How do you guys attack main point questions in reading comprehension?

Lsatbreakingnews

Title^

BinghamtonDave

Ideally, I would like it if the main point was a close approximation to what I have marked in the passage as the main point. Meaning during my read, I have something marked from the passage that I believe the passage is building towards. A few pointers on this: if the passage is about how a new technology's advantages over an old technology making that new technology more desirable, the main point cannot focus simply on the disadvantages of the old technology, the main point has to say something about the new technology's desirability. I think of this as the trajectory of the passage, the main point as it is written by the test writers sets the trajectory for the passage as a whole. I ask myself when I go through a main point: is that a summation of what I just sent 4 minutes reading? Is that what they were building towards? This is why main point answer choices that talk about some factually accurate detail in the passage that is used in service of the main point are always wrong (or at least I have never come across a section where such an answer choice is right.)

So lets review:
Our passage is about the advantages of a new technology over an old technology providing the basis for the new technology being more desirable than the old. The advantages are X and Y. X and Y make the new technology more desirable.

Wrong answer choices for main point:
-New technology has advantage X over old technology.
-Old technology has a disadvantage relative new technology.

A good exercise is to go through the old RC sections and do every passage: write out why the answers on an MP question are wrong.

In short, the main point sets the trajectory for the passage that the author has written.

David

Heart Shaped Box

I really like David's emphasis test, that's what I do for the first line of attack. I only use factual accuracy as a secondary approach (it's time consuming); I try to find the emphasis first eliminate all the ones just off the point (hence I don't even bother checking factual accuracy on those) when I nail down the one I think is the MP, I then use factual accuracy test to double check and confirm.

For the passages without a clear argument structure, the ones author seems to be all over the place with a bunch of "random" points etc. Some of those passages I just don't have a clear prephase after the first read, with those I try to keep the organization in mind and go down to the ACs and let the correct AC to "feed me" via POE. (With MP we really are supposed to read all ACs anyways, even RC in general) Probaly not the optimal approach but at some point you gotta move and I found it to be relatively effective so far. I again use emphasis test even tho i might not have a crystal clear picture of the MP, but i know what's "not" being said. I eliminate all the ACs talking about new ideas, things I don't ever remember reading about at all, or comparing stuff in the passage that I don't remember there is ever a comparison thing going on; if just couple of words off the ACs are gone. Normally when I'm down to 2 ACs, the "true" MP (author perceived) jumps out and I was like, ah, now I see where your going with this, well hidden...

I'm not great with RC so take my advice with a grain of salt, just wanna share what I found to be beneficial, and the strategies been working for me so far.

eesLSAT2017

I’m scientifically trained, so I look for the thesis. What is the passage trying to ‘answer’ or address? That seems to guide me on main point.