Professor and course pilots
Use targeted doctrine practice alongside the course students are already taking. Professor-specific assigned law remains controlling; Testify supplies structured application and repair.
Give students one practice system from doctrine to bar review.
Testify supports focused pilots for law-school administrators, academic-success programs, bar-success directors, professors, and student organizations. The model centers diagnostics, course-sequenced application, bar review, and appropriately scoped learning signals without turning individual student work into public rankings.
Request institutional pricing / a pilot →Bar-success cohorts
Route learners by jurisdiction and administration, then combine diagnostics, timed practice, writing reps, weak-rule repair, and progress signals in one environment.
Affordable access
Testify's current student price is $14.99/month and the planned founding Bar Review price is $249 per covered exam cycle. Institutional arrangements can be discussed separately before public paid launch.
Data boundaries
Program design should use aggregate or appropriately authorized learning data. Testify's public site does not claim that a school partnership exists unless the school has actually approved that statement.
Start with the problem the program is actually trying to solve.
Law-school administrators: broad student access with a consistent learning workflow. Academic-success programs: diagnostics and weak-rule repair. Bar-success directors: jurisdiction-aware practice and writing support. Professors: targeted course-unit application. Student organizations: structured group access and focused review windows.
Cohort dashboards and performance reporting should be offered only to the extent technically supported and appropriately authorized; Testify does not promise institutional analytics that have not been built and verified.
Start with a diagnostic, not a sales presentation.
A professor or bar-success director can begin with a focused subject diagnostic, review how students respond to the application format, then decide whether a broader pilot is useful. That produces real evidence about fit before a school commits to anything.
A pilot can stay narrow: one Civil Procedure unit, one Evidence topic, a finals-prep window, or a bar-success diagnostic. Testify can then evaluate question clarity, completion, recurring weak rules, and whether students actually use the repair workflow before anyone discusses a broader deployment.
School participation should be explicit, not implied.
Testify does not publish a school logo, professor endorsement, partnership claim, or student outcome claim merely because someone tested the product. Public partnership language should follow actual authorization, and any program reporting should respect the agreed level of student-data visibility.