Logical reasoning method

[sejinlee]

I have studied the logical reasoning bible from powerscore, and I also took a full length course 2 years ago. After not doing well on the lsat two times, I also tried Kaplan's logical reasoning lesson book. The main difference was that their method was to encourage reading the question stem first, before reading the stimulus or the answer choices. I found it to be helpful but not to the point where it made a dramatic change in my speed or score, perhaps because i haven't prepared well either way. But overall, is there a serious problem with reading the question stem first? I feel as though reading the question allows me to see whats coming, but I am also worried that it takes up more time. But also with the powerscore method, I also end up going back to read the stimulus again after reading the question stem.

Could someone tell me the pros and cons of each strategy and the best way to figure out which method works for me? I wasn't able to see a big difference in score yet, so I'm not sure which method to stick with.
Any advice would be very helpful!

Thanks in advance

[BethRibet]

Hi Sejinlee,

Thanks for your question.

In general, as you know, PowerScore recommends starting with the stimulus and then analyzing the question stem. One reason is that when focusing on the question stem first, test-takers may not give their full attention to noticing the details or nuances that show up in the stimulus. Reading the stimulus with a "fresh mind" potentially allows you to notice details that you might not catch based on the question stem, but that will matter in weeding out particular answer choices. Our observation is that this approach works best for more test-takers, more often. With that said, our staff will also acknowledge that for an individual test-taker, reading the question first may be more time-efficient, or just a better fit for that individual's analytical processes. So if you were telling me that reading the question stem first worked much better for you, and resulted in more accuracy and speed, I would say Bravo, and affirm that it would be best to continue in that vein. Given what you've shared, it doesn't seem like you're noticing that difference however.

The paragraph above speaks best to the pros of our method, and the cons of starting with the question stem, and as noted, seems well-supported based on our observations of our clients. I would imagine to get a very different rationale, you'd need to ask this question of those who promote the other method!

Hope this helps!

Beth