I had an IDENTICAL situation. I'm pretty sure your post here says exactly what I thought in my head when I started. I was frustrated because I also use the shape of the entire passage to help guide me. Being able to see the passage all at once helped my brain memorize where everything was and, in turn, what content was in what location. I recommend that you make the font size smaller, which helps, and practice ONLY on the screen. It will be difficult, but so worth it! I'm already getting much better at RC, which took practice, weaning myself off paper, and getting used to the screen. Best of luck to you!!

Wow!! Incredible explanation for why C is wrong. Took me two watches to get it, but now I totally do, and I'll be sure to focus more on 1) comparing the negation of a choice to the argument to see whether the negation can still fit with the argument, and 2) subtleties such as verbs: in this case, e.g., "sometimes wreak EH" fits in with the argument's use of "addressing," and that realization allows us to cross C out. Thank you! :)

Drill analytics, for one. Also, I don't know if this would be practical or not, but categorizing questions further - maybe using a view that can be toggled on and off so as to avoid overwhelming the person studying. What I mean by the former part (categorizing questions further) could look like this: you get a MBT question in an LR section. It requires your knowledge of the fourth valid argument form and contains math in the stimulus. Being able to repeat a very similar type of question (with those three areas involved - MBT, math, valid argument form) would be SO useful!! I make the same mistakes sometimes, and though I recognize it, it's hard to efficiently drill the more specific weak spots because I can't find a similar enough question to work on next. It usually happens that I encounter similar ones after a long time of working on other questions (despite working on a similar question type, such as MBT), so I end up making the same mistake again when perhaps that could have been avoided with a more specific categorization system in place. What I mean by the latter part of my idea (the toggling) is that if there was a specific categorization system, learners starting out may think there are too many tags and feel overwhelmed. So, having categorizations like "MBT" (a big question type) and "Math" (a big stimulus type) always toggled on are okay, but a more specific tag like "Valid Argument Form" (a more narrow knowledge area that could happen to appear in question categories from MBT to Wkn and anything in between) could have its visibility toggled off by someone who would rather not get caught up in too many specifics while gaining an introduction to the test. Again, I don't know if this is a very practical suggestion, but something like it would make a WORLD of difference in efficient studying, I think!