Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 12 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 29 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
Related Discussions
2 Likes
Rant/HELP (with RC)
lady macbeth
Alum Member
I know there are so many threads on how to squash RC on here. But I really feel like I'm a rare case of someone who sucks harder than average at RC. Like oh my god. Every PT I take, I go -0-3 on each section. Then RC rolls around and even during BR, I get like -10+. Like what the hell??? Please someone lol give me a hand. Teach me your ways. How do I own RC instead of RC owning me?!?!?!?! It's literally the only thing stopping me from hitting 175+
Comments
My N=1, What worked for me was to slow down and make sure I understand what I'm reading. RC is the only section that I can currently finish with any consistency. I started at a good point (likely because I'm an avid reader of all genres, my UG is in English Lit) but I really started doing better at this section when I made a conscious effort to slow down and comprehend instead of just trying to read all the words really fast.
ETA: I also don't "read for structure" as I've seen recommended in other places. I read for comprehension.
Now if I can just get my other sections to that point. Good luck!
Be positive, dont start with “ugh RC” when you opem that section, thats a death sentence.
Read to learn rather than to answer questions. The topics are stupid but you can actually learn some interesting things!
I think there are two things beyond the normal advice given about RC that really shape my approach. It is my hope that they do not come off as abstract, but rather useful and pragmatic. This is the first time I am attempting to describe my approach.
So, beyond the normal, find the main point, zero in on author's opinion, know why certain elements are introduced in certain paragraphs (to service what point in particular?), have a summary in mind, the actual comprehension aspect is a fine balance between:
knowing where information is and having an understanding about that information.
Sometimes, whether we like it or not, we are going to be asked about details. Details that might be two or three layers deep in the passage. My first step to this is to make sure I am paying full attention to this: I'm not daydreaming about something else I have going on in my life at that moment, I am reading this passage as if it was something very important.
Take for instance PT 38 passage 1: about controlled forrest fires. Question 4 is an example of where we must have a synthesis between knowing where the information is and actually understanding the information. Question 4 asks us about the forests in the tropics. We should know from our outline that the tropics was mentioned in the 3rd paragraph.
Now, we've got to put together some information and do it fast and efficiently, the time pressures are what we are up against. The relevant section of this text does not use the words in the answer choices. Now, there is no magic to this, there is only comprehension: a skill we can sharpen via PTs and reading on our own. A skill I continue to work on and improve. Lines 42-48 contain the relevant information, but we must extract it.
-So our example is pine dominant: meaning it is a homogenous forest.
-Our example is contra that of high elevations: meaning it is low elevations.
That what makes the example of the Nicaragua/homogeneous pine forrest/not high elevations so special in service of our main point.
So my first point is to practice with PTs putting together information.
My second tip is the degree of deviation between how the test makers describe the answer choice and how we describe the answer choice. In RC, there are going to be instances where the way in which the test writers describe an answer choice is going to seem odd, a bit different. In this vein RC requires of a certain degree of malleability in thought. This is particular true of analogy questions. You even look at an analogy question and be like: what a bizarre analogy that is? Me also! I have found that that happens because I am not looking at the original case (the thing being analogized) from a slightly different angle.
I hope this helps, feel free to reach out with any follow up questions.
David
Both of these aspects as well as our core skills can be sharpened by meaningful RC practice. For far too long, I was primarily focused on volume rather than quality.
When I read the passage, I do low resolution summary for each paragraph and make sure to tie back each paragraph with the ones preceding it. I also don't make any markings on the passage.
Teaching RC made me realize a lot of people think low resolution summaries is the same as summarizing the structure of the paragraph. The low resolution summaries are more like the main point of the paragraph. The tie backs to the preceding paragraph is what helps with thinking about how the passage fits together structurally.
Once done, I quickly do a summary of the main point and move on to the questions. Going through the questions is a mixture of strategies depending on the situation. Obviously we have to know how to approach questions based on their type but we also have to know when to go back to passage vs not. Typically, unless its a local question, I avoid going back to the passage. Even with local questions, if I can't answer the question with confidence I move on right away after circling it.
I am also not afraid to circle questions. This lets me have 3 minutes left over at the end of the passage with about 4 circles. Presumably I am -4 on the section at that moment. I now try to chip away at my score and attempt the questions I have circled to start decreasing my errors. So one by one I try to go from -4 to -3, then from -3 to -2 and so on. I attempt the question in the order from what I think are the easiest to hardest.
I believe people would get perfect scores on RC if they didn't have to do the fourth passage. This is in my opinion a combination of not focusing on low resolution summaries when reading the passage and not skipping questions fast enough. If you don't have the right points extracted from your reading and you are focusing on a lot of details you are about to get confused when answering a lot of questions and hence you will be slowing down. Doing good low resolution summaries can mean the difference between going through each questions in 30/40 sec and getting them correct vs spending more time and getting them wrong. Also, some questions are just hard and the answer choices are really nuanced. To try to get them right is just a big time sink. Skip those questions with confidence as soon as you can. If you do these questions, you are just taking time away from other questions and may now have to rush your reading for other passages.
I hope this helped. I think having a right process on RC can be the difference between scoring within our capabilities vs not.
Let me know if this helped.
I like to think of an rc passage like a longer, much more convoluted version of an lr passage. Instead of a single point being argued for there may be multiple main points being argued for/against. Either way I think you’re being tested on your understanding of the question “why?” as opposed to who, what, when, where, how. This to me means “reading for structure”: why is each element of the passage included? Is it a point being argued for? ...against? Is it used to as support? ...background?
When I started, I struggled with rc because I was hyper-focused on detail. No matter how much detail I was able to retain, it didn’t matter because it wasn’t backed by the cohesive structure of the passage...just a regurgitated mess of facts to be torn apart by the questions. I shifted my approach to let the details fall by the wayside (to a degree) and instead make sure I totally understood the reason why each element was included. After doing so, the details would make sense.
During review, I would be careful to underline only the most essential main point(s) (multiple for multiple arguments) and bracket broad sections of support. I would also make sure I had the purpose of each element of the passage annotated (usually corresponded to paragraph structure but not always). Using the advice of another sager, I would flip the page over and recall the number of paragraphs and try to recreate the structure and identify the authors opinion and tone. This recalling process I believed helped me actually put this strategy into practice during timed practice. In whole, I think like lr, in rc one wants to be able to tear apart the passage and put it back together. The details should fall into place during the process and thus have meaning relative to the passage. ?
Thank Dave! Were the approaches you described in your earlier post what made the focus more meaningful and high quality?
Thank you so much! I will keep your tips in mind during my next RC drill. Do you have any specific sections from specific PT's you recommend?
I also have the tendency to hyper focus on detail. I think its because i believe It will give me a greater understanding of what's going on, but I'm wrong. How often do you go back to the passage? Or do you read as fast as possible and answer the questions based off your memory?
All depends on the passage and my comprehension. I definitely do not read as fast as possible.
Since this is an RC procedure, it is the same for all passages. As you are implementing the new procedure to make it a habit, I recommend starting out on the easier ones first and then increasing the difficulty level.
I think people tend to overlook RC procedure and we over emphasize LG procedure. RC is similar like LG in that just like doing one LG game the right way with the right procedure helps your future games out so does doing RC passages the right way. Implementing the procedure and internalizing it is just easier to do if you start on the easier passages and then increase the difficulty level as you get better.