Despite what the abstract says, be sure to download this article and read it cover-to-cover, including (especially!) the footnotes. Here's the gist: "We argue that this game is rigged, inherently biased against authors from lower ranked schools, women, minorities, and faculty who teach legal writing, clinical, and library courses. As such, playing "the game" in a Sisyphean effort to achieve external validation is a losing one for all but a few." I would argue this applies to scholarship generally, not just law. Case in point: my citations as viewed by Google Scholar, versus my citations as viewed by Scopus. Which one is the real measure of my work?
Today: 4 Total: 4 [Direct link] [Share]
