Top Law Schools

Kaplan considers itself a premier LSAT prep company, but Kaplan owns Manhattan Prep. Why doesn’t or why hasn’t Kaplan done away with Manhattan Prep if it truly thought itself to be a premier prep company? Isn’t this cheating it’s students?

Bartlet4President wrote:Kaplan considers itself a premier LSAT prep company, but Kaplan owns Manhattan Prep. Why doesn’t or why hasn’t Kaplan done away with Manhattan Prep if it truly thought itself to be a premier prep company? Isn’t this cheating it’s students?

Good questions. Another along the same lines: Why did Kaplan buy Manhattan prep (when it was a young new LSAT prep provider - it had only been a GMAT company before that) in the first place with the intent of being its funding source to help it grow big and become a dominant nationwide high-end/premier LSAT prep company?

This is actually a really good question and I'm definitely curious. Having used both MLSAT and Kaplan, I can tell you that Manhattan blows Kaplan out of the water (as does almost every other reputable LSAT company) and it's not even close.

Bartlet4President wrote:Kaplan considers itself a premier LSAT prep company, but Kaplan owns Manhattan Prep. Why doesn’t or why hasn’t Kaplan done away with Manhattan Prep if it truly thought itself to be a premier prep company? Isn’t this cheating it’s students?

MLSAT is probably profitable. They teach in mid-sized to big cities. They have a good reputation. Their books are best in the industry in my opinion. Why shut down a revenue source? Especially when the talent would just enter the market again and become your competition and earn profits that you're not getting a cut of?

MLSAT makes Kaplan look bad, but here's what I can tell you from teaching at Kaplan:

1) Kaplan's resources and reach is unparalleled. In significant portions of North America, you might only have Kaplan.

2) For every hardcore retaker, 20 LSATers Googled "LSAT prep" and hit the first link, which coincidentally, might be the same link they used to find their SAT prep. Their parents are typically paying. They attend the class. Maybe 4/5s show up consistently. Maybe 1/4 ever even take the exam. Maybe 1/2 will even retake but fail to seriously understand the exam on a deep enough level to see significant improvement. Meanwhile, Kaplan sucks up 5/5 of those people's $, allowing to well... do 1).

In short, Kaplan doesn't care that it looks bad. It's making money hand over fist. That is of course, not a reflection on the quality of their product...

Barack O'Drama wrote:This is actually a really good question and I'm definitely curious. Having used both MLSAT and Kaplan, I can tell you that Manhattan blows Kaplan out of the water (as does almost every other reputable LSAT company) and it's not even close.

I'd say Princeton Review can be pretty bad as well. After their reform when they stopped using made up questions, they became just kind of OK. That's where I'd put Kaplan, just kind of OK.

I get all that, but I guess I do t get why they don’t just adopt one method. Do they benefit from two methods? They could have the same reach by implementing the Manhattan methods into the Kaplan courses (of course that would be admitting the courses are bad). Last question... how strictly do Kaplan instructors stick to the Kaplan method?

Were I to teach, for example, there area few things I’d really be morally struggling with.

Bartlet4President wrote:I get all that, but I guess I do t get why they don’t just adopt one method. Do they benefit from two methods? They could have the same reach by implementing the Manhattan methods into the Kaplan courses (of course that would be admitting the courses are bad). Last question... how strictly do Kaplan instructors stick to the Kaplan method?

Were I to teach, for example, there area few things I’d really be morally struggling with.

The one thing I'll say about people who work for Kaplan is that they actually do like working for Kaplan--even lower-middle management level people. They really believe in the method.

Corporate understands the $ aspect of things, and I guess they don't exactly have a motivation to rework a system that kind of already works.

Young people are loosey goose b/c they know it's a temporary job before they move onto a T13 typically. Those who are slightly higher up stick really tightly b/c they're true believers. I got the feeling that maybe some of the really high up believe know that it's all crap, but never saw them teach. Regardless of how they teach in their classes, they will tell you to stick to it very strictly and only express your own teaching style within the parameters of the method.

I dealt with the same moral struggle. I never got over it, which I why I never considered myself to be a good Kaplan teacher. If you have a 170, try Blueprint and Manhattan, which will occasionally take below 172s before you try Kaplan, but as a part-time gig as a early 20s liberal arts grad, any LSAT gig is really, really sweet job--even if it's Kaplan.

As Bartlet would say -- Look at the whole board.

The LSAT Trainer wrote:As Bartlet would say -- Look at the whole board.

I’d be curious what kind of credentials would be required to get on your list; The Trainer was my primary resource I used to get to my 170 and what should be higher this June.

BrainsyK wrote:

Bartlet4President wrote:I get all that, but I guess I do t get why they don’t just adopt one method. Do they benefit from two methods? They could have the same reach by implementing the Manhattan methods into the Kaplan courses (of course that would be admitting the courses are bad). Last question... how strictly do Kaplan instructors stick to the Kaplan method?

Were I to teach, for example, there area few things I’d really be morally struggling with.

The one thing I'll say about people who work for Kaplan is that they actually do like working for Kaplan--even lower-middle management level people. They really believe in the method.

Corporate understands the $ aspect of things, and I guess they don't exactly have a motivation to rework a system that kind of already works.

Young people are loosey goose b/c they know it's a temporary job before they move onto a T13 typically. Those who are slightly higher up stick really tightly b/c they're true believers. I got the feeling that maybe some of the really high up believe know that it's all crap, but never saw them teach. Regardless of how they teach in their classes, they will tell you to stick to it very strictly and only express your own teaching style within the parameters of the method.

I dealt with the same moral struggle. I never got over it, which I why I never considered myself to be a good Kaplan teacher. If you have a 170, try Blueprint and Manhattan, which will occasionally take below 172s before you try Kaplan, but as a part-time gig as a early 20s liberal arts grad, any LSAT gig is really, really sweet job--even if it's Kaplan.

After having received an offer to work at $21 hourly I’m an inclined to either offer back a higher wage or decline. Have you had any experience with these situations?

Bartlet4President wrote:After having received an offer to work at $21 hourly I’m an inclined to either offer back a higher wage or decline. Have you had any experience with these situations?

I was too young and dumb to negotiate. Maybe I should have, but honestly, given that I was had majored in liberal arts, that was actually a good wage for me. If you have better options than me, negotiate. I trust that you know what your labor could fetch outside the LSAT market, but if you have no experience teaching the LSAT at all (not saying you don't, but if you don't), it's not the worst rate in the world.

Keep in mind that they pay you to commute at a certain hourly rate if your commute goes beyond 45 minutes. There's also some incentives to get you to teach a class sometimes at higher rates. Also, training/prep time/emailing time gets billed so a lot of job is really just sitting on your ass and casually emailing people and getting paid for it.

BrainsyK wrote:

Bartlet4President wrote:After having received an offer to work at $21 hourly I’m an inclined to either offer back a higher wage or decline. Have you had any experience with these situations?

I was too young and dumb to negotiate. Maybe I should have, but honestly, given that I was had majored in liberal arts, that was actually a good wage for me. If you have better options than me, negotiate. I trust that you know what your labor could fetch outside the LSAT market, but if you have no experience teaching the LSAT at all (not saying you don't, but if you don't), it's not the worst rate in the world.

Keep in mind that they pay you to commute at a certain hourly rate if your commute goes beyond 45 minutes. There's also some incentives to get you to teach a class sometimes at higher rates. Also, training/prep time/emailing time gets billed so a lot of job is really just sitting on your ass and casually emailing people and getting paid for it.

Thanks for the info. I will be driving 50 miles and both of my vehicles are pretty good at guzzling gas. I guess I can’t get hurt for trying .