RC Categorized by Passage Structure List Forum

[SecondWind]

I've scoured TLS and all I've found is this http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=192490

If you don't have a list by structure, would you mind giving any kind of categorization list that you do have?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EDIT: Scoobers has graciously started to provide a preliminary list for us. I will keep this post updated as other people post new ones until we finish. I intend to finish. If you think one is improperly categorized or we're missing a category PLEASE SPEAK UP! Thanks!
Passages with more than one option/thing discussed:

Compare/Contrast: First paragraph introduces the issue, second paragraph introduces the two options (one of the options could be in the first paragraph), last two paragraphs compare/contrast, possibly with examples. Optional fourth gives an opinion.

This is what people used to believe and now they believe (or should believe) something else: First paragraph introduces issue, second paragraph talks about the "wrong" belief, third paragraph talks about the right belief, optional fourth gives reasons why that belief might also be wrong/gives author's opinion.

Take the third option: Closely related to "this is what people used to believe." Paragraph describing two options, paragraph describing the third option, paragraph describing why the third option is better or how it bridges the gap between the first two options. 100% of the time the third option rocks the socks off the other two (obviously, it doesn't have to be numerically the third option). If there is a Take the Third where the author agrees with one of the other options, and the author compares the three (or more) options, then that is inherently a compare/contrast. If there is a Take the Third where the author only briefly explains the first two options, but then extensively explains the third, and offers no opinion (rare!) then this is a This is a thing passage. See my buddy Dosto (PT 64) for an example of a pretend take the third that is actually compare/contrast.

One option and one opinion:

Advantages/Disadvantages: First chunk introduced an idea, second offers advantages/disadvantages, third explains how the disadvantages were avoided or the author's opinion.

Explaining a paradox: First paragraph introduces an issue, second chunk introduces the paradox, third resolves the paradox, optional fourth gives an opinions.

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did: First paragraph introduces the person, second paragraph describes the person, third paragraph describes what he/she did, usually with an example.

New Theory, New Ideas: First paragraph introduces the thing, second paragraph describes what it is, third paragraph describes an example (probably), fourth paragraph describes how it changes things/reflects something/is cool.

Explication: One topic, one opinion. Very frequently uses first person. Doesn't have a specific structure because it is only talking about one thing, but from what I've seen these passages won't have a paragraph at the end giving the author's opinion, because the opinion is woven throughout the passage.

No opinions:

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion: First paragraph (generally) talks about the people who discovered something, second paragraph talks about the discovery, optional third paragraph gives examples, fourth paragraph talks about a counterpoint (also optional, but almost always there)

The List:

Compare/Contrast:
- PT 19 P4 (Slave trade)
- PT 22 P4 (Language of Math)
- PT 27 P4 (Freud's "The Uncanny")
- PT 28 P3 (Steady-state economics)
- PT 35 P4 (Dworkin)
- PT 40 P1 (Multipolar/Bipolar international systems)
- PT 40 P2 (Latin American poetry)
- PT 47 P3 (Family mediation)
- PT 50 P2 (Bankrupcy laws)
- PT 51 P2 (Late heavy bombardment)
- PT 51 P3 (legal reasoning systems)
- PT 57 P2 (Humanism)
- PT 64 P4 (Dostoyevsky) (note: pretends to take the third option)
- PT 68 P3 (Walsh)

Explaining a paradox:
- PT 14 P1 (Earth's polarity)
- PT 40 P3 (Dark Matter)
- PT 46 P2 (Pronghorns)
- PT 49 P3 (Female doctors in antiquity)
- PT 67 P4 (Paradox of omnipotence)

This is what people used to believe and now they believe something else:
- PT 16 P4 (Golden Age for Women)
- PT 26 S4 P3 S (Dolphin Deaths)
- PT 30 P3 (Critical Legal Studies)
- PT 33 S2 P3 S (Atmospheric CO2)
- PT 46 P1 (Econ definition of prosperity)
- PT 48 P1 (Cave paintings)
- PT 49 P2 (African art)
- PT 51 P3 (Imported television)
- PT 66 P2A (Fingerprints are okay)

Take the third option
- PT 64 P1 (Utility Max)

