What is the reputation of Routledge Press in comparative politics? Do R1 departments take it seriously or should I strive for placing my book project with an academic press? Thanks for your insights.
Routledge Press
(83 posts) (9 voices)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
Can we move this to the "Is this a joke?" thread please?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Hey, don't be mean, it's a legitimate question. There are many things that ABDs do not know and are not introduced to in their training. Which is what makes this blog useful, if at all.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Ask the people in your department. Of course some people are always going to say that nothing counts if it's not at Cambridge! But that's not true, or at least not true most places.
Posted 4 years ago # -
^^ OK I'll try again. Routledge is 3rd tier at best. If you want tenure at an R1, don't publish there.
Better?
Posted 4 years ago # -
^Agree with above. Routledge would be a risky bet for a tenure case at an R1.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Routledge > nothing
Posted 4 years ago # -
There was a paper in PS about ten years ago that ranked the presses. Routledge was #19, which seems reasonable to me. I see it as a well-regarded general commercial press. It has some good texts and edited volumes of the sort one might assign in upper-level undergraduate courses. Most of its books are not competing with university press monographs. Instead, it's more in the realm of CQ and Westview. What that all means, in my view, is 1) it's wrong to disparage Routledge in the sense that it's one of the better, and better-respected, commercial publishers, but 2) for tenure purposes, you're certainly better off going with either a top university press (e.g., Cambridge, Princeton) or one of the second-tier university presses that is well known in your subfield (the Hopkins/Columbia/Duke/UNC sorts of places).
Posted 4 years ago # -
Routledge > nothing
I'm actually not sure if this is correct. It might signal something about your ability to place a manuscript at a university press. If you have Routledge and no other book, I might actually infer negative things about your ability to place things.
Perhaps you mean this:
Cambridge + Routledge > Cambridge
Posted 4 years ago # -
About 5-15 years ago, it was not uncommon for TT faculty to publish their second books with Routledge and other commercial presses (after publishing their first with University Presses). That is Book #1 from Cambridge and Book #2 from Routledge or ME Sharpe was the norm. Is this not done anymore?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Also, another reason why Routledge may not be > nothing is the opportunity costs of publishing there. Say you instead decide to spin in into two articles. Unless you cannot place them, I'd say that as a untenured person, two articles in decent journals (not even top 3) trump Routledge.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Of course Routledge > Nothing. Unless by "nothing" you mean something besides nothing.
However, just a book by Routledge won't be enough at most places. But for that matter, just a book at Cambridge won't be enough at most top departments...they want substantial progress towards a 2nd project (so more like Cambridge + multiple good articles).
So the crucial question is really: 1 Routledge book = How many decent peer-reviewed articles?
Posted 4 years ago # -
If at top-25, perhaps would require APSR+AJPS+JOP+IO/WP, plus some lesser ones (8 or 9 in total).
Posted 4 years ago # -
1 Routledge book is approximately equal to 2 articles in fourth-tier journals.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Routledge is not that bad according to the WM IR survey. Please see:
http://irtheoryandpractice.wm.edu/projects/trip/Posted 4 years ago # -
Fourth-tier journals? Right. I've been part of a few dozen tenure reviews, and that assessment is off base from what I've seen. First, this whole discussion of the value of "a Routledge book" suggests that we're accumulating credits rather than producing scholarship. The average Cambridge book is quite a bit better than the average Routledge book, but, within each publisher, there are books that are better and books that are worse. The value of your Routledge book therefore depends in large part on how good it is, and what your letter-writers say about it. In other words, people need to actually read the work, not just count up what's on the vita. Second, on average, a Routledge book would be worth a lot more than two articles in fourth-tier journals. Routledge is a good press. In American, I'd say a Routledge book might be comparable to something like a PRQ and an LSQ.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Fourth-tier journals? Right.
My mistake. That was too much. I meant third-tier.
In American, I'd say a Routledge book might be comparable to something like a PRQ and an LSQ.
Still too much. I'd give you one Routledge book equals either a PRQ or an LSQ. And as a second-tier journal, a PRQ is roughly equal to a JEPOP and a SPPQ together. So my point stands!
Posted 4 years ago # -
I won't wade into the argument, except to point out that this debate should show the OP that many people have a fairly dim view of a Routledge book, and even the more positive assessments tend to be lukewarm (saying it's equivalent to 2 second-tier journal articles ain't that great either).
Posted 4 years ago # -
Well, we're going to have to disagree. I've written a few books and quite a few articles, and to me a book in a top-20 press is, on average, comparable to at least two top-20 articles. Thus, a Routledge book (lower part of top-20) should have value in the range of a PRQ (mid top-20 for journals) and an LSQ (probably not top -20 for journals). Producing a Routledge book easily requires twice the work, and probably much more, of producing a JEPOP and a SPPQ, and Routledge will actually reject submissions. Has anyone with a pulse been rejected by JEPOP or SPPQ?
Of course, ultimately, I'd still rather we read the work rather than rate it by where it appears.Posted 4 years ago # -
I have the impression that some of the posters here don't read many books (by which I mean they focus on articles, not that they can't read). I find some extremely useful stuff in Routledge books - so I would certainly give a decent amount of credit for some of them.
Posted 4 years ago # -
^ For example?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Well, David Collier and Arend Lijphart have recent Routledge books.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Ice, get it, for burn
Posted 4 years ago # -
David Collier and Arend Lijphart aren't new assistant profs looking for tenure advice.
Posted 4 years ago # -
^So? The prior question concerned quality works published by Routledge, not tenure advice. And, is your point really that assistant professors shouldn't even consider publishing in outlets where Collier and Lijphart publish? Just a guess, but if you're up for tenure, you have a Routledge book, and Collier and/or Lijphart are among your letter-writers, I'm thinking they'd be open-minded to the possibility that Routledge publishes some decent works, and I'm thinking their views would carry some weight.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Unless point above holds -- that Routledge is primarily known for for publishing books that by senior faculty that are useful for undergrad courses -- as opposed to contributions to the scholarly literature that help get you tenure.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Routledge tends to aim their books for libraries--very expensive, ugly covers, so they are easy to lose and hard to find. I am not going back to them since I would like people to find my book and buy it.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Here is the first post:
What is the reputation of Routledge Press in comparative politics? Do R1 departments take it seriously or should I strive for placing my book project with an academic press? Thanks for your insights.
Sounds like someone looking for tenure/job placement advice.
I'm thinking they'd be open-minded to the possibility that Routledge publishes some decent works, and I'm thinking their views would carry some weight.
Not if you were actually Collier, in which case you would realize that Collier's book is co-edited (half of the contributions are reprints of old Sartori pieces). Or if you were Lijphart, in which case you'd know that the most recent volume is just a collection of old pieces that he had published long ago.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I give up. The examples of motivated reasoning here are stunning. You prejudge Routledge as unworthy, and then interpret any and all subsequent evidence to fit that judgment. My view, for what it's worth, and as stated on the first page, is that Routledge is fairly high up the food chain among commercial publishers, that assistant professors generally should prefer first- or second-tier university presses to Routledge, but that a Routledge book could be a credible addition to one's record. And I think the facts that 1) Routledge ranked #19 among all presses in the PS piece, and 2) highly-regarded scholars publish with Routledge are much more consistent with my view than with the "Routledge < 0" and "Routledge = fourth-tier journal piece" perspectives.
Posted 4 years ago # -
And I've got $10 that says you're only writing these things because you've published with Routledge in the past and want to feel better about yourself.
Posted 4 years ago #