Voyager's RC Strategy Forum

[acirilli1722]

I just looked at this so I haven't had time to try it out but definitely look forward to doing so. Most of the prep books just say to read actively and mark the passage but don't really do a good job explaining how to do so. Thanks for taking the time to write out all the details. Hopefully this works because RC is really the one section holding me back from higher scores. Thanks again.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

Bump because this thread made me seriously reconsider my RC strategy. Not just because of the OP but also for the other posts ITT.

[tmon]

I'm bumping this up in hopes that there are people who feel they've improved significantly by using this method. I studied using my own combination of techniques for a 2-3 months, averaging around -6, but spiking a few higher than that from time to time and occasionally doing better than the average. I'm trying to implement the strategy, but am just curious as to what I should look for as I continue working with it.

Right now I'm doing a period of untimed individual passages just to get the theory down, then working on speeding individual passages up, and then planning on full sections. Is this the best way to go? Any tips on how to do this successfully, especially since timing has been an issue for me since the beginning?

[seanPtheB]

I'm bumping this up in hopes that there are people who feel they've improved significantly by using this method. I studied using my own combination of techniques for a 2-3 months, averaging around -6, but spiking a few higher than that from time to time and occasionally doing better than the average. I'm trying to implement the strategy, but am just curious as to what I should look for as I continue working with it.

Right now I'm doing a period of untimed individual passages just to get the theory down, then working on speeding individual passages up, and then planning on full sections. Is this the best way to go? Any tips on how to do this successfully, especially since timing has been an issue for me since the beginning?

+793480982398572098345

[Voyager]

I'm bumping this up in hopes that there are people who feel they've improved significantly by using this method. I studied using my own combination of techniques for a 2-3 months, averaging around -6, but spiking a few higher than that from time to time and occasionally doing better than the average. I'm trying to implement the strategy, but am just curious as to what I should look for as I continue working with it.

Right now I'm doing a period of untimed individual passages just to get the theory down, then working on speeding individual passages up, and then planning on full sections. Is this the best way to go? Any tips on how to do this successfully, especially since timing has been an issue for me since the beginning?

Looks like you have the right idea. The key is to nail down your shorthand notations. And then practice practice practice.

Might I make one additional suggestion? When you miss questions (say, more than 2 on any given passage), go back and do the passage over again only THIS time make sure you catch the information you missed to note the first time.

Also, the following may help as well:
http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... f=6&t=7241

I am glad that, all of these years later, these posts are still helping people.

I don't come on here very often any more, but if you have questions you can always shoot me a PM.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

I don't always bump old threads...



... but when I do, I prefer Voyager's RC Strategy.

[sneijder]

Voyager's strategy FTW!! now getting 1-2 wrong on avg. **knock on wood** Everyone should give at least a couple of these a shot!

thanks for posting!

[glucose101]

MLSAT>Voyager

[princeR]

Gonna be trying this as the December 11' LSAT, specifically the soil passage demonstrated my utter lack of ability to do good on RC. I really need to take the type to develop a method instead of just winging it and hoping I retain all the information. I have the Cambridge RC volume 2 (PT 21-40) ordered by difficulty and type so that will give me plenty of time to work on this and obviously add my own strategies as needed. Has anyone tried the PS RCB? I just got it today and after reading through it for a couple hours, I am not totally convinced it was worth it. Do you guys think that just doing a ton of RC and developing a systematic approach is the best way to improve? The PS RCB has some okay drills and stuff, but I'm at that point where drills almost seem a little unnecessary.

[iMisto]

I'm in a similar situation. Not entirely sure drills are where I'm at. Was contemplating getting the PS RCB, but haven't heard wonderful things about it.

Voyager's strategy seems pretty sound, but I'm still nervous. I've tried to implement it on a couple passages so far, with about the same (if not a bit worse) scoring. Praying for a miracle.

[princeR]

I'm in a similar situation. Not entirely sure drills are where I'm at. Was contemplating getting the PS RCB, but haven't heard wonderful things about it.

Voyager's strategy seems pretty sound, but I'm still nervous. I've tried to implement it on a couple passages so far, with about the same (if not a bit worse) scoring. Praying for a miracle.

Don't both with the PS RCB, at the end of the day, I think, as others have also voiced, that RC is about practice and developing a method for yourself. I never really took the time to do this, so I think at least trying to implement Voyager's technique would be pretty helpful, than after time if it's too time consuming, try to tweak it some. I bought the Cambridge RC PT 21-40 so I'll have plenty of passages to go over and practice. I am not gonna time for a while, just work on the methodology of approach, seeing how easy it makes answering questions, and than eventually add some timing elements.

[princeR]

Having a really hard time implementing this strategy without taking up more time per each passage.

[Micdiddy]

Time for another bump?
I stumbled across this searching for RC advice since it is still my worse section. Going to give this a shot...NOW.

[Nammertat]

I've been using a similar (Princeton Review) strategy for over a year now, and still flop on the RC from time to time. I fluctuate between -3 and -12, without much rhyme or reason to it!

Are there any other resources available? I'm able to get to all questions most of the time, but find myself making stupid mistakes. Over 80% of my misses come when I've narrowed down to 2 answer choices, and go with the wrong one. I've tried to stop choosing the "right answer" and instead prove the wrong one incorrect.

I am a prime example of a person who has read quite a bit through college, but in a VERY different technique.

