A) Methods that might be useful to the lower-scoring student are not only inappropriate to the needs of higher scoring students, they can be counterproductive, literally keeping them from the higher scores of which they are capable.
TestWell (and Brown) alum Anne Harris, who got a 164 after taking a mass-market course, scored a 174 after re-training with us. The way she put it, "the Kaplan methods actually held [her] back from [her] own capabilities."
We've spent almost ten years routinely raising the scores of people who start their training in the 160-170 range -- and we even have a regular flow of students who start in the 170-175 range -- who attribute their increases not to practice effect or the imposition of external discipline, but to the methods, processes and tricks that we teach.
Since most people score far below what they're really capable
of, LSAT 180 techniques are actually more helpful to even the middle-scoring
student than mass-market techniques. That's a big part of why
increases of 15-20 points or more, which are almost unheard of in
other courses, are routine with our students, as they see their
scores jump from the 140s to the 160s or from the 150s to the 170s.