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did:
- PT 46 P2 (Obasan)
- PT 46 P4 (Nonconforming laws) (this is a weird one. It first appears to be explaining a paradox, but in actuality it is using that paradox to explain something else)
- Everyone's best friend Noguchi
- PT 51 P1 (Ezekiel Mphahlele) [opinion heavy]
- PT 66 P3 (Toni Morrison)

New Theory, New Ideas:
- PT 47 P1 (CORE Jobs Demonstration)
- PT 47 P2 (Scar Art)
- PT 48 P3 (Native Canadians)
- PT 50 P1 (Mexican American literature) (this could also be put into "compare/contrast," but the questions are more about the effects of MA literature than comparing it)
- PT 50 P3 (Tradition and national identity)
- PT 57 P1 (FCC and Radio)
- PT 64 P2 (Mexican proverbs)
- PT 66 P4 (Atom splitting)
- PT 67 P2 (!Kung)
- PT 68 P1 (Corridos)

Explication:
- PT 40 P4 (Leading questions)
- PT 47 P4 (Pathogens incapacitating hosts) (heavy on the pro-con views though)
- PT 49 P1 (Computers in the courtroom)
- PT 54 P2 (Drilling fluids) (this is a comparative reading passage)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)
- PT 66 P1 (Digitized books)
- PT 66 P2B (Fingerprints suck)

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion:
- PT 36 P3 (Osmoregulation)
- PT 48 P2 (Gluck's poetry)
- PT 48 P4 (Embryos and polarity)
- PT 49 P4 (Maize)
- PT 50 P4 (Riddled Basins of Attraction)
- PT 54 P2 (Drilling fluids) (this is a comparative reading passage)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)

Same conclusion, different method:
- PT 57 P3 (Cather)

Different conclusion, different method:
- PT 64 P3

Different conclusion, same method:
- PT 67 P3 (Invasive species) (note: the first passage uses an example, the second doesn't)

Passage A and Passage B completely disagree:
- PT 64 P3
- PT 67 P3

[LSAT Blog]

I have a list by topic:

http://lsatblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/re ... rized.html

[Kimikho]

I think OP is more looking for categorization based solely on structure, ignoring subject matter.

I've looked for this too and haven't found it, but it would be nice if we could get a list together! I'm at work but off the top of my head I can think of a couple of categories and where some of the passages would fit in:

Compare/Contrast: First paragraph introduces the issue, second paragraph introduces the two options (one of the options could be in the first paragraph), last two paragraphs compare/contrast, possibly with examples. Optional fourth gives an opinion.

Advantages/Disadvantages: First chunk introduced an idea, second offers advantages/disadvantages, third explains how the disadvantages were avoided or the author's opinion.

Explaining a paradox: First paragraph introduces an issue, second chunk introduces the paradox, third resolves the paradox, optional fourth gives an opinions.

This is what people used to believe and now they believe (or should believe) something else: First paragraph introduces issue, second paragraph talks about the "wrong" belief, third paragraph talks about the right belief, optional fourth gives reasons why that belief might also be wrong/gives author's opinion.

Take the third option: Closely related to "this is what people used to believe." Paragraph describing two options, paragraph describing the third option, paragraph describing why the third option is better or how it bridges the gap between the first two options.

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did: First paragraph introduces the person, second paragraph describes the person, third paragraph describes what he/she did, usually with an example.

Look at this awesome literary/artistic thing people do and how it affects something else: First paragraph introduces the thing, second paragraph describes what it is, third paragraph describes an example (probably), fourth paragraph describes how it changes things/reflects something/is cool.

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion: First paragraph (generally) talks about the people who discovered something, second paragraph talks about the discovery, optional third paragraph gives examples, fourth paragraph talks about a counterpoint (also optional, but almost always there)

Odd ones out? There are some passages that clearly have structure but don't clearly fit into a specific category. They tend to be in first person. If someone sees a pattern with these ones, let me know!

For double passages:
Same conclusion, different method
Different conclusion, different method
Different conclusion, same method
Passage A and Passage B completely disagree I think this one can overlap into the different conclusion ones easily.

