Top Law Schools

Kaplan, Princeton Review & Powerscore seem to always be advertising LSAT tutoring positions in my area and I've been thinking about picking up a job there after the semester is over. Just wondering about any personal experiences you guys may have with any of these companies. How much do they typically pay? Do you have the opportunity to pick up a decent amount of hours (20-30/wk) or are you limited to only 5-10/wk?

I briefly worked for PR (as a second job), and they were alright. The one thing that bugged me to know (if I would have taken their course) was that I was the only person in the training class who had taken an actual LSAT. Everyone else had taken diagnostics through PR. Now, there are only so many PTs, and it would be very easy to score 170+ on a test you have already taken once if you bothered to look over your answers.

Also, their training program sucked.

However, the first class they have you teach is 84 hours across three months. And, for your first class, you get 100% prep time- which means any time you spend in the class room you can spend at home preparing for that class. So the first class is up to 168 hours across three months. After that you don't get much prep time.

Once you have a couple classes under your belt they start farming you out for individual tutoring, which is a way to pick up hours.

Powerscore puts the izzy in fo' shizzy. Gotta have a 99% score, and do a series of interviews. You work as much as you want, depending on the demand in your area. Pay depends on what you are teaching (tutoring is twice as much as in-class). You can pm me if you want any more specifics.

I also work for Princeton Review. You can get plenty of hours if you want them. The above poster's description of 84 hours of class + 84 hours of prep for your first class is accurate (and you may actually use more hours of paid prep time, depending on your office). After that, you start taking on additional things: an 84-hour course and a 28-hour course at the same time, for example, or tutoring students, or whatever.

The above poster's experience with some of the people in the training not having taken a real LSAT: yes, sometimes (when we get desperate) we'll train people before they take the LSAT and then have them take it after training but before they teach, so you may find that some other people in the training don't have a real score (but will, before they teach an 84-hour course).

Training is rigorous and intense, but believe me, the alternative (little to no training) is much worse.

I'm looking at going to work for TestMasters once February scores are released, mostly because they pay the best ($30/hour as opposed to $25 at PowerScore or $15-ish at Kaplan), but I wonder if anyone here has any input on the amount of available hours. According to ABA guidelines, law school students aren't supposed to work more than 20 hours per week (this seems like a sensible maximum to self-impose anyway), but I would rather work, say, 20 hours at $25 per than 10 at $30 per. What about tutoring? Both TestMasters and PowerScore pay $50/hour for live tutoring, so available hours becomes that much more of an issue.

tomwatts wrote:Training is rigorous and intense, but believe me, the alternative (little to no training) is much worse.

Do you mind elaborating a little bit on what training is like/consists of? Also, I know the cut off for Powerscore is 99th percentile but does anyone know what the cutoffs are for PR and Kaplan? I haven't been able to find any consistent info on their score cutoffs.

Supernova wrote:

tomwatts wrote:Training is rigorous and intense, but believe me, the alternative (little to no training) is much worse.

Do you mind elaborating a little bit on what training is like/consists of? Also, I know the cut off for Powerscore is 99th percentile but does anyone know what the cutoffs are for PR and Kaplan? I haven't been able to find any consistent info on their score cutoffs.

it is like 90%. Kaplan and PR care more about the teaching interview than your raw score.

i also get a sense that many of you may be overly optomistic about your chances. Testmasters doesn't just hire anyone w/ a 99th percentile LSAT...after all there still are thousands of those people around the nation, and many would be interested in a lucrative part-time gig during law school. Same thing for the other companies.

The tutoring/teaching job market is way more saturated than you would think, because it is the ideal part-time job.

bgdddymtty wrote:I'm looking at going to work for TestMasters once February scores are released, mostly because they pay the best ($30/hour as opposed to $25 at PowerScore or $15-ish at Kaplan), but I wonder if anyone here has any input on the amount of available hours. According to ABA guidelines, law school students aren't supposed to work more than 20 hours per week (this seems like a sensible maximum to self-impose anyway), but I would rather work, say, 20 hours at $25 per than 10 at $30 per. What about tutoring? Both TestMasters and PowerScore pay $50/hour for live tutoring, so available hours becomes that much more of an issue.

