Reading for LR and RC

[candaceross]

Hello,

I have a question about the differences in reading for LR and RC. I have usually done really well on RC, it has been my strongest section in practice (missing 2 questions usually). I was not as successful in LR, so I focused on LR in my studying and neglected RC.

But now I have noticed that while my LR score is improving, my RC scores are getting worse. I'm missing about 8 now.

I've guessed that maybe I'm applying the detailed approach of reading for LR to RC. Do you have any advice in trying to get back to my former scores?

Thanks so much!
Candace

[Robert Carroll]

Candace,

One big difference between LR and RC is that RC questions are overwhelmingly in the Must Be True family. LR conditions you to look at arguments and evaluate what's wrong with them when they fall short, and to pay attention to structure on a small scale. Although RC can have Strengthen and Weaken questions, it more commonly has questions that you have to evaluate with the Fact Test - go by what the author said, rather than trying to strengthen or weaken an argument, or add facts that might help or hurt what the author said.

Another thing to consider is that because RC questions tend to be Must Be True, you need to diagram the passage to discover the relevant information, but you shouldn't attack the passage in the same way that you would attack a LR stimulus - the passage itself is just too large for you to be extremely critical of every point. Take what the author gives you about his/her viewpoints, the viewpoints of groups discussed there, and all the other relevant information; use that information to answer the questions, and don't spend an inordinate amount of time second-guessing all that the author said.

Robert Carroll

[candaceross]

Robert,

Thank you very much. That was very helpful!