thegarciab0y wrote:I am not denying the fact that it is largely a reading problem, I just figured that for 1 section on the LSAT I could improve just enough to get the score I want (160) and then just be ready to make the switch to the most reading I’ve ever done before (Law School), but it seems that the way I’m going even 20 right on RC is a long shot, and for some of you that may seem ridiculous or even funny, but I’m serious, give me 7 sections of LG and id be going to Harvard. My plan of action was to actually increase my games score to perfect every time (which I can definitely see possible), and then use most of my other study time to get as good at reasoning as I possibly could, so I can take a really good swing at 75% of the test and then cross my fingers with RC and hope to land on a 160…. Because from what I’ve been experiencing with RC, I feel like I need to learn how to literally read. I’m just surprised this far into my academic career I’m so ill-prepared for something like this.
Reading is hard. And you have to learn how to do it. Do not feel bad or
laugh it off; it is a skill you have to learn. No one would deny that 3, 4 and 5-year-olds have to learn letters, and then how to form them into words, and then how to form words into sentences, and so on and so forth. And yet we seem to think that after that, everything else just comes easily. Not the case. And the only way to get better at it is to DO it. As others have mentioned, read the Economist, and dense articles. But also, read books. Not stupid political memoirs or whatever else; read Dickens, read Dostoevsky, read Vonnegut, and Asimov, etc. It will seem pointless but you will be learning how to read. And if you want to do just about anything other than pure math (heck even if you do that) reading is a skill that will be massively useful. For Law School, it is essential. But you will not have wasted your time regardless (not to mention that reading good books is worth it on its own merits).