If you want to work for Testmasters, you messed up by posting here...

toolshed wrote:If you want to work for Testmasters, you messed up by posting here...

Because...?

Supernova wrote:

tomwatts wrote:Training is rigorous and intense, but believe me, the alternative (little to no training) is much worse.

Do you mind elaborating a little bit on what training is like/consists of? Also, I know the cut off for Powerscore is 99th percentile but does anyone know what the cutoffs are for PR and Kaplan? I haven't been able to find any consistent info on their score cutoffs.

TPR has a 98th percentile requirement.

bgdddymtty wrote:

toolshed wrote:If you want to work for Testmasters, you messed up by posting here...

Because...?

--LinkRemoved--

holydonkey wrote:

bgdddymtty wrote:

toolshed wrote:If you want to work for Testmasters, you messed up by posting here...

Because...?

--LinkRemoved--

So, don't make thousands of posts and don't ask for info on how to game the interview process. Check and check.

The first guy made it sound like anyone who had ever posted an interest in working for the company would be summarily dropped through a trap door or something.

Supernova wrote:

tomwatts wrote:Training is rigorous and intense, but believe me, the alternative (little to no training) is much worse.

Do you mind elaborating a little bit on what training is like/consists of? Also, I know the cut off for Powerscore is 99th percentile but does anyone know what the cutoffs are for PR and Kaplan? I haven't been able to find any consistent info on their score cutoffs.

As noted above, cutoffs for Kaplan are a little flaky (depending on what course you want to teach, anywhere from none to 95th percentile to 99th percentile. For Princeton Review's main course, it's 98th percentile.

Training for Princeton Review LSAT is four to six full (8-hour) days on two or three weekends (depending on the number of trainees and other details like that). An LSAT Master Trainer (who not only has gone through this process to become a teacher but also has gone through an additional round of training to become a trainer) leads the training. The trainer explains the content of the course and how to teach it, sometimes modeling lessons (pretending that the training group is a class and teaching them like regular students) and sometimes just pointing out things to notice or do in lessons. Then trainees go up and teach the room as if they are teaching a regular class, and the trainer takes notes and gives them feedback on their "teachback." Each trainee i supposed to do 6 of these teachbacks, 2 on each subject. During training, your teachbacks are what you're primarily evaluated on; if you do well enough in those that you look as though you could teach, you're certified. If you're certified by a Master Trainer and also have a 98th percentile score, you get to teach our course. (As noted above, those can happen in either order: certified first, then score, or score first, then certified — score first is more normal.)

Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers? But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

Knockglock wrote:Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers?

If I remember correctly, 98th percentile is typically 170-171, and 99th percentile is typically 172 and above, just for context. Remember also that these are minimums. I'm a Princeton Review teacher and I got a 176.

Knockglock wrote:But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

This is true.

Knockglock wrote:Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers? But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

well this is a pretty narrow-minded view of qualified. someone that is extremely dull, introverted, and that has a hard time relating to the students will not be a good teacher.

englawyer wrote:

Knockglock wrote:Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers? But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

well this is a pretty narrow-minded view of qualified. someone that is extremely dull, introverted, and that has a hard time relating to the students will not be a good teacher.

Good point. Is there anyway I can just try 1 hour with different teachers to see which one is the best fit for me?

englawyer wrote:

Knockglock wrote:Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers? But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

well this is a pretty narrow-minded view of qualified. someone that is extremely dull, introverted, and that has a hard time relating to the students will not be a good teacher.

This is true but more or less a non sequitur. One could safely make the assumption that all test prep companies will attempt to hire teachers who can, well, teach. The relevant question is whether someone who scored, say, a 176, is ipso facto more likely to be able to effectively teach LSAT prep concepts than someone who scored a 164 (the lowest score above the 90th percentile, which is Kaplan's cutoff). It's a fair question, but I know I'd feel more confident learning from someone who missed 5 or 6 questions than from someone who missed around 20.

Knockglock wrote:Good point. Is there anyway I can just try 1 hour with different teachers to see which one is the best fit for me?

