote:Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.

So you should only include it on your resume if you're graduate, then? How else does an incoming 2L deserve to put it on their resume while in incoming transfer 2L doesn't? The only thing that either of them has done is get invited.


Great point.

patentlaw
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:29 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby patentlaw » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:44 pm

bwv812 wrote:
patentlaw wrote:Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.

So you should only include it on your resume if you're graduate, then? How else does an incoming 2L deserve to put it on their resume while in incoming transfer 2L doesn't? The only thing that either of them has done is get invited.


Presumably they've also signed something to the effect that they are accepting the position and will do the work required. By the time the summers start they will have completed at least a year of the duties. At my school, if you drop from LR, it's permanently notated on your transcript and you're required to notify any employers (such as the one taking you for your 2L summer). At least one of my classmates did the comp, got accepted to LR and decided not to do it in the end. He didn't put it down on his resume, and I don't think he should have.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm

patentlaw wrote:
bwv812 wrote:
patentlaw wrote:Because in my mind, it makes them seem like they're claiming credit for something that they don't deserve. To me, the value of LR is not the honor, it's the writing and editing experience that you do. That should be even doubly so with a clerkship. I know of a couple judges that automatically toss people without journal experience, and being "invited" definitely doesn't cut it. So unless you actually do it, I don't like people claiming it.

So you should only include it on your resume if you're graduate, then? How else does an incoming 2L deserve to put it on their resume while in incoming transfer 2L doesn't? The only thing that either of them has done is get invited.


Presumably they've also signed something to the effect that they are accepting the position and will do the work required. By the time the summers start they will have completed at least a year of the duties. At my school, if you drop from LR, it's permanently notated on your transcript and you're required to notify any employers (such as the one taking you for your 2L summer). At least one of my classmates did the comp, got accepted to LR and decided not to do it in the end. He didn't put it down on his resume, and I don't think he should have.


I guess I just come at this issue with a different philosophy. I never held it against an applicant for including something on a resume, unless it is patently inappropriate, such as stating "Went on a 3-day bender in Cancun, Mexico, during Spring Break my senior year of college." But including something directly relevant to law school and, more to the point, performance in law school (such as an invitation to join law review) is not a negative on a resume. And I think it is unfair to hold it against someone for including it. It's like penalizing someone because they didn't play by your own arbitrary rules of the application game. How are they supposed to know that you will be offended by including this information?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, How does it make an applicant less qualified by them stating that they were invited to be on law review? If you require law review experience, then of course they do not qualify as having that. But if lack of law review experience is not an automatic disqualifier, why should an applicant be automatically disqualified by including "invited"?

User avatar
bwv812
Posts: 548
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:18 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby bwv812 » Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:24 pm

patentlaw wrote:
bwv812 wrote:So you should only include it on your resume if you're graduate, then? How else does an incoming 2L deserve to put it on their resume while in incoming transfer 2L doesn't? The only thing that either of them has done is get invited.


Presumably they've also signed something to the effect that they are accepting the position and will do the work required. By the time the summers start they will have completed at least a year of the duties. At my school, if you drop from LR, it's permanently notated on your transcript and you're required to notify any employers (such as the one taking you for your 2L summer). At least one of my classmates did the comp, got accepted to LR and decided not to do it in the end. He didn't put it down on his resume, and I don't think he should have.

Yes, if you decide to quit LR you generally have to notify your employer and a note often gets added to your transcript. This is not much different than a transfer saying they were invited to LR. If the primary value of LR is that it indicates approximate class rank/write-on ability and a willingness to do work, then this is the transfer student's only way to illustrate this; write-on at the new school typically occurs after OCI and contains only limited slots. We ar clearly not going to agree on this issue, but in my opinion the comparison to someone who declines an invitation (without transferring) is inapposite, as declining the invitation is a clear indication that the position and its attendant responsibilities is undesired, whereas the motivating factors for a transfer are likely the opposite.

User avatar
ggocat
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby ggocat » Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:38 pm

In your experience, do authors use the Washington & Lee journal rankings (http://lawlib.wlu.edu/LJ/index.aspx) to determine whether to publish in a particular journal? I am new to the journal rankings and would like to get your opinion of them. Thanks.

User avatar
Wes Henricksen
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:18 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby Wes Henricksen » Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:01 pm

ggocat wrote:In your experience, do authors use the Washington & Lee journal rankings (http://lawlib.wlu.edu/LJ/index.aspx) to determine whether to publish in a particular journal? I am new to the journal rankings and would like to get your opinion of them. Thanks.


