Looking at Question Stem first

[emccready24]

I took the November 2019 LSAT, and I was taught to look at the question stem before reading this stimulus. I am taking the OnDemand course, so I know that Powerscore highly advised against it. Through practice and a practice test, I am finding it very hard to break this habit. I see it being beneficial for some question types like weaken & strengthen. I am always looking for the conclusion in the stimulus over anything else, but I also have in the back of my mind that I will be trying to weaken this conclusion. So my question is: should I continue to try to break this habit or is it okay to stick with it? I am looking at taking the August LSAT.

[KelseyWoods]

Hi emccready24!

For the vast majority of test takers, it is best to read the stimulus first and then the question stem. No matter the question, if you have a stimulus with an argument, you should be looking for the conclusion and you should be looking for weaknesses in the argument. Identifying those weaknesses will obviously help you with weakening the argument, but it will also help you with strengthening the argument (eliminate those weaknesses!) and with identifying flaws in the argument, etc. Truly being able to understand and analyze argument structure on this test is such a foundational concept and is key to so many question types, that you would be much better served honing that skill than honing the much less useful skill of reading a stimulus looking for a specific answer. In fact, I think reading the question stem first and then reading the stimulus with that question stem in mind often distracts you from the much more important task of analyzing the argument. Test takers tend to get sloppy when they know what the stem is so they don't fully analyze the argument and they end up weakening a premise (rather than the conclusion) or falling for an answer choice trap.

I'd recommend doing some deep dives into practicing analyzing argument structure. Read a bunch of stimuli without reading the stems or the answer choices, just focus on the stimulus. For each stimulus, ask yourself:
1. Is there an argument or is just a set of facts?
2. If it's a fact set: do the facts connect in anyway or is there anything surprising about those facts?
3. If it's an argument: what is the main conclusion of the argument? What are the premises that the author is using to support that conclusion?
4. If it's an argument: how do those premises support the main conclusion? How is the author getting from those premises to that conclusion? What assumptions is the author making?
5. If it's an argument: why don't those premises fully support the main conclusion? What gaps or weaknesses exist in the argument? Or is the conclusion fully supported?

All LSAT authors think they have written perfectly sound arguments, with conclusions that are true and premises that fully prove those conclusions are true. But the vast majority of arguments on the LSAT are flawed, meaning that the premises do not fully prove the conclusion. Being able to identify premises and conclusions, how those premises support those conclusions, and why those premises do not fully support the conclusion will help you:
1.) identify argument structure and flaws (for Main Point, Method, Flaw, Parallel, and Point at Issue questions)
2.) identify assumptions that the author has made in leaping from the premises to the conclusions (for Assumption questions)
3.) weaken arguments (for Weaken & Evaluate the Argument questions)
4.) help arguments (for Strengthen, Justify & Evaluate the Argument questions)

So train yourself in fully analyzing stimuli and I think you'll find that you will deepen your understanding of the test and become more efficient and accurate at answering a variety of question types.

Here's a blog post I think you might also find useful: https://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/when-t ... questions/

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey