What is the deal with RC?

amanda_kw

Hi,

Just a general post requesting info from those who like RC /score consistently/ or have improved significantly. I have heard of two types of RC folks - who started out from their diagnostic in RC doing REALLY well and have since fallen from grace. Or those who started out doing not so well and are still doing not so well.

I feel like there is a giant, extremely invisible elephant in the room regarding RC that we are all missing. I would just like to hear some success stories or unusual tips. I know there is a ton of advice regarding different guides and such and I have gone through it with little success. But what has worked in real time? It would be comforting to know that there is at least one 7Sager who loves RC and is scoring -0 to -2 consistently. Where are you?

I appreciate it! I just want to solve the RC mystery to eat up some time in between drilling RC for the rest of my days...

emli1000

I would suggest getting the 4 RC packets from Cambridge and working your way through them. 1 packet at a time. I recently started out doing this and tracking my process on an excel sheet. After BR I'm getting -4 or less per 4 RC passages. Still not the best, but it's a start

brna0714

@amanda_kw I'm always game for a discussion about the LSAT that touches on things that are just a little bit deeper than the normal superficial stuff so I'll bite. I think the "elephant in the room" with RC is actually something that most (all?) test takers touch on but focus in on as much as is necessary to be successful in the section.

As far as I'm concerned, the LSAC includes RC to gauge how well test takers can deduce structure/emphasis from a foreign piece of text - that's it. Sure, they want to know that you understand basic English but if that's really all they were looking form we could call it a day after LR or even LG. They want to know that you can find arguments within text. So focusing on memorizing the details or on anything other than determining what the author is arguing for or against is futile.

Anecdotal at best but here's been my experience in on this has allowed me to improve in RC. We are, after all, taking the LSAT in the hopes of becoming law students and eventually lawyers. If you consider the skills common among successful law students and lawyers, I think you'll find that those people share a common skill, they have the ability to wade through a bunch of stuff/garbage/details of various experiments (text) and come out on the other side with a "take away." I think they, the LSAC, law schools and whomever else, want to know who among us can figure out what the arguments are, why the author wrote the darn thing in the first place and what can we take away from it.

Having this "take away"/main point/structure/purpose/whatever else you want to call it will cover the majority of RC question types (main point, structure, author's opinion). Any of the other questions you may encounter in RC are tangential and are supported by your understanding of the "take away." For instance, if you know (and are actively anticipating, thanks Manhattan) what the author is trying to sell you on then you'll be able to quickly "fetch" that detail because you'll remember it was offered as support for the point the author made at the end of the second paragraph or whatever the case may be. All RC methods that I've encountered are going after this same thing, it's just a matter of stating it in a way that "sticks" for different types of learners.

My two cents, take it for what it's worth. Take care!

blah170blah

I completely second everything @brna0714 says. While it's easy to split up the sections into distinct parts, it's important to remember the skills we use to tackle LG and LR questions are relevant to being successful in RC. I think people see minimum gains in RC because there seems to be no real consensus on how to approach the section. In LR, we know how to tackle assumption and inference questions. RC studying typically doesn't focus on the structural aspects of passages but rather content. As such, it's really easy to say that "I stink at science passages" or the "law passages" but actually there's an even greater underlying reason that we stink at certain science passages and certain law passages (barring extreme cases of limited vocabulary).

The best and most effective way I've approached and tackled RC and seen improvement is to approach an RC passage like a large LR stimulus. In the case of RC, there is a LOT of background, some premises, and one main argument. Since there are more words, it's harder to stay focused but I know that the skill I use to hone in on the argument in an LR question is the exact same skill I need to understand the important details in the passage. I was like you where, on my diagnostic, RC was my best section, went down to -4 up until the 50s, and then skyrocketed to -6 to -8 in the 60s and 70s. Since then, I've consistently got -2 (save for those really unfortunate cases where I can't even focus on my pencil) on RC and I think the biggest reason why is the way I review RC passages. I review RC the same way I review LR passages. I pinpoint what line the question is referencing, I have reasons for why the answer choices are wrong, and can identify exactly where the right answer is in the passage. Reviewing like this has been super annoying and time-consuming but it also improved my speed, which I think is the direct result of having to go back and forth in the passage of picking the right lines to focus on (thereby improving my identifying skills).

amanda_kw

@brna0714 & @blah170blah Thanks so much for your input!

I know that there is so much advice out there about how to get "there" - aka a high score on RC. But I just felt like I was running around in circles without honing in on what "there" was.

It looks like structure/ emphasis of foreign texts and the ability to accurately tune out background to find the structure/main point is the holy grail of RC. And the ability to do this comes through systematic review - which will help you hone ID question skills - a backseat skill to understanding the passage like we understand LR stimuli.

And also don't get bored & do it quickly. But we knew that already. lol.

Thanks again for the response to my esoteric post! I appreciate it.

blah170blah

Of course! I'm excited to go over this with you in person on Friday

"And the ability to do this comes through systematic review - which will help you hone ID question skills - a backseat skill to understanding the passage like we understand LR stimuli. "
--- I would also add: "And the ability to do this comes through systematic review and procedures." Like @VegMeg55 and I discussed in another thread, the approach necessary to "accurately tune out background to find the structure/main point" differs for each person. I need absolutely minimal underlining and notations, whereas she likes to make a lot of annotations.

amanda_kw

@blah170blah definitely! I've gone over that thread a few times. It's super helpful for specific details to help with BR of RC.

Nilesh S

I'd say develop a system of notation and train yourself to see structure in the passages... and read with an eye towards certain types of things... main point, authors attitude... passage organization.. these things matter a lot. Was getting 15 - 17 in the RC and then I worked on it from the Manhattan Prep RC guide... (LSAT Trainer - written by the Mike Kim who used to work for Manhattan is better from what I hear) from then on I never dropped below 20 with my score usually hovering around 24-26.

amanda_kw

OK. @"Nilesh S" - I went through Manhattan this past weekend and I am reviewing 7Sage and the Trainer's info on RC. It's starting to come together with the info about the big picture with help from blah and brna. RC is a tough cookie to crack - but I think 7Sagers can do it.

Nilesh S

Ha ha @amanda_kw yes we can!

DumbHollywoodActor

While it's a very informative thread, the title of this discussion sounds like the beginning of an unpopular Jerry Seinfeld stand-up routine.

amanda_kw

@DumbHollywoodActor bhahahaaha. It totally does. Not my intention, I swear. lol.

inactive

amanda_kw

@"Dillon A. Wright" LOL. I can hear his voice in my head. - So there are words on the page, and your eyes are moving from left to right in an orderly fashion from the start of the passage, through all of the paragraphs - what normally happens during reading, R, but then you get to the end and there's no comprehension. No C. So how can it be RC, with an R and no C?*

*The exception - 7Sagers know what is going on! Most of the time...