Reviewing RC passages Forum

[beautyistruth]

In following PithyPike's guide to LSAT prep, I'm having a lot of trouble doing meaningful review of reading comprehension passages. I think I simply don't know how to review them effectively, especially the answers I get right, because after completing four in a row, I forget where I might have nearly selected the wrong answer. In general, I have trouble retracing my mental steps when going back over questions. Does anybody run into this problem/does anybody have any advice?

[penguinbrah]

yes, I hate reviewing RC

[gobosox]

I've had similar issues-- starting to try to look at my initial reading of the passage and how I could have done better-- if I missed important names I should have circled, didn't write down the tone, etc. But it's a lot harder for me to analyze the questions.

Manhattan's strategy of pointing out why each wrong answer is wrong (scope, degree, etc etc) could be helpful, though I have not been doing it religiously...

[danshupp]

RC is just a maddening section to review in general. Even when reviewing passages I struggled with I don't feel like I get a lot out the review. I think Blueprint's method for RC is the best I have came across but it's still an extremely difficult section to improve on once you become competent. I have had a hard time improving from -5/6.

[Clearly]

My review process generally goes like this:

Discern which questions I got wrong.
Read the question
Look at the correct answer
Shout "Ah I FUCKING KNEW IT"

Kidding aside, My belief about reviewing RC is I don't gain much benefit in learning how to answer questions right/wrong. I review specifically to improve my ability to read the next passage. I look at where the correct answer came from in the passage, what words should have signaled me that I should retain this information, and generally why I didn't follow LSAC's lead on this passage. I look at my wrong answer choice, what was wrong about it, if nothing, what wasn't strong enough about it, what was it missing that the right answer wasn't missing.

Basically, I focus on actually improving my Reading Comprehension as LSAC likes it.

[bp shinners]

I look at where the correct answer came from in the passage, what words should have signaled me that I should retain this information, and generally why I didn't follow LSAC's lead on this passage. I look at my wrong answer choice, what was wrong about it, if nothing, what wasn't strong enough about it, what was it missing that the right answer wasn't missing.

Exactly the right way to be going about reviewing RC. It's not about figuring out what the answer is, because that's content-specific. It's more important to figure out what you're missing in the passages generally (e.g. a comparison will almost always be asked about, so you should note it), and what features wrong answer choices you keep falling for (e.g. answer choices that are too strong).

Also, keep track of what you're annotating in the passage that's never asked about. If you keep pulling out the same info, and it almost never shows up in a question, that's probably a waste of time.