Compare/Contrast:
- PT 19 P4 (Slave trade)
- PT 22 P4 (Language of Math)
- PT 27 P4 (Freud's "The Uncanny")
- PT 28 P3 (Steady-state economics)
- PT 35 P4 (Dworkin)
- PT 47 P3 (Family mediation)
- PT 50 P2 (Bankrupcy laws)
- PT 51 P2 (Late heavy bombardment)
- PT 51 P3 (legal reasoning systems)
- PT 57 P2 (Humanism)
- PT 64 P4 (Dostoyevsky) (note: pretends to take the third option)
- PT 68 P3 (Walsh)

Advantages/Disadvantages:
- PT 67 P1 (Tucker) (this seems like it could be a "this is what they believe" passage, but the questions are more geared towards advantages and disadvantages of the author's methods)

Explaining a paradox:
- PT 14 P1 (Earth's polarity)
- PT 46 P2 (Pronghorns)
- PT 49 P3 (Female doctors in antiquity)
- PT 67 P4 (Paradox of omnipotence)

This is what people used to believe and now they believe (or should believe) something else:
- PT 16 P4 (Golden Age for Women)
- PT 30 P3 (Critical Legal Studies)
- PT 46 P1 (Econ definition of prosperity)
- PT 48 P1 (Cave paintings)
- PT 49 P2 (African art)
- PT 51 P3 (Imported television)

Take the third option
- PT 64 P1 (Utility Max)

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did:
- PT 46 P2 (Obasan)
- PT 46 P4 (Nonconforming laws) (this is a weird one. It first appears to be explaining a paradox, but in actuality it is using that paradox to explain something else)
- Everyone's best friend Noguchi
- PT 51 P1 (Ezekiel Mphahlele) [opinion heavy]

Look at this awesome literary/artistic/theory thing people do and how it affects something else:
- PT 47 P1 (CORE Jobs Demonstration)
- PT 47 P2 (Scar Art)
- PT 48 P3 (Native Canadians)
- PT 50 P1 (Mexican American literature) (this could also be put into "compare/contrast," but the questions are more about the effects of MA literature than comparing it)
- PT 50 P3 (Tradition and national identity)
- PT 57 P1 (FCC and Radio)
- PT 64 P2 (Mexican proverbs)
- PT 67 P2 (!Kung)
- PT 68 P1 (Corridos)

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion:
- PT 36 P3 (Osmoregulation)
- PT 47 P4 (Pathogens incapacitating hosts) (heavy on the pro-con views though)
- PT 48 P2 (Gluck's poetry)
- PT 48 P4 (Embryos and polarity)
- PT 49 P1 (Computers in the courtroom)
- PT 49 P4 (Maize)
- PT 50 P4 (Riddled Basins of Attraction)
- PT 54 P2 (Drilling fluids) (this is a comparative reading passage)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)

Same conclusion, different method:
- PT 57 P3 (Cather)

Different conclusion, different method:
- PT 64 P3

Different conclusion, same method:
- PT 67 P3 (Invasive species) (note: the first passage uses an example, the second doesn't)

Passage A and Passage B completely disagree:
- PT 64 P3
- PT 67 P3


Obviously this is all preliminary, and I think it would be cool if we could actually make some structure categories and stuff. I'm literally just scanning the PDFs of a few RC sections and sticking them in.

[SecondWind]

I think OP is more looking for categorization based solely on structure, ignoring subject matter.

I've looked for this too and haven't found it, but it would be nice if we could get a list together! I'm at work but off the top of my head I can think of a couple of categories and where some of the passages would fit in:

Compare/Contrast: First paragraph introduces the issue, second paragraph introduces the two options (one of the options could be in the first paragraph), last two paragraphs compare/contrast, possibly with examples. Optional fourth gives an opinion.

Explaining a paradox: First paragraph introduces an issue, second chunk introduces the paradox, third resolves the paragraph, optional fourth gives an opinions.

This is what people used to believe and now they believe something else: First paragraph introduces issue, second paragraph talks about the "wrong" belief, third paragraph talks about the right belief, optional fourth gives reasons why that belief might also be wrong/gives author's opinion.

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did: First paragraph introduces the person, second paragraph describes the person, third paragraph describes what he/she did, usually with an example.

Look at this awesome literary/artistic thing people do and how it affects something else: First paragraph introduces the thing, second paragraph describes what it is, third paragraph describes an example (probably), fourth paragraph describes how it changes things/reflects something/is cool.

