The Law Review Approach
What the Humanities Can Learn
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 14856324 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Allen Mendenhall (0009-0001-4549-613X, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 48-58 |
| Publication date | 2013-03-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Academic Questions (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0895-4852 • E-ISSN: 1936-4709 |
| Publisher | National Association of Scholars (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s12129-013-9341-z |
| OpenAlex | W2156686168 |
| Language | EN |
Readers of this journal probably know how the peer review process works in the humanities disciplines and at various journals, so I will explain how the law review process generally works and then what the humanities can learn and borrow from the law review process. I will end by advocating for a hybrid law review/peer review approach to publishing. The law review process is not a panacea for our publishing ills. It has several drawbacks and shortcomings. This essay highlights the positives and notes some of the negatives of the law review publishing process, but a lengthy explanation of all that is good or bad about law reviews is not my aim. Every law review has its idiosyncrasies and methodologies, but most share certain overarching procedures and protocols that can be evaluated in terms of their similarity
Digital humanities · Epistemology · Higher education · Humanities · Pedagogy · Philosophy of education · Political science · Social science · Sociology · Law · Legal Education and Practice Innovations · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|