Thought Feb Reading Comp Was More Difficult. Anybody Else?
Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:25 pm
Maybe I was just tired by that point though.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=106909
That was my problem this time. Just couldn't focus. My brain: "Dude, dude, dude, too much crap to process right now. Gimme a break."missinglink wrote:Had it right after my break, so I was relatively fresh. Thought it was fairly easy.
-3 at most. I've found the biggest determinant of my RC score is my level of fatigue. More fatigue = harder to engage the text.
Yeah, we shouldn't get more specific, but I think a lot of the RC questions were asking you to make that extra connection. I was just too tired. Didn't have a problem making the connections on the games section. Just RC.existenz wrote:I don't think it was as hard as Sept. or Dec. On the Darwin comparative passage section, I think I may have bombed at least one of the questions. Something about the main idea of the last paragraph of section B being the same as an issue discussed in passage A. Don't want to get any more specific than that. But it seemed like there were a few good answers and it was hard to decide between them.
missinglink wrote:I've found the biggest determinant of my RC score is my level of fatigue. More fatigue = harder to engage the text.
I experienced so much confusion on the comparative section. It seemed like it should have been so easy, and yet, no. Not at all. The passages weren't crazy difficult to get fundamentally, but it seemed that more trickeration (to use an ESPN term that probably isn't a real word) than normal was involved in the questions.existenz wrote:I thought it was related to the scientific status quo. But there were three plausible answers there all involving being open-minded to new discoveries. Killer question, wish I had gone back to it at the end.
monkeyboy wrote:Yeah, we shouldn't get more specific, but I think a lot of the RC questions were asking you to make that extra connection. I was just too tired. Didn't have a problem making the connections on the games section. Just RC.existenz wrote:I don't think it was as hard as Sept. or Dec. On the Darwin comparative passage section, I think I may have bombed at least one of the questions. Something about the main idea of the last paragraph of section B being the same as an issue discussed in passage A. Don't want to get any more specific than that. But it seemed like there were a few good answers and it was hard to decide between them.
Ha ha. I guess you're right.princepointe wrote:monkeyboy wrote:Yeah, we shouldn't get more specific, but I think a lot of the RC questions were asking you to make that extra connection. I was just too tired. Didn't have a problem making the connections on the games section. Just RC.existenz wrote:I don't think it was as hard as Sept. or Dec. On the Darwin comparative passage section, I think I may have bombed at least one of the questions. Something about the main idea of the last paragraph of section B being the same as an issue discussed in passage A. Don't want to get any more specific than that. But it seemed like there were a few good answers and it was hard to decide between them.
watch out the LSAC police are trolling boards looking for you guys. lol. ahhhhh the paranoia.
I'm thinking those 3 were traps. Usually if 3 seem plausible, none are. I think the right one was the opposite of being open-minded, as it referred to them as being [outcasts] (can't remember the term). Any thoughts?existenz wrote:There were three plausible answers there all involving being open-minded to new discoveries. Killer question, wish I had gone back to it at the end.
georges2 wrote:Quick question, i did the last passage on a rush, and it seemed to me that most answers or questions came from the last two paragraphs and nothing from the second paragraph which i barely read(the one of the nigerian language or something), was it just me or i totally screwd it?
I'm not sure about this advice. Go look at PT 55 and the Chinese talk-story questions. One of them asks what the author's tone was and two answers were "Deep respect" and "Scholarly appreciation". Very similar answers, you could almost flip a coin, but one of them was right and one was wrong.14yearplan wrote:I'm thinking those 3 were traps. Usually if 3 seem plausible, none are. I think the right one was the opposite of being open-minded, as it referred to them as being [outcasts] (can't remember the term). Any thoughts?existenz wrote:There were three plausible answers there all involving being open-minded to new discoveries. Killer question, wish I had gone back to it at the end.
Yeah, my brain was so drained at that point, I don't think I was reading the passages fully at all. I was just reading bits and pieces, trying to put together big picture while answering the questions. It will be interesting to see how I did. Probably not well.tj1320 wrote:Definitely my worst section. I was fatigued by that point and I didn't choose the passages wisely, spending too much time on one when I could and should have chosen another, easier one. Oh well.