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion: First paragraph (generally) talks about the people who discovered something, second paragraph talks about the discovery, optional third paragraph gives examples, fourth paragraph talks about a counterpoint (also optional, but almost always there)

For double passages:
Same conclusion, different method
Different conclusion, different method
Different conclusion, same method
Passage A and Passage B completely disagree

Compare/Contrast:
- PT 19 P4 (Slave trade)
- PT 22 P4 (Language of Math)
- PT 27 P4 (Freud's "The Uncanny")
- PT 28 P3 (Steady-state economics)
- PT 35 P4 (Dworkin)
- PT 50 P2 (Bankrupcy laws)
- PT 57 P2 (Humanism)
- PT 68 P3 (Walsh)

Explaining a paradox:
- PT 14 P1 (Earth's polarity)
- PT 49 P3 (Female doctors in antiquity)

This is what people used to believe and now they believe something else:
- PT 16 P4 (Golden Age for Women)
- PT 30 P3 (Critical Legal Studies)
- PT 48 P1 (Cave paintings)
- PT 49 P2 (African art)

Look at this awesome literary/artistic/theory thing people do and how it affects something else:
- PT 48 P3 (Native Canadians)
- PT 50 P1 (Mexican American literature) (this could also be put into "compare/contrast," but the questions are more about the effects of MA literature than comparing it)
- PT 50 P3 (Tradition and national identity)
- PT 57 P1 (FCC and Radio)
- PT 68 P1 (Corridos)


This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion:
- PT 36 P3 (Osmoregulation)
- PT 48 P2 (Gluck's poetry)
- PT 48 P4 (Embryos and polarity)
- PT 49 P1 (Computers in the courtroom)
- PT 49 P4 (Maize)
- PT 50 P4 (Riddled Basins of Attraction)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)

Same conclusion, different method:
- PT 57 P3 (Cather)

Different conclusion, different method:

Different conclusion, same method:

Passage A and Passage B completely disagree:


Obviously this is all preliminary, and I think it would be cool if we could actually make some structure categories and stuff. I'm literally just scanning the PDFs of a few RC sections and sticking them in.

This is EXACTLY what I'm looking for. It's not that I'm too lazy or don't have time to make one myself, it's that I'm riding the struggle bus when it comes to the RC. I'm not seeing patterns on how to analyze the specific types of passages.

Thanks!

[Kimikho]

I think OP is more looking for categorization based solely on structure, ignoring subject matter.

I've looked for this too and haven't found it, but it would be nice if we could get a list together! I'm at work but off the top of my head I can think of a couple of categories and where some of the passages would fit in:

Compare/Contrast: First paragraph introduces the issue, second paragraph introduces the two options (one of the options could be in the first paragraph), last two paragraphs compare/contrast, possibly with examples. Optional fourth gives an opinion.

Explaining a paradox: First paragraph introduces an issue, second chunk introduces the paradox, third resolves the paragraph, optional fourth gives an opinions.

This is what people used to believe and now they believe something else: First paragraph introduces issue, second paragraph talks about the "wrong" belief, third paragraph talks about the right belief, optional fourth gives reasons why that belief might also be wrong/gives author's opinion.

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did: First paragraph introduces the person, second paragraph describes the person, third paragraph describes what he/she did, usually with an example.

Look at this awesome literary/artistic thing people do and how it affects something else: First paragraph introduces the thing, second paragraph describes what it is, third paragraph describes an example (probably), fourth paragraph describes how it changes things/reflects something/is cool.

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion: First paragraph (generally) talks about the people who discovered something, second paragraph talks about the discovery, optional third paragraph gives examples, fourth paragraph talks about a counterpoint (also optional, but almost always there)

For double passages:
Same conclusion, different method
Different conclusion, different method
Different conclusion, same method
Passage A and Passage B completely disagree

Compare/Contrast:
- PT 19 P4 (Slave trade)
- PT 22 P4 (Language of Math)
- PT 27 P4 (Freud's "The Uncanny")
- PT 28 P3 (Steady-state economics)
- PT 35 P4 (Dworkin)
- PT 50 P2 (Bankrupcy laws)
- PT 57 P2 (Humanism)
- PT 68 P3 (Walsh)

Explaining a paradox:
- PT 14 P1 (Earth's polarity)
- PT 49 P3 (Female doctors in antiquity)

This is what people used to believe and now they believe something else:
- PT 16 P4 (Golden Age for Women)
- PT 30 P3 (Critical Legal Studies)
- PT 48 P1 (Cave paintings)
- PT 49 P2 (African art)

Look at this awesome literary/artistic/theory thing people do and how it affects something else:
- PT 48 P3 (Native Canadians)
- PT 50 P1 (Mexican American literature) (this could also be put into "compare/contrast," but the questions are more about the effects of MA literature than comparing it)
- PT 50 P3 (Tradition and national identity)
- PT 57 P1 (FCC and Radio)
- PT 68 P1 (Corridos)


This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion:
- PT 36 P3 (Osmoregulation)
- PT 48 P2 (Gluck's poetry)
- PT 48 P4 (Embryos and polarity)
- PT 49 P1 (Computers in the courtroom)
- PT 49 P4 (Maize)
- PT 50 P4 (Riddled Basins of Attraction)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)

Same conclusion, different method:
- PT 57 P3 (Cather)

Different conclusion, different method:

Different conclusion, same method:

Passage A and Passage B completely disagree:


Obviously this is all preliminary, and I think it would be cool if we could actually make some structure categories and stuff. I'm literally just scanning the PDFs of a few RC sections and sticking them in.

This is EXACTLY what I'm looking for. It's not that I'm too lazy or don't have time to make one myself, it's that I'm riding the struggle bus when it comes to the RC. I'm not seeing patterns on how to analyze the specific types of passages.

Thanks!

No problem! I totally understand your difficulty. It took me until like last week to start seeing the structure (it was during my fourth attempt at the Walsh passage). I'd still love to see if anyone else can add anything, because it would be really useful to have .

[RobertGolddust]

Good stuff scoobers!

[Kimikho]

Thanks

SRSLY PEOPLE add to the list. This would have helped me so much the last few months/will help for the inevitable retake.

[koval]

Great description. Your categorizing some of the passages from PTs made me realize I disproportionally miss on "Boring" passages.

It sucks that RC sort of leaves it up to the individual taker to categorize the structures themselves, especially if you like breaking things down into type.

[Otunga]

Great description. Your categorizing some of the passages from PTs made me realize I disproportionally miss on "Boring" passages.

It sucks that RC sort of leaves it up to the individual taker to categorize the structures themselves, especially if you like breaking things down into type.

I'm with you here, though I found fractals (57) to be the exception. Usually, though, the boring as shit passages cost me points. NGF on 44 springs to mind.

[Jeffort]

I especially like this category:

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion

It's a nice catch-all category since pretty much every RC passage fits this general description!

Getting familiar with common passage structures and being able to see them within the passages is very helpful for training your brain to focus on looking for the various different types of main pieces that are the building blocks of the various different overall structures. It's much easier to identify the same structures and follow along when reading when you've seen similar patterns before, so this is good for pattern recognition through familiarity.

People just need to make sure that they don't try to categorize passages while initially reading since you cannot determine the overall structure until you have finished reading the entire passage and seen all the components it contains. Wait until after you have read the whole thing, then review all the major pieces, think about how they relate and synthesize them into the big picture whole for categorization purposes.

If you try to categorize it before you finish reading the whole thing you'll just be guessing and distracting yourself from paying closer attention to the structure as it builds in front of you from paragraph to paragraph by trying to pigeonhole it with insufficient information. You may overlook an unexpected shift in direction of the passage you didn't expect due to having mistakenly pre-judged the overall structure category before reading the whole thing. Do look for structure pieces as you read and pay attention to how they relate to other pieces as you read, just don't try to add them all up to overall classification until done reading and synthesizing.

[Kimikho]

I especially like this category:

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion

It's a nice catch-all category since pretty much every RC passage fits this general description!

Haha I was just going to ask if anyone had a better idea of splitting up that category. Some passages (drilling fluids, for example) have very little opinion, and I think those ones (the ones that lack a counterpoint paragraph I guess) should be in a different category.

For me personally, it would have been nice before to know which categories I had the most trouble with so I could focus on those. The compare-contrast passages tend to be way simpler (for me) than the information-with-really-hidden-opinion passages.

((Also, I have been really not motivated to study so I threw up a couple more passages that I did today in the categories so I can feel like I did something useful.))