The authors of professional legal articles typically base the decision of where to publish on law review rank. Once they receive an offer from one law review (e.g., Washington Law Review), they very often then use that offer to leverage an offer from a "better" law review (e.g., Columbia Law Review). Which ranking they use to determine which law review to publish in probably varies from author to author. But the law review ranking usually roughly follows the law school ranking structure.

I, myself, do not know much about law review rankings and cannot therefore express an informed opinion on them. Maybe someone else w/ more knowledge on the topic will respond to you.

User avatar
ggocat
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby ggocat » Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:12 pm

Wes Henricksen wrote:
ggocat wrote:In your experience, do authors use the Washington & Lee journal rankings (http://lawlib.wlu.edu/LJ/index.aspx) to determine whether to publish in a particular journal? I am new to the journal rankings and would like to get your opinion of them. Thanks.

The authors of professional legal articles typically base the decision of where to publish on law review rank. Once they receive an offer from one law review (e.g., Washington Law Review), they very often then use that offer to leverage an offer from a "better" law review (e.g., Columbia Law Review). Which ranking they use to determine which law review to publish in probably varies from author to author. But the law review ranking usually roughly follows the law school ranking structure.

I, myself, do not know much about law review rankings and cannot therefore express an informed opinion on them. Maybe someone else w/ more knowledge on the topic will respond to you.

Thank you for the explanation. I wasn't sure if W&L is the "premier" ranking, or if authors just use U.S. News for flagship journals, or if they use one of the other law review rankings (I've seen a few others). No biggie. The law review rankings are all pretty similar anyway, and there is a high correlation to U.S. News. With all the rankings buzz, I just got curious.

patentlaw
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:29 am

Re: Former law review editor taking questions

Postby patentlaw » Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:21 pm

Wes Henricksen wrote:I guess I just come at this issue with a different philosophy. I never held it against an applicant for including something on a resume, unless it is patently inappropriate, such as stating "Went on a 3-day bender in Cancun, Mexico, during Spring Break my senior year of college." But including something directly relevant to law school and, more to the point, performance in law school (such as an invitation to join law review) is not a negative on a resume. And I think it is unfair to hold it against someone for including it. It's like penalizing someone because they didn't play by your own arbitrary rules of the application game. How are they supposed to know that you will be offended by including this information?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, How does it make an applicant less qualified by them stating that they were invited to be on law review? If you require law review experience, then of course they do not qualify as having that. But if lack of law review experience is not an automatic disqualifier, why should an applicant be automatically disqualified by including "invited"?


I don't think it makes them less qualified, but I just don't think it belongs on a resume. Some people put their LSAT on their resume, it's directly related to law school (though not performance in law school), but I just don't think it belongs on a resume. I don't think I ever said it would be an automatic disqualifier, I just wouldn't look highly on it.

bwv812 wrote:Yes, if you decide to quit LR you generally have to notify your employer and a note often gets added to your transcript. This is not much different than a transfer saying they were invited to LR. If the primary value of LR is that it indicates approximate class rank/write-on ability and a willingness to do work, then this is the transfer student's only way to illustrate this; write-on at the new school typically occurs after OCI and contains only limited slots. We ar clearly not going to agree on this issue, but in my opinion the comparison to someone who declines an invitation (without transferring) is inapposite, as declining the invitation is a clear indication that the position and its attendant responsibilities is undesired, whereas the motivating factors for a transfer are likely the opposite.


My point is that putting "invited" on doesn't tell me any of that. I don't know if they wrote-on, graded on, or wrote a very nice personal statement (I believe some LR's use personal statements in their decisions). All it definitively says is that they think it important that they were invited to LR at a school they no longer attend. It doesn't tell me even if they were planning on accepting that offer had they not transferred.

bwv812 wrote:Perhaps you'll write-on at your new school, but the competition happens after OCI, there are fewer slots available (if any), and the invitation usually reflects your writing ability. I think the baseline expectation at better schools (and those who interview there) is that pure grade-on is not possible, though I do wonder how many schools have pure grade-on slots, and if they tell invited students how they qualified; this uncertainty is another reason to include the info, because it's unlikely the person reviewing your resume will know how you qualified for law review, or how that law review extends invitations.


I know how the write-on works with OCI, I've been through this process as an interviewer. I went to a T10 school and my baseline assumption is that at lower-ranked schools, pure grade-ons are possible, and that not many higher ranked schools have pure grade-ons (though I could be wrong about this).

I don't know what the general thought on this is. I could easily believe my view is in the minority, but I don't think it's universally accepted as a good thing. I've been on the other side of the table and I just wanted to say what I do when I see this. And I guess you could go nuts trying to figure out all the nitpicky things interviewers will think are bad form on your resume (I really dislike 2 page resumes unless absolutely necessary), so if your CSO tells you to put it on, put it on.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests