@ said:

I like Tony's strategy. It's not bad advice since the time invested in improving RC could likely help you more on a point for point basis in other sections.

If you're really looking to improve, though, I recommend speed-reading exercises. Some will scoff, but part of the challenge of RC for me was physically being able to read fast enough. Understanding all the content is practically a Sufficient Condition to scoring 24 or higher, one that takes a lot of practice reading. Being able to scan the text quickly enough is a Necessary Condition to scoring perfect, though.

You can practice for just 10 min a day:

spend a minute to get your default speed in WPM.

spend 2 min or 2 x 2 min reading one line per second

spend 3 min or 2 x 3 min reading one line per half second (two lines per second)

spend 2 min reading and note your new speed in WPM

Note it's important to keep pace regardless of how fully you understand what you're reading. This is how you can improve the physical speed at which your eyes move.

There are a few other methods that helped me score a 172, but that's the one I think other people are least likely to mention. I can also describe the speed reading exercise in greater detail if you'd like.

Yes, I would definitely love to hear more about your methods and how/where you practice those methods. Is it on an app or some website/platform? Thank you!

@ said:

In my opinion, while it can help to read from similar outside sources like the ones you've mentioned (I personally read from the Economist daily just because I like to), to improve in RC you ultimately have to get better at reading for structure, improve your short term memory, and start being able to anticipate the types of things the questions will ask you about from the passage.

This is a longer post, but I HIGHLY recommend you take a look at it if you're looking for guidance on RC improvement. I've been implementing some of the things mentioned by this 7Sager who scored a 179 and it's helped me make the most improvements by far (RC is also my worst section).

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/26560/my-guide-to-reading-comprehension-part-1-long-ish-post

Thank you!

@ said:

Well, you definitely want to read a lot every day, just so that you familiarize yourself with reading dense and challenging material. In addition, you also have to hone RC skills that are unique to the LSAT (understanding structure, referential phrasing, grasping difficult explanations, keeping track of viewpoints, understanding tone, and finding main points) and that you wouldn't normally do when casually reading. Nevertheless, over the years I've heard good recommendations about the following and that's why I make it a goal to read at least 1hr every day from these sources:

The New Yorker

The Economist

Harper's

Scientific American

Science Mag

Arts & Letters Daily

SCOTUS Blog

1000 Word Philosophy

Thank you!

Great insight!

@ said:

@ said:

Fool Proofing the core curriculum games was key to me getting to -0LG. 100% recommend.

@ thanks so much for your feedback. do u mind explaining more about how you started fool proofing and how many games you did per day? this would be so helpful!

Of course! I can email you a document that I made that shows pretty much everything I did. If you have another preferred method of communication let me know and we could work something out.

Fool Proofing the core curriculum games was key to me getting to -0LG. 100% recommend.

The key to LGs is to not move on from a game you struggled with until you find out exactly what the source of difficulty is and making sure that you understand how to get around it. Also, getting all the points for a tough game does not rest solely on how good you are at the specific game but also on how quick you complete the easier ones. In my experience, the way I got -0 on LG was how quickly I learned to solve easier games such as pure sequencing or one layered sequencing games. The time buffer I have allows me to think thoroughly about the tough games which is absolutely necessary to a consistent -0 to -2. I am not sure how much time you have to study, but I find it very helpful to do at least a couple of games every single day. It only takes about 20mins but it keeps you refreshed on the different techniques. Hope this helps, and let me know if you have any questions!

@ said:

@ Thank you for replying! If you don't mind me asking, what do you think helped you the most in getting a better score on the games?

Honestly just doing a ton of games really does the trick. But the key is not to move on from a game you struggled with to another one until you fully analyze what made this game difficult, the particular inference that was key to solving it in time and how to arrive at it, and how to apply it to future games. Let me know if you have any other questions or questions about a particular game!

Good luck!

A 5 increase is certainly possible. If I were you, I would focus on games because this is where people see the biggest improvement. I personally started at -7/8 at games and now I am around -1/-0. So there is your 5 point increase right there. Good luck!

@ said:

"You are wrong..." is not the same as "the claim is wrong," taken as "the claim is factually incorrect" just as, "the conclusion doesn't follow" isn't the same as, "the conclusion is false."

You could be wrong to make the claim because the claim is in fact false, but that is not the only reason. You being wrong is subjective and prescriptive.

That said, I don't think the answer depends on whether Murray thinks the claim is factually incorrect or Jane is wrong for making the claim. You could remove that sentence or toggle the meaning, and the attack on question would still be the same.

Murray:

You avoid criticizing others for doing the same thing

So you are motivated by personal dislike

So you are wrong

Makes Sense! Thanks a lot!

@ said:

I have tried a few tutors and have noticed that they all have their own teaching styles. I have a tutor named Kate who has helped me improve tons on Logic Games, she charges $40USD an hour I think, and then I have a tutor who is amazing at RC and LR and I pay him $125USD for 90min. Hopefully this helps.

What score range are you aiming for in RC and LR, and is your working with tutor getting you closer to where you'd like to be?

@ said:

@ said:

@ said:

I would highly recommend working with a private tutor. I was stuck at 162 after several attempts. Then worked with two of the best tutors and got a 177 after 4 months of additional study after understanding the test much better. The tutors were expensive as they are well known and in high demand but were well worth the investment as I got into Columbia and NYU. Working with private tutors was well worth the investment.

Do you mind sharing who your tutors were?

I don't mind sharing the tutors I worked with. I went through about 6 six tutors before I found the two best. It may be better to dm me so I can speak more freely about what were the pros and cons of each.

Hey Ravinder,

Thanks for offering to share your experience. I just DM'd you.

Not sure which section specifically you are referring to, but you can always find very good explanations and commonly raised questions/concerns (which may be the ones you have) on both the Manhattan PREP and Powerscore forums. They are especially helpful for LR in my experience.

@ said:

I would highly recommend working with a private tutor. I was stuck at 162 after several attempts. Then worked with two of the best tutors and got a 177 after 4 months of additional study after understanding the test much better. The tutors were expensive as they are well known and in high demand but were well worth the investment as I got into Columbia and NYU. Working with private tutors was well worth the investment.

Do you mind sharing who your tutors were?

@ said:

There's an ungraded, unsaved demo on the LSAC website. Also, there are quite a few podcasts that discuss processes. We're fortunate to get to type our samples because imagine writing that whole short essay in pencil.

Can you please let me know where I can find those podcasts?