[Dr.Zer0]

tag

[Kimikho]

Threw in the passages from PT 64 :]

[Nonconsecutive]

Wow, great resource! Thanks for compiling this.

[Kimikho]

Put in passages from PT 67 and PT 46.

If someone can think of a good category for PT 46 P4, please do! It has a clear structure but a somewhat weird one I think.

[bizzybone1313]

We should send this thread link to all of the major prep companies, so one of them can categorize all of the passages for us. It is THEM that is competing for OUR business. I would love to see a breakdown of the percentages for all of the different LSAT prep companies in terms of the amount of business they pull in of the overall market share.

[SecondWind]

The list has been updated.

Tell Scoobers thanks.

She's literally done all the work! Since I'm already going to go through and doing every RC section, I'm going to verify every single one of these (not that I'm doubting you Scoobers). It would be nice to have 1-38 (yes people, I still have my training wheels on) to be categorized so that I can start verifying them.

[Kimikho]

It's been no problem!

I've actually been working on writing up explanations for RC in the 50s and 60s (at least the ones I do). I'll probably post it after I get my score in October...I don't want to jinx myself .

[cahwc12]

I'd just like to commend scoobers for doing this. I wanted to do this after I took the LSAT and never bothered with it, and I always wished someone would do it. If TLS can help him flesh out a comprehensive list of passages by type, I think it would be a fantastic contribution.

I already intend to use this with my students and want to thank you a lot for providing what you have so far.

[Hotguy]

Some prep companies should learn from scoobers lol, this is immensely helpful, unlike a list of subjects which is just the contrary.

[Kimikho]

Thanks, everyone .

I just wanted to reiterate that I am seriously working on putting together a better list (with more in-depth explanations) and writing up some explanations for the individual passages. It was really helping me already so I figured I'd write it all down. The changes include splitting up "this is a thing," and a couple new categories, plus some overall categories, because everything I learned I learned from Manhattan LR. I'm still working on pulling out some of the passages from "this is a thing," but this is the new list I've got so far:

Passages with more than one option/thing discussed:

Compare/Contrast: First paragraph introduces the issue, second paragraph introduces the two options (one of the options could be in the first paragraph), last two paragraphs compare/contrast, possibly with examples. Optional fourth gives an opinion.

This is what people used to believe and now they believe (or should believe) something else: First paragraph introduces issue, second paragraph talks about the "wrong" belief, third paragraph talks about the right belief, optional fourth gives reasons why that belief might also be wrong/gives author's opinion.

Take the third option: Closely related to "this is what people used to believe." Paragraph describing two options, paragraph describing the third option, paragraph describing why the third option is better or how it bridges the gap between the first two options. 100% of the time the third option rocks the socks off the other two (obviously, it doesn't have to be numerically the third option). If there is a Take the Third where the author agrees with one of the other options, and the author compares the three (or more) options, then that is inherently a compare/contrast. If there is a Take the Third where the author only briefly explains the first two options, but then extensively explains the third, and offers no opinion (rare!) then this is a This is a thing passage. See my buddy Dosto (PT 64) for an example of a pretend take the third that is actually compare/contrast.

One option and one opinion:

Advantages/Disadvantages: First chunk introduced an idea, second offers advantages/disadvantages, third explains how the disadvantages were avoided or the author's opinion.

Explaining a paradox: First paragraph introduces an issue, second chunk introduces the paradox, third resolves the paradox, optional fourth gives an opinions.

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did: First paragraph introduces the person, second paragraph describes the person, third paragraph describes what he/she did, usually with an example.

New Theory, New Ideas: First paragraph introduces the thing, second paragraph describes what it is, third paragraph describes an example (probably), fourth paragraph describes how it changes things/reflects something/is cool.

Explication: One topic, one opinion. Very frequently uses first person. Doesn't have a specific structure because it is only talking about one thing, but from what I've seen these passages won't have a paragraph at the end giving the author's opinion, because the opinion is woven throughout the passage.