Any and all suggestions are welcome- I've got thick enough skin to open it up to the TLS community!

[Nova]

Gonna be trying this as the December 11' LSAT, specifically the soil passage demonstrated my utter lack of ability to do good on RC.

It was the death of my score too.

[ams212]

Tag

[sama]

thanks a lot, always had trouble with this section

[Br3v]

Tag rc strategy

[dowu]

Using this strategy since a few weeks ago. Hopefully it helps.

[Hjones33]

taggerson

[NoodleyOne]

I don't always bump old threads...



... but when I do, I prefer Voyager's RC Strategy.

Due to all the rc whinging... I figured it's time to bump.

[Zensack]

I'm wary of any strategy that advocates underlining or highlighting because people tend to focus on their highlighting instead of absorbing the passage. Typically people who highlight either do it to large swaths of text (flip through some used textbooks and you'll find some with more highlighted than plain text) or simply hit the bold and italicized terms; some do both, using two colors. If you're able to discipline yourself and only hit very specific things, such as the author's conclusion or sentences that give his or her opinion, great, do it, otherwise don't fall into the highlighting trap. Marginal notes I'm more keen on; writing down information improves retention, the shorthand notes save time on questions that ask you to summarize the passage, and those that ask about the main point of paragraph X. Boxing may be worthwhile, but only as a time saving measure; it won't help your retention.

What has brought my RC score up was not adjusting my reading strategy, but changing what information I attempt to take from the passage. For example, I used to miss a lot of "author would agree with" type questions, because I was treating any passage without a blatant agenda as an informative piece; when I began focusing more on the author's motive for writing my average score improved. The most important thing you can do on RC, like all the other sections, is review your misses and look for similarities.

[chadbrochill]

Giving this a shot

[cahwc12]

I tried this approach in 2007 when I was originally studying for the LSAT in undergrad and looking for a way to make RC more like games, and after studying for months now to June and for a retake in October, I genuinely feel this approach is absolutely a terrible way to go about it. I have made leaps and bounds in RC progression and it is due to my practice with the dearth of RC sections available, not gimmicky strategies like this.

You will find few if any reputable tutors who will advocate for heavily marking passages, and few if any test takers who score high in RC who advocate for heavily marking passages. In fact, there is a good reason nearly all high scorers make minimal if any markings, and it's because these markings are a crutch. You shouldn't be able to recall 100% of the info in a passage, but you should be able to remember where something is for few minutes.

Every time you underline, box, annotate or highlight you are interrupting your train of thought and the otherwise continuous flow of information from the passage to your brain. Marking up the passage extensively in this manner is akin to doing several hypotheticals before tackling any of the games questions. If it's tested, then you have done the work already; if it's not tested, you just wasted time that you will never get back. In both cases, you saved no time.

It's also worth noting that Voyager (even in admitting his hyperbole years later) took the test in June '06 (pt48) which is probably the one of the easiest tests and RC sections that have existed in the modern LSAT era. (Look through your own PT logs if you don't believe me.) Cambridge LSAT rates the average question difficulty for PT48 as 2.3 on a scale of 1-4, whereas the average question difficulty on some of the modern tests is much higher (PT60 2.8, PT61 3.4). This is anecdotal and their system is subjective, but again, refer to your own prep logs or take the test for yourself if you don't believe me.

If you're clueless like I was in RC when I began prepping, this method probably will help you, but it's akin to taking diet pills when you should instead be cutting your caloric intake. In other words, you're addressing the effects of poor comprehension rather than the causes of poor comprehension.

Rather than searching for ways to game the test, try taking the actual tests.

How many of you that are struggling have taken more than a handful of RC sections? There are 71 available RC sections to take--284 passages. The RC section has become more difficult recently, but the section itself has not changed markedly from PT1 to PT66 (even comparative reading from June '07 is not very different at all).

All of the answers to detail and inference questions are still 100% supported in the text.


Read for structure and main point. If you see something that indicates the author's tone or attitude, identify it (mark it if you must, otherwise just remember where it is). When you can identify or synthesize the main point, (generally, but not always toward the end of the first or beginning of the second paragraph), assess each paragraph in terms of how it fits into the structure of the passage and how it ties into the main point.

When you finish reading, you should be able to answer questions about the main point, structure, primary purpose and author's attitude. These are global questions. Everything else will be determinable by direct reference to the text. You don't need to remember all the details of the passage, just their general locations. If you can do this, you will be in great shape, and the more passages you practice, the better you will become at doing this.

There are only a limited number of passage structures, and only a limited number of positions an author will take. The more RC you do, the more these will begin to stand out. There are also only a limited number of types of incorrect answers, and many of them end up being seemingly subtle, one-word distortions. The more exposure you have to the material, the more easily you will recognize these distortions in the answer choices and the frequent types of incorrect answer choices.


In sum, you may consider trying this approach, but it is for damage mitigation not aimed at addressing the root cause of your RC problems. Ask yourself why you are missing questions. Are you missing them because you can't find a detail, or because you can't answer the main point? You are possibly more likely to find detail questions faster with this method, but you are less likely to be able to synthesize and answer main point and structural questions--questions that can only be answered by a re-reading of most of the passage. Also, while you may answer detail questions slightly faster, you're also investing additional time into the passage reading, so your net time saving is usually zero or even negative.

[RickyDnwhyc]

.