Public interest law- Do rankings matter less?

[studymaster]

I'd call them elitist but I've liked everyone I've met/listened to from there so I don't think that would be entirely fair.

Who says elitist is a pejorative?

"Elitist" means snobby or pretentious.  "Elite," on the other hand, is not pejorative.  It simply means of a superior class, higher caliber, etc.

Indulge me, I ama bit of a logophile, and youre kinda wrong on this one...


e⋅lit⋅ism   /ɪˈlitɪzəm, eɪˈli-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation  [i-lee-tiz-uhm, ey-lee-] Show IPA Pronunciation 

–noun 1. practice of or belief in rule by an elite.
2. consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group.

[goaliechica]

I'd call them elitist but I've liked everyone I've met/listened to from there so I don't think that would be entirely fair.

Who says elitist is a pejorative?

"Elitist" means snobby or pretentious.  "Elite," on the other hand, is not pejorative.  It simply means of a superior class, higher caliber, etc.

Indulge me, I ama bit of a logophile, and youre kinda wrong on this one...


e⋅lit⋅ism   /ɪˈlitɪzəm, eɪˈli-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation  [i-lee-tiz-uhm, ey-lee-] Show IPA Pronunciation 

–noun 1. practice of or belief in rule by an elite.
2. consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group.

Look, I can dictionary shop too:

The Compact Oxford English Dictionary gives as a definition of elitism: "noun 1 the belief that a society or system should be run by an elite. 2 the superior attitude or behaviour associated with an elite (elitism)."

ETA:

Elitism is the belief or attitude that those individuals who are considered members of the elite are those whose views on a matter are to be taken the most seriously or carry the most weight.

The pretentiousness bit comes from the first part of your definition: the belief in rule by an elite. Now I'm not saying you're not welcome to buy into that as a good thing, but it's considered pretentious by many to believe that one knows best and should be in charge of things/have their opinions given the most weight on a matter. Sometimes it's true, but it's also pretentious. Since you seem to be having trouble understanding what she was driving at.

[Miss P]

I'd call them elitist but I've liked everyone I've met/listened to from there so I don't think that would be entirely fair.

Who says elitist is a pejorative?

"Elitist" means snobby or pretentious.  "Elite," on the other hand, is not pejorative.  It simply means of a superior class, higher caliber, etc.

Indulge me, I ama bit of a logophile, and youre kinda wrong on this one...

e⋅lit⋅ism   /ɪˈlitɪzəm, eɪˈli-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation  [i-lee-tiz-uhm, ey-lee-] Show IPA Pronunciation 

–noun 1. practice of or belief in rule by an elite.
2. consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group.

I agree with goalie. 

Since you are a self-professed logophile, studymaster, surely you understand that words have different meanings in different contexts and I am not "wrong" just because I was operating with a different shade of meaning than you were.  Moreover, I would argue that the "belief in rule by an elite" or "consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group" is, essentially, snobbery.  Third, other dictionaries put other definitions first.  Some (e.g., Merriam-Webster online) include references to the headnote for "snobbery" directly in their definitions of "elitism."  Finally, by far the most common everyday connotation of "elitist" is pejorative; this was obviously the usage that observationalist was employing.  (It may also be that different forms of the word have different primary meanings.  For instance, when we refer to "elitism," we may more often be talking about a coherent and rationalized group ideology while when we refer to "elitists," we may more often be talking about individual snobs.)

In any case, I don't entirely understand your stake in this.  If you want to say, "Elitism isn't always bad," that's reasonable, I suppose, but it's not really relevant to the discussion here.  Observationalist obviously meant that he was concerned about the elitism he saw, even if he liked the people he knew well enough that he didn't want to call them "elitist."  In doing so, he told us which connotation of the word he was using, the negative one. 

[observationalist]

Thank you both for getting my back... I didn't have enough brainpower to spare on defending myself against a wordsmith.  12 hours until the last final... looking forward to the satisfaction that comes with being halfway towards getting that J.D.

To end the confusion, a more accurate statement of what I was trying to say would've been: "I'd call them eliTTTist, but I respect them and their elite talents/ambitions too much [for various reasons previously mentioned] to care whether they look down on me and my TTT15 legal education."

[PetitBonaparte]

I interned for a summer at a large non-profit firm that is quite well known in NYC (e.g. it has many government contacts and gets sponsorship from a lot of BigLaw firms).  Throughout the summer program, brown bag lunches were held periodically to give the attorneys and directors of various units a chance to discuss life in the public sector. At one of these meetings, the director of the Litigation Unit said that positions in non-profit are very competitive because there aren't many to begin with, and specifically that a good GPA from a good law school is something they definitely take note of.

In general, I think a larger portion of graduates from top law schools end up in the private sector, but if they were to consider the public sector, their credentials would give them a leg up.