No opinions:

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion: First paragraph (generally) talks about the people who discovered something, second paragraph talks about the discovery, optional third paragraph gives examples, fourth paragraph talks about a counterpoint (also optional, but almost always there)


I should be keeping better track of this list, but here it is updated:

Compare/Contrast:
- PT 19 P4 (Slave trade)
- PT 22 P4 (Language of Math)
- PT 27 P4 (Freud's "The Uncanny")
- PT 28 P3 (Steady-state economics)
- PT 35 P4 (Dworkin)
- PT 40 P1 (Multipolar/Bipolar international systems)
- PT 40 P2 (Latin American poetry)
- PT 47 P3 (Family mediation)
- PT 50 P2 (Bankrupcy laws)
- PT 51 P2 (Late heavy bombardment)
- PT 51 P3 (legal reasoning systems)
- PT 57 P2 (Humanism)
- PT 64 P4 (Dostoyevsky) (note: pretends to take the third option)
- PT 68 P3 (Walsh)

Explaining a paradox:
- PT 14 P1 (Earth's polarity)
- PT 40 P3 (Dark Matter)
- PT 46 P2 (Pronghorns)
- PT 49 P3 (Female doctors in antiquity)
- PT 67 P4 (Paradox of omnipotence)

This is what people used to believe and now they believe something else:
- PT 16 P4 (Golden Age for Women)
- PT 30 P3 (Critical Legal Studies)
- PT 46 P1 (Econ definition of prosperity)
- PT 48 P1 (Cave paintings)
- PT 49 P2 (African art)
- PT 51 P3 (Imported television)
- PT 66 P2A (Fingerprints are okay)

Take the third option
- PT 64 P1 (Utility Max)

Look at this awesome person (usually an artist) and what she/he did:
- PT 46 P2 (Obasan)
- PT 46 P4 (Nonconforming laws) (this is a weird one. It first appears to be explaining a paradox, but in actuality it is using that paradox to explain something else)
- Everyone's best friend Noguchi
- PT 51 P1 (Ezekiel Mphahlele) [opinion heavy]
- PT 66 P3 (Toni Morrison)

New Theory, New Ideas:
- PT 47 P1 (CORE Jobs Demonstration)
- PT 47 P2 (Scar Art)
- PT 48 P3 (Native Canadians)
- PT 50 P1 (Mexican American literature) (this could also be put into "compare/contrast," but the questions are more about the effects of MA literature than comparing it)
- PT 50 P3 (Tradition and national identity)
- PT 57 P1 (FCC and Radio)
- PT 64 P2 (Mexican proverbs)
- PT 66 P4 (Atom splitting)
- PT 67 P2 (!Kung)
- PT 68 P1 (Corridos)

Explication:
- PT 40 P4 (Leading questions)
- PT 47 P4 (Pathogens incapacitating hosts) (heavy on the pro-con views though)
- PT 49 P1 (Computers in the courtroom)
- PT 54 P2 (Drilling fluids) (this is a comparative reading passage)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)
- PT 66 P1 (Digitized books)
- PT 66 P2B (Fingerprints suck)

This is a thing. Let's talk about it in a boring fashion:
- PT 36 P3 (Osmoregulation)
- PT 48 P2 (Gluck's poetry)
- PT 48 P4 (Embryos and polarity)
- PT 49 P4 (Maize)
- PT 50 P4 (Riddled Basins of Attraction)
- PT 54 P2 (Drilling fluids) (this is a comparative reading passage)
- PT 57 P4 (Fractals)

Same conclusion, different method:
- PT 57 P3 (Cather)

Different conclusion, different method:
- PT 64 P3

Different conclusion, same method:
- PT 67 P3 (Invasive species) (note: the first passage uses an example, the second doesn't)

Passage A and Passage B completely disagree:
- PT 64 P3
- PT 67 P3


If anyone wants, I can post some of the more in-depth explanations of the categories that I've got going right now. I do keep moving them around every now and then . I've also got some explanations, but those are like four pages long and take me about an hour to do for each one, so I might hold onto them for now .

[SecondWind]

I'd just like to commend scoobers for doing this. I wanted to do this after I took the LSAT and never bothered with it, and I always wished someone would do it. If TLS can help HER* flesh out a comprehensive list of passages by type, I think it would be a fantastic contribution.

I already intend to use this with my students and want to thank you a lot for providing what you have so far.

I made the same mistake....

[SecondWind]

This needs to be seen. BUMP!

[10052014]

.

[chizzy]

scoobers should trademark this work, so the prep companies dont steal it.

+1111