RC Real Improvers Wanted, not someone who started at -4.... How did you do it? Forum

[nyc56]

RC the bain of my existence. Go from -2-7 depending on the difficulty. Have honed my skills to this range, it took a fair bit of work. Probably average around -5. For people that brute forced their way to respectable RC scores, how the hell did you do it? Looking for recommendations on books, strategies, alternative review methods (yes obviously blind review).

In the beginning of my RC work, I began way to stuck in the details. I have since adopted more of the overview approach. I don't have a problem finishing a section on time, (but there isn't alot of extra either) and generally can diagram the passage structure in my head fine. I have experimented with notating and found a bare minimalist is most effective for me. I've drilled almost every lsat passage in existence, but this shouldn't necessarily prevent me from improving on a whole.

RC questions, particularly in the 70s and late 60s are brutally esoteric. What can I do to make the final leap?!

[AJordan]

Do you understand why you are missing the questions you are missing? If yes, more study and drill. If no, a tutor may be necessary to get a different set of eyes on your process. Are you taking "inference" questions too far? Are you missing tone questions? Possible title questions? Comparative passage processes not jiving?

I was in a similar boat and the answer for me was just to get as close to perfect as possible on LG/LR and then pray for a good day on my range come test day. Maybe I got lucky but I found test day hyper focus to be a thing. Not sure exactly how many I missed because lolfebruarylsat but it couldn't have been more than like 5. My breakthrough for RC came with reading every question as a must be true question instead of anything nebulous. Once I needed hard evidence to answer instead of making it work in my brain I got better. Maybe that can work for you too?

[heyduchess]

Hey! RC was my worst section... even though I was a Journalism/English double major. I was missing about -7 and I've pulled it to -2 or less where the 2 I'm missing, I always have it narrowed down to two answers and just choose the wrong one out of carelessness.

Here's how I did it:
1) I read. A lot. And not just fun books. I alternate thick works of literary fiction and non-fiction about things in which I have zero interest. A really good example (for me at least) is Devil In the White City. It's a thick piece of fiction and it's about a topic (architecture) that is meh to me.
2) I took notes. Whenever a conclusion or viewpoint came up, I underlined, labelled (Point 1/A, Point 2/B), and summarized in three words. That way, I could jump back to those sections easily.
3) I slowed down on reading. I was blowing through the passages because that's how I read in real life. This is common advice all over these boards. If you take your time reading, you can speed things up when you get to the questions.
4) Take note of which questions you're missing and why you're missing them. This applies to every section. If you're missing all Author's Attitude, you should probably work on Author's Attitude. If you're missing the comparative passages, review those. If you're missing the science selections, review those.
5) Pretend to be interested. This is what helps me most. When you're interested in something, it sticks with you. Try to get excited about the passages. How is it that when we're at work and scrolling through the internet we're 100% down to read any article that we stumble upon, but when we open the LSAT, we lose all interest in reading? Some of the passages are actually kinda fascinating. If you let yourself "get into them", it's immensely helpful!

Hope your score bumps up! You got this!

[grades??]

Read hard stuff that bores the shit out of you, and do it a lot. For example, most people find plato's dialogues boring. I suggest reading them because they are FILLED with arguments to follow and can help you learn the skill of following an argument for pages.

[Barack O'Drama]

I started off missing around -7/-8 and currently I am around -3/-4, so I'm far from the best at RC, but here's what's worked for me:

1) Staying interested -- even if it means forcing myself.

2) Active reading -- asking myself questions along the way and connecting the dots of how different paragraphs are related.

3) 7Sage's memory method: https://7sage.com/lsat-reading-comprehe ... ry-method/

[Platopus]

I've had some decent success with not marking up the passage at all. I used to spend more time going through and underlining, circling, etc. I found that by just reading the passage slowly and really trying to absorb the information, I've done much better. Try switching up your note taking method. Can't hurt to experiment a bit.

[tanes25]

Don't let yourself get bogged down in the specifics, that's where I got lost. I was trying too hard to understand everything in the passage. All you really need to do is know where things are in the psg. You should also stay focused on why the author wrote what he/she wrote and how it relates to what was before and after it. Pay attention to any examples given, why and what they relate to. Take note how each paragraph relates to the other. Note the author's tone and opinion and track the changes, if any. Do the same for critics or any opposing opinions. Pause after each paragraph and jot down a few words summarizing that paragraph. I found that I tended to miss questions on the passages that I thought I "understood" well versus the passages that I read and knew I had no clue what was going on. Once you've done enough passages you get the feel for what types of questions they could ask so that helps to keep the focus during the passage as well. I started out at -52 (lol! ) on RC sections and now I'm down to -3. I've gone -0 on plenty of passages but still not consistent. I'm working on it though!

[Pneumonia]

Have you perfected (or come close to perfecting) LG and LR yet? The sections form a natural progression of increasingly obfuscated logic. But it's all logic. It's very hard to meaningfully improve on RC, but in order to do so you really, really need to have mastered the other two sections.

[nyc56]

I average -2 in LR, and -3 for LG which I know should be improved, but I generally use the brute method and do not make that many inferences up front unless it is obvious to split the game board. I've found this method though slightly less accurate more reliable when in stressful situations.