Step 0: Reading the Question Stem First

CantStopWontStop

7Sage recommends reading the question stem first. I will start to play with this. However, in the Powerscore books they say DON"T read the question stem first and go on to give several pretty good reasons. I don't see where 7Sage gives it's cost benefits analysis/reasoning for why to read the question stem first. Am I missing where this is stated? And if not, any thoughts on why it is better to read the question stem first?

LSATcantwin

Preference, pure and simple.

I prefer Stem first for a two main reasons;

1.) I want to know what I am doing, before I do it. I prefer knowing exactly what type of question I am up against before I tackle the stim. It puts my mind in the right place.

2.) It saves me time. I work much faster when my brain knows what it is suppose to be doing. I read the stem, think "okay, SA so I'm looking for a leap in logic" then go into the stim knowing exactly what I'm looking for. It cuts down on reading the stim more than once in a lot of cases.

but again it is really preference...however I think the majority of people are going to tell you they work better with stim first. This is just based on responses I've seen to this question before.

ATLsat_2019

I'm also in favor of reading the question stem first. I struggled with LR for a long time and once I started using 7sage's methods, including reading the question stem first, I started to improve a lot. I'm sure it's a lot to do with personal preference but just wanted to share what has been working for me lately. Starting with the question stem helps me know exactly what I need to read for (and what I don't) and move through the questions more quickly and with greater accuracy and focus.

Seeking Perfection

I preferred not to read it first, but it definitely saves time. So if I was a little behind pace compared to normal, I read question stems first then the passage and then answered.

If not, I read the passage the question and the answers in order and then reread/scanned the passage to confirm the answer.

FixedDice

1. You spend less time trying to figure out whether a stimulus is an argument and, if it is one, trying to figure out whether said argument is well-supported;
2. You know what your task is beforehand.

Take your typical MP question, for instance. If you know that all you were looking for is the MP of the stimulus, you wouldn't be spending your precious second(s) deciding whether the argument you just saw is a horrible, reasonable, decent, or valid argument.

Of course, if reading the stimulus works better for you, then by all means go for it. Each to his or her own. I personally tried reading stimuli first for a while, until I decided the other approach was better for me.

FixedDice

On a totally irrelevant side note, I have been thinking that the whole read-the-stimulus-first approach is one of those instances where the truly intelligent doesn't take account for the difference in intellectual horsepower between him- or herself and the rest when making a recommendation to the latter. Like you said, some commercial sources do raise a number of reasonable points for reading the stimulus first; it does work for quite a number of people too. I just think that for people like me, it just doesn't work as well.

hawaiihi

Once I started reading the stem first, it totally changed my perspective in LR in a really positive way. If you know what you're looking for, it makes a difference.

For example, on questions like "The argument follows assuming that..." I'd find myself already coming up with the correct assumption in my head even before reading the multiple choice answers.

I find it so helpful, especially compared to my way of thinking before, when I was like... "okay. Just read all that stuff about a new policy for construction zoning in Middletown. Uhhh...now what?"

Cant Get Right

Different questions require different levels of understanding. Maybe the mosts conspicuous example of this is a main conclusion question. Why in the world would you exert any more energy on that than just reading the stimulus to find the conclusion? I'm all about taking the path of least resistance and saving my mental energies for where I need them. Knowing the task allows me to calibrate what I'm reading for in terms of both depth and focus. This let's me get more for less for my time and energy which is key to my success in LR.

akistotle

I agree with @"Cant Get Right". You don’t have to start analyzing the argument when you know your task is only to look for the conclusion. It saves you a lot of time.