LR details, need advice :/

BirdLaw818

Hey guys, so in reading LR question stems, I've become more attentive to the structure of the argument along side being extra careful with what is actually said. However, in assessing the arguments structure I've taken a teeny bit more time per question...I feel like this is because I attach equal importance to the content of the question.

My question is: in an effort to actually save time and not rush and miss questions, how much should I really try to understand a stems content? Should I focus less on content and more on structure? When I get lucky with LR and finish all on time, I score in the 170s where RC does most of the damage (timing is also an issue).

When I get shorted on time from LR, I score in the mid 160s....

So this advice could carry into my RC as well. I've begun to analyze structure too but I've made no adjustments in my reading of details. I am more accurate but I lose time.

I understand every question and question type, I'm literally just running out of time. I'm not being efficient. For example, Parallel question types are my favorite and I go through them quick because I know it just focuses on structure.

Wat to do?

Thanks again guys, I'm almost there, this is my final weakness and it really needs to be addressed. Last LSAT I took I had no timing issues on LR. I did relatively poorly but came to my answers using the same (although flawed at the time) methods WITHOUT really caring for argument structure.

nessa.k13.0

@Kewlaidd said:
My question is: in an effort to actually save time and not rush and miss questions, how much should I really try to understand a stems content? Should I focus less on content and more on structure? When I get lucky with LR and finish all on time, I score in the 170s where RC does most of the damage (timing is also an issue).

Hmm have you ever come across those questions where you're like: what in the convoluted hell did I just read??? I think it's better to always read for structure rather than get lost in the weeds but be mindful of the specific variables that give rise to the conclusion in the stimulus. I think understanding the stimulus content first can more helpful on some question types than others like MBT, but there are some question types where that focus is more of a trap than anything --like more difficult sufficient assumption questions. Idk if you've seen the question about "sentient beings outside our solar system" and how humans will know if they exist or not, but the moment you try to sit there and parse out all the multiple referential phrases and embedded conditionals to understand the content of the abomination of an argument, you've already lost. It's better to read it and if it's not intuitive skip it. When you come back to such questions first identify the conclusion then (in the case of convoluted-wtf-multipremise-stimuli) identify the important distinction/divide between the factors or concepts. To do this connect back to the specific phrases referenced for each referential phrase (draw a connecting line if you have to) and then outline the embedded phrases (I use parenthesis). Underline the premises. All this is just to get the mechanics of the argument so you can see the structure of the argument. Hopefully, then you'll be able to see the element(s) of the conclusion that is unsupported. The key is to understand the main division(s) in ideas and which ones lead to the conclusion in the stimulus. It doesn't matter if you don't understand the content of the argument if you can identify the things that are unsupported. If you can understand the argument then great. I wouldn't try this for the first time on Monday, so practice it if you can.

When I get shorted on time from LR, I score in the mid 160s....S

So this advice could carry into my RC as well. I've begun to analyze structure too but I've made no adjustments in my reading of details. I am more accurate but I lose time.

I understand every question and question type, I'm literally just running out of time. I'm not being efficient. For example, Parallel question types are my favorite and I go through them quick because I know it just focuses on structure.

Wat to do?

If it makes you go faster and gives you the confidence you need skip to those parallel questions.

If you have time tomorrow before the Pep Rally we can go over an RC high resolution low resolution strategy if you would like----it's an amazing way to get structure and content understanding.

I hope this helps!