Top Law Schools

I started my RC prep on Saturday and think maybe I found a trick to it. I did about four sections and timed myself (no more than ten minutes an article), stopped, and then looked at my answers afterwards. After doing this two or three times, it occurred to me that basically the LSAT takes scholarly articles and cuts off their introduction and conclusion. I started thinking about my own undergraduate career and realized how hard it would be to figure out what the author is talking about without at least an introduction. Thus, I started reading less for detail (I took notes on the structure so that I could go back and look if need be) and more to figure out the gist of the argument. I noticed that I got many, if not all, of the questions right in a timely manner when I figured out the argument and struggled when I did not. Does this sound about right to the LSAT gurus?

I'm most certainly not, nor am I even close to being, an "LSAT Guru" but I more or less agree with what you are saying. General comprehension of the passage is by far the most important thing to doing well on the questions. Although I'm not sure I really agree with you about the lack of an introduction. Many of the passages certainly reveal their argument either in the first or second paragraph, and from there on, everything the author says somehow relates to that implied or stated argument. I always read with this question in mind: "how does what I'm currently reading relate to the core argument?"