Suggestions for LR

cklomoooooo-1

I have been scoring -3 to -7 in LR disregard all the efforts I made just to improve my LR. I have read the manhattan prep LR, the trainer, the loophole and finish about 30-40% in 7-sage.... Any suggestions in how to improve LR?

swanganie

That's a pretty big range. If you have enough data in 7Sage analytics, review if there's trends. For me, I know I get MSS incorrect disproportionately and that I spend way too much time on Flaw/AP questions, so I've been focusing on those. It absolutely does help to target specific problem types. Whatever they are for you, try drilling the hell out of them.

GoatAdvocate_0L_SLS

If you've read The Loophole (I haven't read the others, so I won't speak to those) and feel like you don't have any strategies in your pocket, I'd advise you to read it again.

The crux of the book is that we don't solidify our understanding of the stimulus before looking at the answer choices. You should be able to read a stimulus, memorize it, translate it in your head, pick out important words and flaws, and then write down a list of all that is wrong with the argument. I'm willing to bet that you're missing questions because you missed something in the stimulus, not because of a trap AC.

How do you improve an understanding of the stimulus? Do LR section memorization/translation drills with CLIR. Anticipate the correct AC. (DO NOT LOOK AT THE AC'S!!!) DO A LOT OF THEM. Do too much. Then do more. Then, do a timed drill of the LR section you just translated. You should be getting close to a perfect score after having previously translated all the stimuli.

If not, then either: (A) you didn't understand the stimulus initially on the question(s) you missed - maybe it was particularly difficult or something - or (B) there was something tricky about the AC's. In the case of the former, keep those missed questions in a "Wrong Answer Journal" and study what it was about them that got you. In the case of the latter, I'd recommend looking back at The Loophole to memorize the Red Flag AC's she discusses and review the Powerful/Provable method.

Lastly, there is no secret strategy. That is, unless we exclude hard work.

J.A. Bettig

Is English your native language? It could be sentence structures throwing you off perhaps. How are you on RC typically?

cklomoooooo-1

No, English is not my native language. But I think I have enough basics to understand sentence structures. My scores in RC is similar to my LR. > @"J.A. Bettig" said:

Is English your native language? It could be sentence structures throwing you off perhaps. How are you on RC typically?

cklomoooooo-1

Thank you so much for your advice and input. Do you think loophole with drill is enough to get down to -1/-0 in LR?

@GoatAdvocate said:
If you've read The Loophole (I haven't read the others, so I won't speak to those) and feel like you don't have any strategies in your pocket, I'd advise you to read it again.

The crux of the book is that we don't solidify our understanding of the stimulus before looking at the answer choices. You should be able to read a stimulus, memorize it, translate it in your head, pick out important words and flaws, and then write down a list of all that is wrong with the argument. I'm willing to bet that you're missing questions because you missed something in the stimulus, not because of a trap AC.

How do you improve an understanding of the stimulus? Do LR section memorization/translation drills with CLIR. Anticipate the correct AC. (DO NOT LOOK AT THE AC'S!!!) DO A LOT OF THEM. Do too much. Then do more. Then, do a timed drill of the LR section you just translated. You should be getting close to a perfect score after having previously translated all the stimuli.

If not, then either: (A) you didn't understand the stimulus initially on the question(s) you missed - maybe it was particularly difficult or something - or (B) there was something tricky about the AC's. In the case of the former, keep those missed questions in a "Wrong Answer Journal" and study what it was about them that got you. In the case of the latter, I'd recommend looking back at The Loophole to memorize the Red Flag AC's she discusses and review the Powerful/Provable method.

Lastly, there is no secret strategy. That is, unless we exclude hard work.

cklomoooooo-1

Thank you! I did all my drillings in the books I read, loophole, trainer and Manhattan prep. Do you think it is more helpful to do more drillings in 7Sage?

@swanganie said:
That's a pretty big range. If you have enough data in 7Sage analytics, review if there's trends. For me, I know I get MSS incorrect disproportionately and that I spend way too much time on Flaw/AP questions, so I've been focusing on those. It absolutely does help to target specific problem types. Whatever they are for you, try drilling the hell out of them.

