How do you drill RC?

7SageThanks

I took the June 2017 test, scored a 172. Goal was 176+. I definitely have room for improvement on LR, but I think I know how to approach that. RC I'm a little more unsure about. For reference, I was -3 on RC on the June test and that's right around where I usually score.

I've heard of people drilling RC but I don't know what that actually entails. Anyone have experience with that?

I've used PowerScore, LSAT Hacks, LSAT Trainer, and other tutor's videos on how to approach a passage. I've found that notation is distracting and prevents me from reading the passage. I just sort of read the passage, don't move on to the questions until I understand it and then when I answer questions I either go back and reference lines or I just know the answer. In other words, I just wing it.

If you had 6 weeks to dedicate just to RC, how would you structure that time?

Alex

I'm by no means an RC expert, but it is my favorite section and I do considerably better on it then most other sections.

When In drill RC, I just generally do the passage timed. I don't use notations and rely heavily on JY's memory method and the techniques from The LSAT Trainer and Manhattan RC. I kind of combined them all together and do what works for me. I also prefer limited notations.

I usually do a passage, then blind review it, which takes me somewhere around 45 minutes. I scrupulously re-read it, line by line, dissecting any and all important things. Author's VP, MP, tone changes, etc. I then write line cites by all the answers. In a way, it doesn't seem like I do much different from yourself.

In this case, I would recommend a tutor to specifically help you with RC.

Sami

RC is one of those sections where the ballpark for a really good section is -0 to -3. It's really hard to get better than this range. Getting -3 on RC on the real thing is right where you want to be. I don't want to give you advice that might be foreign to you because you are already doing really well on RC. If you try a completely different strategy it might actually be counterproductive since there are a couple of strategies out there and sometimes switching to a different strategy initially can lead to a significant drop in RC score.

Maybe just keep up with why you got a certain question wrong similar to how you blind review for LR questions might be helpful.

I am going to tag @danielznelson @"Daniel.Sieradzki" and @"Cant Get Right" for you. Maybe they will have something different to add.

theLSATdreamer

awhile ago i saw a post with a video that was over an hour maybe @"Dillon A. Wright" may know what im talking abotu but the video had great point and i been searching for it i think it may help you out. I just printed out every reading comp from 1-40 and made 5 copies of each ahah my goal is to do them over and over until I learn to read haha.

username

@theLSATdreamer Are you referring to the Hammer Time video?

I definitely agree with @Sami, it's somewhat difficult to push past the -3 or under mark with consistency. I'm in a similar position. For me, getting -3 RC tests or a -0 tends to hinge on whether or not there happened to be a particularly dense passage or a passage on a topic that I just wasn't feeling. BUT, l'd suggest looking to see if there are any trends in the questions you're missing. Are they mostly Main Point questions? Are they questions focused on content, details or structure? And then choose a strategy for those questions in particular.

theLSATdreamer

@garicb-1 yes ! i needed this thank you!

7SageThanks

@garicb-1 I struggle most with inferring an author's position, especially where the inference comes from structure and tone. Tone is slightly easier because there are opinionated word choices I can spot, but sometimes I find myself in a situation where two answer choices that describe the authors tone as "hesitant" and "reluctant," for example, and I'll be like...those are pretty similar. So I try to figure out how they're different, don't end up doing a good job at that, and then almost flip a coin.
I'm not good with making inferences based on structure either. When I'm more or less asked to infer why an author wrote something yet there's no explicit line reference I get uneasy. My gut feeling with some elimination techniques can get me down to two answer choices, but when I pick on my gut instinct from those two I'm only right about half the time. Then when I review the test and look up an explanation I honestly think the other answer choice I was between was so close to being right I would not have a good way of spotting that on the test.

I'm sort of wondering whether there are patterns to RC passages and questions that would specifically help with this situation like there are to LR. Because if that is true, then drilling would probably help me recognize those patterns and gain a point or two.

inactive

@theLSATdreamer said:
awhile ago i saw a post with a video that was over an hour maybe @"Dillon A. Wright" may know what im talking abotu but the video had great point and i been searching for it i think it may help you out. I just printed out every reading comp from 1-40 and made 5 copies of each ahah my goal is to do them over and over until I learn to read haha.

If it's over an hour it's likely a Webinar video.
https://7sage.com/webinar/

Cant Get Right

That's a tough range to improve from. I'm typically pretty content with -3 on RC, so if you can figure out how to score consistently better, let me know!

That said, I do think having a specific strategy is beneficial in any section. What strategy will be most effective for you is difficult to say. I think there is a much broader range of what can be effective in RC than any other section.

For me, I notate details while focusing my metal energy on the big, structural elements of the passage. The whole point of RC is to throw more information at us than we can ever hope to retain and see how well we can sort through it all. I find that annotation works well for me, but it's definitely not for everyone. I will say though that before it worked, it was really distracting for me too. I didn't know my system very well at first, and so I spent a lot of energy just remembering what my annotations even were. Obviously that is not a productive area of focus. It took a lot of drilling repeat sections before they became intuitive. Once they did though, it was really effective.

Good luck, and I hope you'll let us know what you end up doing!

username

@7SageThanks this is garicb. lolz. I have issues with Main point and attitude primarily. On the latter, I focus a lot on the intensity of the words. Usually you can cut down a few, but I'm sure you've figured that much out, as well. It's gotten to the point that I will just watch the video review of the particular problem and then mentally (or even in my notebook) take note of the definition/differences provided of that specific word. I'm hoping that those sorts of words will repeat enough that it'll make a difference. Or, more realistically, that I'll get a feel for the subtleties of those sorts of words more broadly. An example I remember would be, 'optimistic' and 'supportive' or something. In the former, you think it will work out, as in the latter, you may think it'll be a total failure but you're still supporting it. shrug

As for the gut feeling, yeah. I have that too. I personally diagram as I go along. Not as much as in that video, but a lot more than is suggested by 7Sage. The memory method in 7Sage, though, recommends taking a second between each paragraph to paraphrase the paragraph that you just read and then to summarize the mentally summarize the passage's structure in it's entirety once before you move on to the questions. I've found this super useful when approaching the structure and inference questions. It's also good to remember that answers to the inference questions are often explicitly stated in the paragraph/just re-phrasings. Idk. I'm not gonna be of much help on those. For the main point questions, i've just started asking myself, what was the author really driving at this whole time? and that rephrasing has helped.

In general, I'm working from the assumption that RC does have underlying patterns, as the other sections do. So, moving forward, I'm personally going to be focusing on drilling the 2 or 3 question types that I have trouble with in isolation and then gauge my progress based on the time PT's.

Good luck.