In the recent controversial posts about BP and TM, the issue of Blueprint's RC method came up. Specifically:
I agree that the reading comp portion of the Blueprint course is different from ours, although electronic discovery revealed that Blueprint used Robin Singh's liner notes to help create their reading comp "markups". The problem with Blueprint's reading comprehension methodology is that it doesn't work. It was created by Jodi Triplett, who has taken the actual LSAT five times--her lowest score was a 156 and her highest was a 168, and she missed multiple questions on each of the reading comp sections that she took. While those are solid scores, they certainly don't qualify her to create LSAT course curriculum. And Ms. Triplett even admitted at her deposition that she was not an LSAT expert.
Ignoring the legality of taking Mr. Singh's liner notes, because that's being addressed elsewhere, I'm curious what others, specifically those who have taken Blueprint (not the instructors), think of this. I'm specifically asking if you think it works or worked for you. Did you actually use it? Did it illuminate the RC section for you? Did it improve RC performance?
I'm not convinced by the argument above, of course. It seems incomplete, at best. Saying "it doesn't work" is a rather strong statement. Yet, Ms. Tripplet's lack of perfection on the section doesn't prove anything. It's relevant, but not conclusive. A person need not be an expert to have an excellent idea or method that works better for others than they can use it personally. The proof of the pudding, as they say, would be in the eating. Does it work for students? Is it used? I'd be interested in hearing from those who have attempted it.