Law review editors often have a hard time adjusting to their new role of evaluating and critiquing the work of professors and established legal scholars, resulting in entire editorial boards missing fundamental problems in a particular article. The author provides a solution to this problem by recommending the adoption of two separate phases of editing - a substantive editing phase, which addresses what the article actually communicates, and a technical editing phase, which addresses the form the author uses to communicate. As examples for any law review to follow, the author provides two substantive edits of two different author submissions as appendices to the article.
Substantive Editing Versus Technical Editing: How Law Review Editors Do Their Job, 30 STETSON L. REV. 451