Top Law Schools

My December score is unexpectedly disappointing, but I am confused with my RC performance: I spent only 5 minutes reading the first sentences in the comparative passages and finishing its 5 questions at the end of the section, it is amazing that I got them all correct. I spent 30 minutes or so on the other 3 passages, and tried to absorb the main points, author's attitudes, details, etc. However, I screwed them up and missed 12 in total.

This confused me: the more time spent, the more errors. This error pattern happened when I worked on PT 67: no missing on the comparative A/B passages in 5 minutes but missed -6 on the other 3 passages (30 minutes).

Maybe my way of doing RC is flawed. I only need to remember the location of the points and author's general attitude? what should I change to improve?

Manhattan RC saved my test score. It gives a pretty nice plan to attack a reading passage that highlights what information is important and what isn't. I recommend it.

I think you may just be over-analyzing? If you got -12, I feel like you didn't actually get the point at all. So maybe you're paying too much attention to detail and missing the bigger picture/overall tone. Or maybe the comparison passage was just easier, lol.

But do you find yourself reaching one conclusion first while reading, but it changing as you continue through the passage? Up you may be subtly second-guessing yourself too much.

This should help. It really helps me. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... f=6&t=7240

You may be over analyzing. Try this approach: What is the main argument? What are the two (or three) view points to the argument and who's views are they. Then finally, how does the author of the passage feel about all this. Does he/she side with either group, disapprove all of them, agree somewhat and offer a conclusion of her own?

Everything else is just a distraction.

naillsat wrote:I only need to remember the location of the points and author's general attitude?

That will answer 80% of questions and give you a solid idea for the other 20%.

A lot of times, people over-read/analyze the passages. The details are there to prove a point or provide background. So if you know what the viewpoints are, you can get a good idea of which details would align with each of those points. That's why it pays off to focus on the viewpoints - it severely limits the details that might appear to prove those points.

Going back over it, you should definitely focus on the viewpoints and the author's attitude, as that's a majority of the section.

bp shinners wrote:

naillsat wrote:I only need to remember the location of the points and author's general attitude?

That will answer 80% of questions and give you a solid idea for the other 20%.

A lot of times, people over-read/analyze the passages. The details are there to prove a point or provide background. So if you know what the viewpoints are, you can get a good idea of which details would align with each of those points. That's why it pays off to focus on the viewpoints - it severely limits the details that might appear to prove those points.

Going back over it, you should definitely focus on the viewpoints and the author's attitude, as that's a majority of the section.

Thanks guys! What strategy do you guys recommend for handing descriptive/illuminating passages? The author writes to tell you something objectively about a phenomenon/history/scientific observation without any opinions/attitude.

naillsat wrote:

bp shinners wrote:

naillsat wrote:I only need to remember the location of the points and author's general attitude?

That will answer 80% of questions and give you a solid idea for the other 20%.

A lot of times, people over-read/analyze the passages. The details are there to prove a point or provide background. So if you know what the viewpoints are, you can get a good idea of which details would align with each of those points. That's why it pays off to focus on the viewpoints - it severely limits the details that might appear to prove those points.

Going back over it, you should definitely focus on the viewpoints and the author's attitude, as that's a majority of the section.

Thanks guys! What strategy do you guys recommend for handing descriptive/illuminating passages? The author writes to tell you something objectively about a phenomenon/history/scientific observation without any opinions/attitude.

Those are the ones where you do have to focus on the details. But knowing that a few sentences in (generally, you can tell quickly when you're reading one of these passages) will help you properly focus on the details so you don't have to re-read the passage as much during the questions.