@isabellagirjikian Hi! I'll try my best. If I'm being completely honest, I am not using the chart/spectrum of support that 7sage teaches. I think approaching Point at Issue questions like "Most Strongly Supported" questions is a great approach. Also, I think the first part of this lesson, where they talk about the speakers either being explicit vs. implicit about their opinions helped me to better approach those questions.

For this specific example, this was my approach:

1) Read the question.

2) Identify that it's a point at issue question type and tell myself that I'm looking for where the speakers disagree

3) Translate Lutsina's argument/identify the conclusion. Lutsina is saying that futuristic sci-fi is a better source of social criticism than conventional fiction.

4) Translate Priscilla argument/indentify the conclusion. Priscilla is saying that conventional fiction is a better source of social criticism than sci-fi because conventional fiction is grounded in reality.

5) I think from here, we can deduce that they're disagreeing about what which fiction genre serves as a better tool for social criticism.

I would say that in this example, their point of disagreement is explicitly stated. Lutsina, in the last sentence, says "Thus futuristic sci-fi has the potential to be a richer source of social criticism." Richer than what? Than conventional fiction. A comparison is being made here. Priscilla refutes this claim by saying, in the last sentence, "the most effective social criticism results from...conventional fiction." Answer choice C gets us here.

I’ve been having this same issue but for the answer choices. It happened on LawHub