Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.4K All Categories
- 27.3K LSAT
- 16.6K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 73 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 19 June 2024 LSAT
- 3 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 42 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 8 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.9K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 12 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 588 Technical Problems
- 278 Off-topic
Related Discussions
2 Likes
How to Tackle RC
joecarterruskey
Free Trial Member
I've been stuck in the 166-171 range for 8 months or so now, and do retakes in the 174-176 range.
I typically miss 2-4 in LR, and 0-3 in games.
However, my RC is all over the place. There have been times where I've gone -0, and others (like most recently) where I've missed as many as 8 or 9.
I started doing the Puzzle Theory (piecing all of the answers together), and writing a brief statement summarizing each paragraph. These helped initially, but not as much anymore.
I also understand that all of the answers are in the passage, but I'm finding the answer choices so convoluted that I can't find them. With that said, I typically finish RC with a few minutes of extra time.
How do I properly review RC? What can I do to get better?
I typically miss 2-4 in LR, and 0-3 in games.
However, my RC is all over the place. There have been times where I've gone -0, and others (like most recently) where I've missed as many as 8 or 9.
I started doing the Puzzle Theory (piecing all of the answers together), and writing a brief statement summarizing each paragraph. These helped initially, but not as much anymore.
I also understand that all of the answers are in the passage, but I'm finding the answer choices so convoluted that I can't find them. With that said, I typically finish RC with a few minutes of extra time.
How do I properly review RC? What can I do to get better?
Comments
I've noticed a big part of RC conversation is centered around the passages, as it should be. But I do think there are some strategies capable of helping with the questions themselves. I'll list some of the tips I've taught myself, all of which have helped me significantly.
- Do not accept an answer choice unless it is 100% correct. This is beyond obvious on paper, but in reality, I used to constantly select answers that I felt were "75%," maybe even "95%" correct, only to miss the respective question because of the inclusion of one, out-of-scope word or term. I've noticed this is especially tempting with inference, principle, and most likely to agree questions. Be prepared to not only look for an answer choice 100%, dead-on and especially within scope, but to also eliminate answer choices that are "95%" correct and "5%" incorrect.
- When in doubt with questions on a particular word (e.g. "Which one of the following most accurately expresses the meaning of the word _____") look to immediately preceding sentences to help gather some context. Relevant sentences can comprise an entire paragraph or perhaps a line or two. Sometimes, the word asked about may be a part of a conclusion, with its "premises" coming before the use of the word. In some other instances, the word may be a part of an example of what is discussed just prior.
This technique has also helped me with questions asking for the primary purpose of a particular mention (e.g. "The author of the passage mentions ____ and ___ primarily in order to), which may include a person or a comparison between persons, among other things. Looking to context before and sometimes ahead of the words or phrase asked about is especially helpful in avoiding trap answer choices.
- For primary function/primary purpose passages, scrutinize attractive answer choices that do not properly convey what the author is actually doing. For example, if a passage is used to defend a viewpoint against criticism, an answer choice claiming that the author's primary purpose is to "explain" the topic defended is probably not going to be the correct answer. Nor would be an answer choice using a phrase like "argue for" when the author isn't taking a stance on the topic discussed.
- Author's attitude questions generally, if not always, are asking about the author's general attitude in the passage. Finding an AC that may explain his or her attitude on a very particular part of the passage has not been the correct answer, in my experience, and looking at least primarily for the word or phrase that most generally describes the author's attitude should give you a better chance of finding the correct AC. Though this tip has helped me, and in my experience has never failed, I would be especially interested in hearing others' perspective on this tip.
- Do not allow yourself to be baited by words you may not know in term/attitude questions (e.g. "With regard to their respective attitudes toward ____, passage A differs from passage B in that passage A is more..." or "Which one of the following pairs of terms would most likely be used by the authors of passage A and passage B, respectively, to describe ____?").
Occasionally, these questions will have among the ACs words to which I simply cannot assign definitions. In the past, I've fixated on those words with the concern that the correct AC is the one I don't understand. Yet more often than not (if only due to the fact that this type of AC is one of five total), the correct AC is a different one. But with an obsessive focus on the elusively worded incorrect AC, I miss the much easier and correct AC staring right at me. While the correct AC may use terms you are not familiar with, carefully eliminate the others first before selecting the one you cannot be sure about. Ignore what you cannot determine is wrong or right until after you've eliminated every other AC.
- With some of the trickiest RC questions, answers are often not found explicitly, even if its a question other than an Inference Question. I ran across a question just recently where the answer was found in two different paragraphs - a type of something was discussed and a characteristic of that something was referenced much later. This particular question was asking for the characteristic of that something. Since I didn't catch that the two were linked, I missed the question.