At some point, we (Princeton Review) had a "if you don't like your first session with a tutor, let us know and we won't charge you for the first session and will find you another tutor" policy. I think it's still in place. So with us, yes — but make sure you ask if you call to sign up just in case.

bgdddymtty wrote:One could safely make the assumption that all test prep companies will attempt to hire teachers who can, well, teach.

Well, yes, but some companies (and some sites) are more thorough about this than others.

bgdddymtty wrote:The relevant question is whether someone who scored, say, a 176, is ipso facto more likely to be able to effectively teach LSAT prep concepts than someone who scored a 164 (the lowest score above the 90th percentile, which is Kaplan's cutoff). It's a fair question, but I know I'd feel more confident learning from someone who missed 5 or 6 questions than from someone who missed around 20.

You're taking an extreme example to prove a point, which is fair. It's also fair to consider the opposite end: if you had a choice between two teachers, one of whom scored a 171, which was 98th percentile, and the other of whom scored a 172, which was 99th percentile), would that one question really be the deciding factor between the two?

That was the reason we decided not to match PS's 99th percentile. Most of our teachers are in the 99th percentile. I am. But the one or two talented teachers who got 171's... it would be silly to turn them away.

toolshed wrote:Powerscore puts the izzy in fo' shizzy. Gotta have a 99% score, and do a series of interviews. You work as much as you want, depending on the demand in your area. Pay depends on what you are teaching (tutoring is twice as much as in-class). You can pm me if you want any more specifics.

+ a million

PowerScore is for lovers.

tomwatts wrote:You're taking an extreme example to prove a point, which is fair. It's also fair to consider the opposite end: if you had a choice between two teachers, one of whom scored a 171, which was 98th percentile, and the other of whom scored a 172, which was 99th percentile), would that one question really be the deciding factor between the two?

That was the reason we decided not to match PS's 99th percentile. Most of our teachers are in the 99th percentile. I am. But the one or two talented teachers who got 171's... it would be silly to turn them away.

I absolutely agree with you here. While being able to say, "We're the only test prep company where you know that you will only be taught by people in the 99th percentile" is a great marketing tool, it doesn't mean your instructor quality is better than one whose score standards are only slightly lower. Frankly, it could be a plus, as, going back to your original point, choosing from 98+ as opposed to 99+ gives one a potential applicant pool twice as large from which to choose the best teachers.

You mind publishing publicly what pay is like at PR, or may I PM you for that kind of info?

Beyond the idiocy that a company higher-up displayed on these boards, TTTestmasters has a ton of other problems as well and routinely get sued by organizations such as LSAC. You really don't want to work for them. All-around unprofessional.

Knockglock wrote:

englawyer wrote:

Knockglock wrote:Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers? But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

well this is a pretty narrow-minded view of qualified. someone that is extremely dull, introverted, and that has a hard time relating to the students will not be a good teacher.

Good point. Is there anyway I can just try 1 hour with different teachers to see which one is the best fit for me?

if you are looking at classes, you might want to post in the LSAT prep forum for recommendations. you can probably get the name of the prospective teacher from the companies.

bgdddymtty wrote:

englawyer wrote:

Knockglock wrote:Interesting, so it seems that Powerscore are the most qualified teachers? But PR has different levels of tutoring so you can make sure you hire someone who not only has the high LSAT score like PS, but also that they're an experienced tutor

well this is a pretty narrow-minded view of qualified. someone that is extremely dull, introverted, and that has a hard time relating to the students will not be a good teacher.

This is true but more or less a non sequitur. One could safely make the assumption that all test prep companies will attempt to hire teachers who can, well, teach. The relevant question is whether someone who scored, say, a 176, is ipso facto more likely to be able to effectively teach LSAT prep concepts than someone who scored a 164 (the lowest score above the 90th percentile, which is Kaplan's cutoff). It's a fair question, but I know I'd feel more confident learning from someone who missed 5 or 6 questions than from someone who missed around 20.

good points, but some companies are willing to start training based on a phone interview alone.

in my mind, the best objective metric used would be pay rate. presumably, the best teachers will seek out their maximum pay, so you are confident in the quality based on the pay rate.

for example, manhattan gmat routinely "picks off" teachers from the lower-compensation companies (ex kaplan) and more than doubles their pay rate. the teachers there are smart and veterans of the industry.