It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
When you have extra time at the end of an LR section, is it strategically wiser to first go back to questions you flat out skipped (due to their initial perceived difficulty) or to questions completed but marked for review due to some uncertainty?
By "uncertainty" I mean those questions where you have a somewhat high degree of certainty but just slightly (like 70% certainty or so). Since every question is worth 1 point, would it be best to prioritize these questions or those that you just flat out skipped?
Comments
I think it's a judgement call as to how well you think you'll be able to answer the questions that you totally skipped.
If you blindly guess on a question, you've got a 20% chance of getting it right. If you can eliminate 3 answers after working on it for a bit, you up your chances to 50%.
If you work on questions that are 70% certain, you might get your confidence up to 90%.
Say there are 3 questions that you skipped and 3 questions with which you are 70% confident. If you spend all the time on the skipped questions to get them to 50%, your expected return would be .5(3) + .7(3) = 3.6. If you only focus on the 70% questions, your expected return would be .2(3) + .9(3) = 3.3.
That's a little abstract, but if you start thinking about which questions you think you have the best return on investment, it might help with strategy. I think more broadly you've just got to make sure you don't sink too much time into any one question. Even upon a return, you've got to be willing to pull out and go to a different question if it's not clicking. The worst return on investment would be if you spent all your time on only one question. Better to narrow down to 2 answers, guess, and move on to the next one.
I really like this approach. I have a post somewhere where I really dig deep into this. You have to think in terms of probability. For me, I typically benefit more from going back to my 50/50s first, and then moving to my skips, but that's just how my sections tend to play out. I normally have three 50/50s, and two skips. So that's 150% confidence to be gained on three 50/50s, and 160% on two skips. The difference is that I'm usually able to resolve my 50/50s quickly. So in less time, I can gain about the same level of confidence. It's all about return on time investment.
Another thing that's important is to have a dynamic marking strategy. You should not just be circling any question you want to come back to. A 50/50 should be distinct from a blind guess which should be distinct from high confidence. That way you can quickly see what's what which will allow you to maximize that end time.
I fully agree with this, and it's something I am trying to improve. Right now I have 3 tiers, a "least confident/totally skipped" tier, a "down to two answers but leaning towards one" tier, and "pretty confident but not totally sure" tier. I'm also playing around with a numerical marking system.
I circle my 50/50s, double circle my skips/really low confidence, and slash through my high confidence/didn't read all answer choices, and then don't mark at all when I'm confident enough. Finding my system and practicing it and refining it until it was second nature became a vital part of my studies. Effective use of that extra time, for me, is the difference between the -4 range and the -1 range. I don't just understand every question right away. But I do know how to manage my time effectively and maximize my returns for every second.
Really great insights. Thanks so much