[Crowd-sourcing] Reasons why law review editors should communicate when they are *not* accepting an article for publication

Posted by Elli Olson, community karma 677
Hey all! 

It's that time of year again: lots of authors are submitting articles to lots of law reviews, and everyone involved is probably a little stressed out.

I wanted to start this thread to crowd-source information about why law review editors should be sending rejections. Personally I have a few reasons why I think law reviews should send rejection notifications to authors (http://blog.scholasticahq.com/post/5-reasons-your-law-review-should-be-sending-rejections/). However, I'd like to learn what you - authors or editors - see as important reasons for why editors should take the time to let authors know when they're not going to extend an offer on a submission.

If you're able to, please share your advice about how you approach article rejections. If you're an author, maybe you can share some of the nicer, more polite rejections you've received in your time? If you're an editor, maybe you can explain how your board goes about acknowledging your submitting authors' work?

Thanks in advance for sharing your experience with us!


1 Comment

Ilan Fuchs, community karma 2089
First and foremost, it is the professional thing to do. Sending a rejection letter is not an option, it is an accepted part of running a journal in any academic field. The fact that some student journals do not send them can only be explained by lack of professionalism. 
almost 8 years ago
login to leave comment