Need help on reading comp

ALLCAA123

Hey everyone,
So, I'm consistently scoring in the mid 160's, which is a big improvement for me (started off at 155). I usually get no more than 3 wrong per LR section, and no more than 2 wrong on LG. But reading comp..... I can't seem miss fewer than 7 questions. I get anywhere from -6 to -12 wrong on each timed RC section that I do. I got a 165 most recently, and that was with -11 on RC.

I just don't get it– I make a low resolution summary for each paragraph that I read, and I usually think I have a good grasp of the material going into the questions. But, when I hit the questions, it feels like I didn't even read the passage. The questions feel like they're discussing a foreign topic, and I end up guessing/referring aimlessly back to the passage in attempting the questions without any rhyme or reason. I never find my low-resolution summaries useful. Yes, I make them as concise and descriptive as possible (I don't use more than one word to explain what happened in a paragraph), but they never help me. JY makes it look easy in his videos, but come PT/drill time, everything I worked on goes out the window. For those of you who've seen great improvement in RC, how did you do it?

Thank you all!

Shane C.

I am in the same boat here. RC is really dragging me down as I usually get -10 and thus finish with about 60% correct. When I finish my blind review on reading comp, I am closer to -3 or -4. Usually the last reading prompt is a disaster (as I am short on time when I get to the last few questions) and I am still making some mistakes throughout the earlier three prompts.

Looking to see what advice others have.

AudaciousRed

RC is my worst section, too. I used to try and read quickly, make one or three word summaries for each paragraph, and then do the questions. I found I would have to go back for everything, and was still missing so many questions. It didn't work well for me.
I have been making some progress on RC by approaching it a little differently. I slowed down and started making basic summaries in my head as I went that made more sense to me, and I remembered how each of the players relate to one another. Ex. "A bunch of experts think X in paragraph 1, but Guy A says they're wrong in paragraph 2 and presents his plan. Experts B and C come along in the third paragraph to say how Guy A is wrong/is misunderstanding the problem based on evidence R, and in paragraph 4, Guy A responds to their complaints, concedes a little, but holds his ground in paragraph 5. The author of the article seems like he thinks Experts B and C are too conservative and need to get with Guy A's plan." I get that this can be done by saying paragraph 1 is an "Hypothesis" and other one word methods, but my mind works better remembering it in simple everyday terms, like how I might try to tell my daughter the plot to a movie I saw or a story I read.
I found that summarizing the main point (what is this actually about?), and how the main actors/ subjects relate to one another helped me to better understand what was going on in the piece. It's so easy to get lost in the details, and the people who make the LSAT count on you being lost in the words and all those unimportant details. And almost none of it is important. Seriously. If you can say "Hey, I remember reading about that red laser in paragraph 3 when Experts B and C talk about it" and know exactly where to go to find it, you can easily answer those questions about what Experts B and C say the red laser can do. But a number of the questions will ask about who had what position, how they related to one another (especially on comparative passages -- how were they the same, on what did they differ, etc), what the main point of the passage was about, and even how the passage was laid out. If you know these things, those questions become very easy and super fast to answer.

This may not work for you. But I find my timing is getting better by taking this approach. I was able to finish under time on July's test, which almost never happens to me. I always used to run out of time by the last reading. I feel this change in my approach made the comparable passage much easier to tear apart, too. I find I do this all the time in my head, and I summarize complex things all the time for my child, because it's easier to understand (Magneto and Professor X were old friends, and they agree that mutants should fight for equality, but Magneto takes the idea way far and thinks violence is the only answer and that mutants are better than humans anyway, and Professor X thinks peace and equality with humans is the best way, even if it takes longer. They have fought each other a lot because of this difference in approach).
It takes more time during the reading, but if half of the questions are answered easily, and I can go back and find specific details in the passage quickly, it works better for me. It's still a process, but this has been my more recent approach, and it's so far working.