LawyeringForLife-1

If you are stagnating, it likely means you have not internalized the methods in the Loophole.
I would suggest flash cards (paper or digital). Multiple per Q.
e.g.
Strengthen - Q Stem Keywords
Strengthen - Correct Answer (I do all relevant info/tips, etc on 1, but if you can break-down if you want)
Strengthen - TRAP
Strengthen - Role of Loophole (or Controversy/Inference/Resolution depending on Q type)
Strengthen - Back-Up Plan

If you remember, these are the big points from the book for each Q type.

Of course, do Answer Choices types and whatever else you need.

Drill with the flash cards every day (no exceptions) until you see that you are retaining (I recommend Quizlet, because it gives you options like typing in the answer yourself, which requires you to actually know it.)

After that, create custom problem sets - e.g. PT30 to 35 (including C) - that is 26 Strengthen Qs. No timer - take 2 hours if you need to and just follow each step - translate stimulus, design the CLIR, customize to fit the Q and translate all the answer choices (all this out loud and recording yourself). Make sure you follow EVERY step to build consistency.

This kind of grunt work will force you to break the bad habits. I am sure you will start recognizing new patterns and see the Qs differently after only a few drills.

Figure out how much of this you need before you are able to go back to doing times drills on full sections.

ninamatryoshka

As others have suggested, drill specific question types instead of practicing by doing full sections. For instance create a problem set with select 5 weakening questions from the PT 50s range, do them slowly (put your timing setting to unlimited), and then review them once you're done using 7sage's explanations and any other explanations you can find, paying particular attention to the ones you got wrong. Then create another set of 5 weakening, and do the process again. If you're still getting some incorrect, then keep going until you're able to get any weakening question that comes your way correct. Do the same for other question types. Pay particular attention to the question types that appear most frequently on the test, and the ones you regularly get wrong. "Pin" any questions you think are tough and that you believe are worth reviewing again, and review those pinned questions on a regular basis.
Maybe try and get through all the LR sections in a certain PT range, for instance all the LR sections in the 60s, and use the LR sections in the 50s for drilling specific question types. Save the ones in the 70s and 80s for once you're better, but make sure you get to them as LR questions change a bit in each PT range (they get a bit harder as the years go on), so you want to give yourself enough time to hit those tough questions in the PTs in the 80s.

GoatAdvocate_0L_SLS

@cklomoooooo said:
Thank you so much for your advice and input. Do you think loophole with drill is enough to get down to -1/-0 in LR?

@GoatAdvocate said:
If you've read The Loophole (I haven't read the others, so I won't speak to those) and feel like you don't have any strategies in your pocket, I'd advise you to read it again.

The crux of the book is that we don't solidify our understanding of the stimulus before looking at the answer choices. You should be able to read a stimulus, memorize it, translate it in your head, pick out important words and flaws, and then write down a list of all that is wrong with the argument. I'm willing to bet that you're missing questions because you missed something in the stimulus, not because of a trap AC.

How do you improve an understanding of the stimulus? Do LR section memorization/translation drills with CLIR. Anticipate the correct AC. (DO NOT LOOK AT THE AC'S!!!) DO A LOT OF THEM. Do too much. Then do more. Then, do a timed drill of the LR section you just translated. You should be getting close to a perfect score after having previously translated all the stimuli.

If not, then either: (A) you didn't understand the stimulus initially on the question(s) you missed - maybe it was particularly difficult or something - or (B) there was something tricky about the AC's. In the case of the former, keep those missed questions in a "Wrong Answer Journal" and study what it was about them that got you. In the case of the latter, I'd recommend looking back at The Loophole to memorize the Red Flag AC's she discusses and review the Powerful/Provable method.

Lastly, there is no secret strategy. That is, unless we exclude hard work.

I don't think that any study strategy is sufficient for a perfect to near perfect score. I also don't think that -1 to -0 is a good goal either. Your first goal should be to stabilize the amount of LR questions you miss. That is, if you're missing anywhere between 3 to 7, get that range smaller to like 3 to 5, or 3 to 4. It's likely you're missing points due to a combination of stupid, avoidable mistakes and legitimate reasoning errors. The former is easier to identify and fix; the latter is something we all struggle with and is also why everyone isn't scoring a 180.

The most important thing you can do is to keep a Wrong Answer Journal. That will help you identify the stupid mistakes. As for the few hardest questions on LR, there's no one strategy. You have to throw everything you've learned at them every time you see them.