Manhattan vs Blueprint RC Book?

Mellow_Z

I've heard a lot of people recommend the Manhattan RC book to supplement your RC curriculum. Has anyone gone through the Blueprint RC book? I already have a copy of that laying around so it would be easy to go through it, but I am curious if it would be more beneficial to skip it and go straight to Manhattan's book instead.

Any feedback is welcome. FWIW, I definitely struggle the most on RC. I just want to make sure I spend my time learning it in the most efficient manor, and not having to test 3/4 different methods before finding one that sticks.

I also plan on using @TheoryandPractice 's RC summary s/he posted a few days back; I just would like to get a better baseline before jumping into the application of their methodology.

TheoryandPractice

@Mellow_Z Hi! I think you are wise to stick with the basics first. I think implementing specific methodologies comes later. Once you master the basics (active reading, reading for structure), your needs become more apparent (where your weaknesses lie) and it is a lot more efficient to test various methodologies then to target specific weaknesses.

One note of caution is it takes a long time to master the basics for reading. Not sure about you; certainly did for me. I really had to change the way I read, and changing a life-long habit takes a while. I recommend taking notes after each practice session what particular aspect of the basics you still feel uncomfortable and focusing on those aspects on the next practice session, and so on. One day everything will start to flow and you will do active reading and reading for structure quite unconsciously. You won't even be thinking about what you are doing because it became so natural for you. That's when you can say that you have "mastered" it.

Mellow_Z

@TheoryandPractice said:
@Mellow_Z Hi! I think you are wise to stick with the basics first. I think implementing specific methodologies comes later. Once you master the basics (active reading, reading for structure), your needs become more apparent (where your weaknesses lie) and it is a lot more efficient to test various methodologies then to target specific weaknesses.

One note of caution is it takes a long time to master the basics for reading. Not sure about you; certainly did for me. I really had to change the way I read, and changing a life-long habit takes a while. I recommend taking notes after each practice session what particular aspect of the basics you still feel uncomfortable and focusing on those aspects on the next practice session, and so on. One day everything will start to flow and you will do active reading and reading for structure quite unconsciously. You won't even be thinking about what you are doing because it became so natural for you. That's when you can say that you have "mastered" it.

I appreciate the response!

So in terms of priority.. should I do CC > Active Reading/Reading for Structure? Or focus on the basics of Active Reading and Reading for Structure before really hammering through the CC again?

TheoryandPractice

I think doing them simultaneously might work. I've watched JY's videos. Although he doesn't explicitly say "here, I am doing active reading," or "here, I am reading for structure," he naturally does active reading and reading for structure in his RC videos. So I would try to actively read and read for structure before watching JY's videos, and watch his video to see where I missed. (I'm not talking about the questions, but missing parts of active reading/ reading for structure. For example, did I miss a referential phrasing in para 2? Why? etc)

Select 1 passage in the CC and try active reading and reading for structure first
then watch JY's video in the CC

At least this is what I did. Hopefully it is helpful to you too

conraddnoronha

The Manhattan book for RC is good, but I'd recommend the LSAT trainer.

Mellow_Z

@conraddnoronha said:
The Manhattan book for RC is good, but I'd recommend the LSAT trainer.

Yeah I have The Trainer. I'm wrapping that up in tandem with 7sage's CC. I was just curious on everyone else's experience with other materials! I guess I'm in good hands and might not need any other content; I will see what happens when I get through the rest of the curriculum! Thanks for the input everyone

tanes256

@Mellow_Z I don't recall if Manhattan uses "VIEWSTAMP" but if so, I didn't like that book. Wasn't really beneficial for me at all. I would stick with The LSAT Trainer for RC. Can't comment on Blueprint.

The Noodley

I am curious to know whether someone has used Blueprint RC book?

dennisgerrard

@Mellow_Z I used Manhattan RC book(4th version) and found it extremely helpful .The categorization of question types and PEAR Method(Pause,Evaluation, Anticipate, Reassess). I keep reviewing some chapters. My personal tutor also suggests this book.

@"Testing..." I enrolled Blueprint courses before and have its RC book electronically(free if you subscribed to Amazon). It focuses more on passage (like synthesis passage, anti-syntheis passages and synthesis passages) and author's presence in passage or not.

JY's comment on RC is for high-level at later stage of preparation. I would say both books sharpen your fundamental skills.

For my RC, I tends to move towards questions since the questions take much of my time. And POE takes time too. I will prefer Manhattan to Blueprint. Yet, combing book with practice is the key to increase score on RC.

Hope this is helpful.

JustDoIt

I really didn't like manhattan. I would advise using the trainer for foundational reasoning structure strategies then diving deeper on your own.

The Noodley

@dennisgerrard thank you so much! I will first take a look at RC and Trainer!