17 comments

  • Saturday, Aug 16

    Kevin's note that we shouldn't be too concerned with speed yet was on point. I was just stressing that I took too long for the previous section's drills.

    3
  • Tuesday, May 20

    Does the lack of citations bother anyone else?

    -1
  • Friday, May 16

    funny how this passage used the concept of stealing thunder by providing negative information in the last paragraph.

    6
  • Saturday, Oct 19 2024

    So is this the SP framework "Here's some background of X, here's what I think, and why?"

    Where:

    Background = lawyers believe stealing thunder is effective

    What (I) Author thinks = the effectiveness of stealing thunder is supported

    Why = Psych Explanations 1-4

    #feedback

    9
  • Friday, Sep 06 2024

    Wouldn't the main point be more like "Stealing Thunder is effective, but it has some limitations?" Why aren't we including the bottom limitation point?

    10
  • Tuesday, Aug 20 2024

    GO KEVIN.. WHOOP WHOOP

    7
  • Wednesday, Aug 07 2024

    I was typing up my question about timing right as you got to answering it! Thank you for reading my mind haha!

    5
  • Wednesday, Aug 07 2024

    Just wondering if we are doing these new RC lessons and we haven't done the old ones, should we? I wonder if there's any benefit to also doing the old RC section?

    1
  • Sunday, Aug 04 2024

    How is a single position passage different from spotlight passage? Can't you use the spotlight framework to understand this passage? Let me tell you about this thing (stealing thunder). Here's why it's works (reasons 1,2,3,4).

    0
  • Friday, Aug 02 2024

    #feedback this seems to be the written explanation of paragraph 3 we did in the last lesson, not the after-passage explanation :)

    1

Confirm action

Are you sure?