I feel like I am not grasping the fundamentals properly, I am rarely able to predict what the answer choice will be until I get to the answer choices, although I have this general idea of what could be wrong with the argument. I am also missing a ton of level 4 and 5 questions. After 4 PT's I have narrowed down my weaknesses to Flaw, NA, SA, and even though it does not happen often MBT questions. I want to add that even when I am BR'ing I don't I still lack the ability of choosing the correct answers for those questions. Do you guys think this is a fundamentals issue, or it is lack of experience since I have only done 4 PT's?
Comments
I would recommend writing out explanations for all the question you have a tough time with or get wrong. This way, you can really let your thoughts flow and see how you process the stimulus and what made you choose the wrong answer or what tripped you up about the question. Keep these questions and review them every now and then. Hopefully, you'll see a general pattern of why you're picking certain answer choices which will make you more prepared when in similar situations.
This advice also extends to NA and MBT, although you may not be able to prephrase as consistently. I prephrase a lot of the time with these questions still, but sometimes the correct answer takes a form that you weren't thinking of. In any case, taking the time to predict should allow you to better see why right answers are correct.
As for SA, look through the Trainer's section on this and maybe revisit the lessons in the curriculum. You should be able to see the gaps in the argument; they're usually pretty evident because new variables often just show in in the conclusion.
Also, is it me or are the LR questions on the more modern exams slightly easier? Most of the harder questions I did were from PT's 1-9, and I gotta say the stimuli in those PT's were hellish, and the way the questions were asked was not any better.