KDLMaj wrote:All a high score proves is that you can get the score- it doesn't prove that you can help anyone else get it.
This is true — as far as it goes. I used to say, "The question you should ask me is not, 'How did you score?' but 'How do your students score?'" I was glad when I got to stop saying this, though, because if they really did ask me that, I would say, "All over the freakin' map." None of us — not PR, not Kaplan, not TM/PS/BP — have enough statistical data to talk about the distributions of our students' real scores on the test. So there is no statistically significant data that you, or I, or any other test prep teacher can help anyone else get the score. (We have anecdotes, but that's not the same thing.)
KDLMaj wrote:And, frankly, unless you write the curriculum yourself (and the average instructor should NOT), then it doesn't matter if you pulled a 180.
I somewhat disagree. I will grant that I teach Princeton Review methods. But frankly, I teach Tom-style Princeton Review methods. My methods come from the family of PR methods that differ in style from Kaplan methods or PS methods or whatever, but I've had students take courses with other PR teachers and then take mine (more commonly, just make up a few classes with me) and comment on the different styles. It's not a completely different procedure; PR is question-stem first on LR, always, always, always. But where I advocate symbolizing "G is to the left of R" in one way, another teacher might use a different symbol to mean the same thing (well, there are really only two out there: G — R and G ... R). Where I might emphasize counting elements and considering how they fit into a diagram on a certain game, another teacher might emphasize testing possibilities, or whatever.
So to some degree, I am
writing part of the curriculum myself. For that matter, all instructors choose what to emphasize and what to de-emphasize, and to that extent, all
instructors write part of the curriculum. And what you choose better make sense. So it I think it does
matter that the teacher be able to score well on the test.
Now, in certain courses, this is not so. We have an Accelerated course that has 28 hours of total class time. In that kind of rush, you're going to skim the surface of the LSAT and pretty much say the same thing as any other teacher would. Heck, in the regular Kaplan classroom course (short), the same thing might be true. In that case, the teacher's own ability with the test isn't terribly relevant; the teacher is going to say the same things, regardless. But in an 80+ hour course, in which you're getting into as much detail of the LSAT as you can, well, that's where it matters.