Perplexing reading comp problem!

JennLSAT

When I took my diagnostic test, reading comp was my best section , -3. I am an avid reader and thought this part of the test would be the least difficult for me. For a few months, my RC score was consistently my best.

As my studying has intensified, my RC score has suddenly tanked. I recently PTed and got a -9(!!!) in RC. All my other areas have improved significantly, and my PTs are in the high 160s/low 170s. But somehow, my RC score keeps dropping.

It's true that my studying has focused primarily on other areas (formal logic, etc. from the CC, drilling games and LR) but I predicted that this would keep my RC score stagnant, not cause it to collapse.

Has anyone experienced this? What mistake could I be making that wrecks my RC score?

BinghamtonDave

The first question in attempting to diagnose what could possibly be happening here would be to ask if you have skipped around in your PT schedule or have you stayed on course along a linear path? For instance, was the -3 from the 40s or 30s range and the -9 from the +75 range?

My next question would be what PT was the -9? Certain passages: i.e. "bundle sheath cells" etc, are considerably more challenging than others.

JennLSAT

Hi @BinghamtonDave, I've skipped around a lot in PTs and gotten -3 (+/- 1) many times. I haven't touched the most recent exams (75+) as I'm saving them for the end. Are they known to have harder RC sections? The -9 was on PT62... and I had another -6 recently on another RC set from the 60s... I don't know if these are anomalous or I'm forming bad habits that are creating a problem.

Cant Get Right

This happened to me too actually. I think I could copy and paste your thread and it'd be completely accurate. I started with RC by just reading the passage and answering the questions. That's basically what I did on LR and LG too at first. But then I developed very specific section strategies for them and that unsettled me in RC because on some level I must have realized that I actually had no plan and no idea how I was going about that section. RC no longer fit within my approach, and I couldn't switch gears fast enough to go back to just winging it.

So, I took a couple weeks off from everything else and focused on developing a plan for RC. I watched webinars and came up with an annotation strategy and drilled until it all came naturally. That got me back down to where I needed to be. I just needed to be deliberate in knowing what I was doing beyond just reading the passage and answering the questions.

It's also entirely possible that both of us just kind of freaked out over one bad section that isn't fully representative of our abilities.

JennLSAT

@"Cant Get Right" this is a brilliant answer! I suspected that this was what was going on -- either I've freaked out about nothing, or my new abilities to scrutinize LR qs were undermining my normal "wing it" approach to RC. It's great to hear how you tackled it. Which webinars did you find most helpful?

Thanks!!!

nikita123

@JennLSAT This is exactly what has happened to me! I was never worse than -3 in RC since the beginning, and now that I'm PTing at high 160s low 170s I'm doing much better on LR/LG but markedly worse on RC (-5 and -6 on my last two PTs). Have you thought about elements of fatigue coming into play? For instance, even now, if I do an RC Problem Set here on 7sage's CC, I usually have few to no problems. However, when during a full PT the RC section arrives in the third or fourth section, I find myself unable to maintain the same kind of concentration and retention that I usually have, leading to poor performance. I suppose this would only be solved by practicing RC sections when you're already fatigued... Also any other guidance you've received would be helpful for me as well!

Cant Get Right

Hey Jenn, happy to elaborate. The most useful exercises I did were annotation drills, repeat sections, and uncovering the test writers' intentions.

I've been a heavy annotator ever since "Cat's Cradle" in high school. My annotations have gotten better but they've always been pretty arbitrary. So I used Nicole's system to develop my own system of meaningful notations. Google "LSAT Hammer Time" and it should be in the first few videos to pop up. I'm not saying start annotating if you don't already. But if you do, just make sure the marks have specific and consistent meaning. My system is a little different than Nicole's, but the main difference in my section strategy is that I do not return to my annotations. The annotations pick up detailing while I more actively focus on big picture, structural trends.

Repeats really helped me to dig deeply into the underlying structure. Because I had at least some recollection of the subject matter, my mind naturally shifted a bit deeper into the content. This is when I really began being able to parse out the subtleties in the answer choices that had been causing me problems.

The other thing I started doing was asking for every wrong answer choice: What are the test writers up to here? The wrong answers are as carefully crafted as the right ones in order to exploit specific errors and misunderstandings. This exercise helped me get inside their heads and learn their tricks. Once you figure them out in review, you learn to start seeing them on the front end. This applies big time to LR as well.

Hope this helps and good luck!