It was expected that you essentially connect the dots. If you cannot find an answer where you think it should be, nor in the immediate surrounding context, it may be in a different part(s) of the passage altogether, though a clear understanding of what the passage is addressing will illuminate this more clearly. In other words, if you track referential phrasing and follow the ins and outs of the passage, two sentences not adjacent to one another (and possibly even in different paragraphs) will be very relevant to one another.
I notice that I typically get inference and author's attitude/most likely to agree with questions incorrect. Also, that if I can't identify the main point of the passage correctly, I get a ton of questions wrong (seems obvious haha).
Something else I've noticed is that the next day when BRing the test, I make the questions I missed correct without even reading the passage again. What gives?
1) Stay engaged with the passage. Yes, medieval art is probably the most dull topic on this planet, but "pretend" to be interested in it.
2) Never go into auto-pilot! This is why point 1 is important. Auto-pilot is when you start off fine, but all of a sudden realize that you are paragraph 4, with no idea of what you read in paragraphs 2 and 3. Again, stay engaged.
3) Piece the paragraphs together. Paragraph 1 will somehow be linked to 2, 3, 4, etc. 2 will be linked to 1, 3, 4, etc. And so on. Find that link, and keep track of it.
4) Focus on the author! The LSAT tries to trip you up with this. The author will discuss something that someone else said. The LSAT writers will hope that you'll confuse the authors point of view with that of the individual that he or she is discussing.
5) Keep track of time, but don't let it throw you off. This is probably why you are able to come back to the passage hours later, and correctly answer a question that prior, you were unable to answer. Don't freak out about time...but, don't waste time on trivial things (for example, what complex but irrelevant words mean).
Success with inference questions comes with time. While you are by definition forced to infer, the passage is generally nice to you in what it implies. Inference questions are more reachable than the question stem implies. Improvement in Strengthening and Weakening LR Questions has actually helped me improve with these RC questions, it seems.
Haha, your woes with BR is likely common. I experience that phenomenon myself. Pressure under restrictive time conditions will do that to you. The fact that you're catching them so quickly probably means you'll actually be selecting those correct answers under timed conditions.
My biggest criticism of the "puzzle" method is that there's no way to guarantee your original approach to the passage is the correct one. Put more simply, you can make wrong answers fit uniformly too and often the test writers will afford you the opportunity to do that. I think what danielznelson said is your best bet.
(a) read for structure not for detail.
(b) spend time and due your due diligence with the wording in the answer choices. More often than not the writers will sneak related but unmentioned ideas into the passage.
(c) annotate for thought transitions and viewpoints. The first part of this is already done for you as thought transitions in RC tend to correspond very closely with paragraph structure. When I test if I find something that's not already blocked for by paragraph structure I'll circle the referent (whether name, or idea, or opinion) by the first word of the thought.
(d) don't spend too much time on any single question. "But just another 30 seconds and I'll get it!" For a lot of people that 30 seconds turns into two minutes+ and with a possible missed question. Move on and come back to it at the end of the section. You'll be surprised at how much you can remember in section 2 even after reading sections 3 & 4. Don't believe me give yourself 2-3 to read each passage and 30 seconds to think about each one. Then Attempt to answer each set of passage questions by skimming (<15 seconds) I bet you'll do just about as well as you usually would.
If in doubt, the more extreme or less professional answer is usually incorrect (which makes sense, since extreme answers would also be easier to spot). Hope this helps.
I recommend using the passage to confirm/deny answers and (if at all) using this "puzzle method" to double-check answers. Hope this helps.
The idea is this: use what you do know to find out what you don't. I think the method was more helpful prior to about prep test 57 after which (I believe and other's opinions also seem to support) that the quality of wrong answer choices markedly improved in reading comprehension. My biggest beef with the method is that it if you're original inclination is wrong it can set you down the wrong path for the rest of the passage. For example, if you miss a main point question or an X agrees with which one of the following questions it can predispose you to pick wrong "puzzle matching" answers. I feel the best method for reading comp is to use paragraph structure to help guide your thoughts. If you come to an answer that you're unsure of compare it against the passage, not against other answer choices IMHOP.
1. Slow down when reading the passages! Like in logic games, the setup is the most important part and can reveal many answers.
2. When annotating, focus on structure and thought transitions, as well as author's attitude.
3. Compare answer choices to the passage, not to each other. Correct answers will match text and task.
I guess my major issue is that I feel like I already implement these strategies, yet something is clearly still missing. Since I'm finishing with a decent amount of extra time the only thing I think I can really do differently is read more slowly.
Something else interesting I noted is that at the beginning of my studies I was substantially better at RC, and have gotten increasingly worse.
And what makes this especially difficult to improve upon is that the errors I'm making are broad.