Self-study
Did anyone have an aha moment for these, I can't figure out how to differentiate main conclusion from the summary type ACs
2
Did anyone have an aha moment for these, I can't figure out how to differentiate main conclusion from the summary type ACs
1 comments
I see it this way:
Main Conclusion is mostly what the author is saying and is the author's main point. What is their objective in telling us this passage? Why did they write this. What do they think about this passage? Similar to a LR MC question, what is the author arguing?
So, any AC that just summarises the passage but doesn't talk about the author's main point isn't going to be a good answer. Like yes, the passage does tell us that summary AC. But, is that what the author was arguing the whole time? Most likely not. The author probably had some view, whether it be like the spotlight in-your-face perspective or really hidden perspective, the correct AC will probably have that perspective within it.
It really helped when I realised that RC passages are like LR stimuli, but like a much lengthened form. You can ask yourself like, "Why should I believe this" when the author makes some prescriptive/judgemental/hypothesis/etc. claim and the rest of the passage (or the premises) should help support the author's perspective. When I started noticing those patterns in both LR and RC, it was really an AHA! moment.
Try to apply the same steps you'd do to a LR MC question. Like if step 1 for LR MC is to identify premise and conclusion, in your reading of the passage, you should identify the structure of support and anything that the author claims/believes/prescribes. And if you don't know if that's what the author's believing, then ask "why should I believe this?" The rest of the passage should support.
This is what works for me, and I'm sure there's lots of other ways to go about it. Good Luck!!