For LR sections, the thing that helped me most was separating and tracking my strengths and weaknesses based on question types. I have gotten my LR to a place where I am comfortable, and am now turning my attention to RC.
I was wondering if anyone had any success in using a similar method for RC - essentially dissecting what questions you are getting wrong, whether they are "which would the author agree with" or "what can be inferred" or "the use of the word ASDFJKL; in line 2444 most closely means..." My guess is that this method is much less useful for RC than for LR, mostly because the nature of the questions is more defined by the nature of the passage.
I was just hoping to get some insights in to this before I scour through a bunch of old answer sheets.
2 posts • Page 1 of 1