Has anyone taken the Princeton Review LSAT prep course? if so, was it help full?

[TrippleA]

If so, would you recommend it, or should i do Kaplan instead?

[EarlCat]

I've taught until mid 2008.  They had just done a major overhaul, so I doubt it's changed much since.  Hyperlearning is a solid course--lots of material, lots of class time.  Ultimately, though, what makes a good class is a good instructor, so you need to do your homework figuring out who will be teaching and frankly if their instruction is worth a damn.

[LSAT Eliminator]

If so, would you recommend it, or should i do Kaplan instead?

I think that if you poke around a bit more, you'll hear a wide variety of advocates for companies other than those two...the LSAT prep option range is pretty large these days. 

[LawSchoolGuy]

I did a quick google search and came up with a bunch of responses...not much of it's good though:

Here's the search string if you want it:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=princeton+LSAT+class+review&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=C8A7d7DARTLq-KITIhgTXnPTUCgAAAKoEBU_QCzce

[LawSchoolGuy]

Also, before I forget, there was a pretty good PDF link put up here earlier that talked about prep companies. I did a little digging and here's the link: http://www.accepted.com/law/LSATPrep.pdf

Good luck, dude.

[JurisDad]

"Help Full" = full of help = helpful 

Kidding aside, I need to get signed up for a class or tutoring fairly soon too. There have been a few other topics posted with similar questions, and I have seen Powerscore recommended a lot. I have not yet figured out all the details of the differences of each company, but it seems that they are not all the same.

[JurisDad]

Also, before I forget, there was a pretty good PDF link put up here earlier that talked about prep companies. I did a little digging and here's the link: http://www.accepted.com/law/LSATPrep.pdf

Ah yes, this was the link that I had seen before. Very informative!

[TrippleA]

Thanks for the suggestions! but im gonna stick with Princeton Review course for now and start my own study course at home for extra study time.
Alex

[EarlCat]

Thanks for the suggestions! but im gonna stick with Princeton Review course for now and start my own study course at home for extra study time.
Alex

You should have plenty of homework with TPR.  I recommend doing it all three times.  Do it, erase it, do it again, erase it, do it again.  It's all about practice and practice is all about repetition.

Whatever you do, don't mix methods.  If you're doing TPR, then use TPR methods.  Don't do, say, a TPR class and Nova self-study.  Unfortunately, TPR's retail materials leave much to be desired.  I do recommend the LSAT Workout for Games and RC (not LR) if you're consistently cracking 165.  Other than that, stick with the Hyperlearning materials you get in class.  They'll have pretty much every LSAT question ever made anyway.

[Anne]

Thanks for the suggestions! but im gonna stick with Princeton Review course for now and start my own study course at home for extra study time.
Alex

Whatever you do, don't mix methods.  If you're doing TPR, then use TPR methods.  Don't do, say, a TPR class and Nova self-study. 

I've worked with plenty of people that use multiple methods, and it never ends well. Each test prep company has a different way with which it approaches the LSAT, so mixing and matching tends to over-confuse and muddle.

[JurisDad]

Whatever you do, don't mix methods.  If you're doing TPR, then use TPR methods.  Don't do, say, a TPR class and Nova self-study.

But what if halfway through the class, you start to realize it is poor quality? At that point shouldn't you seek out something better?

[Anne]

Whatever you do, don't mix methods. If you're doing TPR, then use TPR methods.  Don't do, say, a TPR class and Nova self-study.

But what if halfway through the class, you start to realize it is poor quality? At that point shouldn't you seek out something better?

There's nothing barring you from going out and seeking another method of instruction or another company should you realize that what you're currently doing doesn't work or is of poor quality. What Earl is saying, I think, is that you only use ONE method at a time. If you find that what you're using doesn't work, then you can switch to another one, but don't do two (or three, or four) at once. That usually only ends up confusing the student. I've worked with plenty of students that switch methods halfway through and, although they need to spend some time "un-learning" methods before they can fully learn the new information, it almost always ends up well. It's when methods get mixed and matched all at once that problems arise.  

[JurisDad]

That makes sense, Anne. Although, after spending big $, no matter the quality, I would probably have a difficult time abandoning my class before it's completion.

[EarlCat]

But what if halfway through the class, you start to realize it is poor quality? At that point shouldn't you seek out something better?

Well, it depends on what you mean by poor quality.  If the materials and methods are poor quality, then obviously you'd want to switch, although I think more often than not when the methods don't work its from user error.  Especially early on, students will often misuse techniques, or apply techniques to the wrong things.  For instance, if I've only taught ordering games, people might try and ordering diagram to a group game.  When all you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

The second, and more common way a course might be poor quality is when it's taught by a poor quality instructor.  If that's the case, I'd try to stick with the same method rather than jump ship entirely.  Anne is right about the difficulty in "unlearning."

But yeah, bottom line, don't ever try to juggle more than one method. 

[LSAT Eliminator]

When all you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

I'll second that. Early on in prepping for the LSAT, a lot of students feel a bit of frustration because sometimes it seems to them that the techniques don't work. Of course, they won't work on every problem you see because in some instances they don't apply to the question at hand. That is a hard thing to learn at first, and it takes time - lots of time - before you realize when to pick up the hammer and when to pick up the screwdriver.

I definitely think there are systemic differences in LSAT prep methods, but most students won't understand those differences until they get somewhat deeper in the process, and by then they have already seen too much to easily "unlearn" it. That's why due diligence up front is essential. That way later on you will be comfortable with your prep choice, whatever it may be, even if you are having a bit of a struggle at times.