[iamprov]

I interned for a summer at a large non-profit firm that is quite well known in NYC (e.g. it has many government contacts and gets sponsorship from a lot of BigLaw firms).  Throughout the summer program, brown bag lunches were held periodically to give the attorneys and directors of various units a chance to discuss life in the public sector. At one of these meetings, the director of the Litigation Unit said that positions in non-profit are very competitive because there aren't many to begin with, and specifically that a good GPA from a good law school is something they definitely take note of.

In general, I think a larger portion of graduates from top law schools end up in the private sector, but if they were to consider the public sector, their credentials would give them a leg up.

Agreed.  Sexy PI jobs are extremely competitive (especially in metro areas) and the employers do take a school's reputation into account.  I will say this:  if your class rank is good enough to get you into a big firm, and you still opt for PI, employers will take note of that as well.  But look at the staff attorneys for the ACLU, for example.  They all went to T1 (and in many cases, Top 14) schools.

[whitman]

Observationalist,

I am planning on entering the field of environmental law, as well, but am taking a year off before law school.  I will be applying to schools this fall.  You said that you regretted not applying to Lewis and Clark and Vermont.  Part of me wants to go to a school like that, but another part of me know that many people change their mind, and aren't you kind of screwed if you go to a school like that and don't go into environmental law.  That is, if you could have gotten into, say, Vanderbilt.  Thoughts on that?  Also, I know Tulane is supposed to have a good environmental program.  Did you consider that and what do you think of it?  I think I have a decent shot at getting into Vandy and similarly ranked schools.  It sounds like you would recommend Vandy for someone interested in environmental law even though it doesn't excel in the field?

[observationalist]

Observationalist,

I am planning on entering the field of environmental law, as well, but am taking a year off before law school.  I will be applying to schools this fall.  You said that you regretted not applying to Lewis and Clark and Vermont.  Part of me wants to go to a school like that, but another part of me know that many people change their mind, and aren't you kind of screwed if you go to a school like that and don't go into environmental law.  That is, if you could have gotten into, say, Vanderbilt.  Thoughts on that?  Also, I know Tulane is supposed to have a good environmental program.  Did you consider that and what do you think of it?  I think I have a decent shot at getting into Vandy and similarly ranked schools.  It sounds like you would recommend Vandy for someone interested in environmental law even though it doesn't excel in the field?

G'luck in researching schools/applying next cycle.  My reasons for saying I would've applied to those schools were basically so that I would've (hopefully) been in a position to balance the extra costs of Vanderbilt with the opportunities.  Vanderbilt sold me on the small class size, the placement ability in biglaw to justify the debt, and the direct and close access to faculty.  You'll have the first and the third of those at L&C, Vermont, and Pace (though obviously not the biglaw prospects). That said, I wasn't 100% set on enviro work so I don't think I would've bit on one of the other three schools without having had prior experience doing enviro-specific work, instead of just regulatory consulting.  If you really see yourself doing that kind of work and nothing else, those are all valid schools to consider even compared to T-25 programs.

Regarding Vanderbilt, I have yet to see someone say we don't excel in placement for environmental law... it's more that our reputation hasn't caught up with the massive improvements Professor Vandenbergh has brought to the table since he's been here.  In sheer numbers we'll never pump out the same number as the enviro schools (or even GULC with their massive class size and government focus), but the opportunities for those of us who want them are amazing. Except for ELPAR and the DC symposium (which are both truly one-of-a-kind for the experience and networking opportunities they give us), none of the opportunities I've pursued are particularly unique to Vanderbilt.  The difference here is that I've had direct access to everything without facing much competition from my classmates.  Whenever I've stated an interest in doing something, I've had guidance from my professors and ultimately someone from the school throwing Vanderbilt's weight behind my name to get me through.  There are only perhaps a dozen students in the 1L class looking to practice enviro law around the country, and already they're doing very well getting on the right track.  We've got a Texan going to Austin to split her summer between Environmental Defense and a boutique that handles Sierra Club litigation; an Alaskan working in Rome at the UNFAO; a New Yorker hopefully landing an internship with NYCDEP; an east-coaster aiming at ngos in DC; and a Kentuckian working for the former EPA GC here in Nashville.  Those are the five I know who have sought help from the Environmental Law Society and Prof. Vandenbergh... there are likely others that have been to Vandenbergh who we don't know about. I actually know of two more 2Ls who asked me about him at some point and may be pushing for an enviro track... thinking this through just made me realize we need to set up an ELS meeting to touch base with everyone.  So, thanks for that!

But yeah, there are still valid reasons to hit up L&C/Vermont/Pace.  I didn't research Tulane in applying to schools so I won't comment much except to say that their clinic is very well-regarded by employers.  It's even spoken highly of by the folks up at Pace's clinic, which in my biased opinion is the best in the country.