Reading Comprehension

Well,
I have realized that,one mistake lots of people make is they dont make a plan how will they attack certain kind of question in GMAT(even me).They treat each question as new question(just another) and tackle as it comes where as lots of people say question and answers of GMAT RC most of time follow as specific pattern.

So we read lots of articles from different places,read books ,collect information from them but keep all the infomation as fragements as use it sometime only.Soon,we get overloaded by the rules(may be remembering) and details and we forget or we are made to forget about our core job i.e answeing RC questions correctly.So i feel like we have to have our own strategy for attacking it(when and how will i approach,how will i filter answes and so on).

Currently i have found two approaches from different books.I am refining it(identifying good and bad from each approach)
I am planning to attack RC using Manhattan and Kaplan approach.(I am trying to find common ground)
Develop separate strategy for short and long.
Eliminate using wrong answer categories(Out of scope,opposite,one word wrong,True but not relevant,...)
(I will write my detail strategy once it is well formed.)

So i am curious to know how do you tackle the RC questions.
Any kind strategy that you use.

May be way of choosing answers,saving time,reading,specific action flow...

Some people read skipping,some books suggest to prephrase first,sometimes read first question first.
Write how details and so on.

How do you do it.

May be it will be helpful for many people like me.

thanks

Well, i will quote with an example. I have given two mock test recently. One was Manhattan 740(Q51,V40) and the other PowerPrep 720(Q51, V35). The only place where i struggled was RC and i seriously don't know why. Maybe in a hurry to compete with time i went wrong but still the reasons are inexplicable. I will be the first person who will be indebted to you, if you can formulate some concrete steps to beat RC

My strategy (which has not worked though!!)

I read the first question and then I read the passage understanding what it roughly says ( i take down no notes), then i attack the question. Depending upon the question, i either refer back to the passage or answer it directly. This is the shortest time-taking strategy that i have. I have even tried doing it the other way, as most experts suggest, where i read a para, note down either main point or paraphrase it, in short take down some note of the same and repeat the process for all other paras. The challenge here are two: either i dont refer back to these notes in my final answers or it takes too much time to efficiently follow the process......

Let's see if you have the magic wand to bridge the gap

Regards,
Waltz2Salsa

waltz2salsa wrote:Well, i will quote with an example. I have given two mock test recently. One was Manhattan 740(Q51,V40) and the other PowerPrep 720(Q51, V35).

You have very good prep scores.As most of people say there is some sort of corelation between score range for real gmat score and manhattan score,i think you have very good chance.

You should not forget that GMAT is CAT,looking at your score range,you must be getting so called hard questions.
I am not an expert but i have found GMAT makes you uncomfortable or in so called 'hard questions' ,GMAC does the following:(thats why it is said hard)
Too many contenders or close answers.While you feel one is right and you are lured by another one or cannot cross it completely.It not only cofuses you but also sucks up you time even if you are lucky enough to get it right.-(Solution:Manhattan Score method-but doesnt work for all)
Complicated answer wording structure.(even correct answers wont say thing directly).-(Solution:Rephrase answer with simplier story or JIST)
Long passage,some time longer than even so called long passages.Cramp you for the time and man makes more mistakes when he is i hurry,when he is afraid or nervous..-(Solution:Manhattan Skeleton read method,Kaplan notes method)

So i may not be able to formulate mathematical steps ,i think your strategy in particular should take care of these things atleast.

waltz2salsa wrote: I read the first question

I think it is what kaplan suggests.It may have some advantages but disadvantages i can think of:
Most of time #1 question is general question about summary of passage.(why to waste time reading lines when you know that)
If you see any specific question in #1 and you read question before answer,your whole passage may be guided by that particular question as you will start searching answer for that question rather than understanding the whole passage which will hurt for other questions.
This might have worked well,if you had known all questions in advance but GMAT structure is bit different.

waltz2salsa wrote: and then I read the passage understanding what it roughly says ( i take down no notes)

I am planning to take atleast some notes,headlines for long passages but no notes for short passage.Just remember where is where(keywords) and go for meaning.Even in specific question it may not take much time going back to passage if you have right keywords.

These are parts of my strategy that i am formulating.

Any other suggestions are warmly welcomed.

Question first: I never read the question first in RC; I find it too distracting when I have to keep in mind the question (which may be a detail question or inference, rather than main idea) as well as the flow of the passage. I am good at reading and it still bothers me. "Question first" is much better for CR (though I don't do it there either, for the same reason -- I have a small brain and it's all full).

Notes: When the passage details different theories or processes in each paragraph, I will summarize them briefly in notes (Like "1: against, because of old evidence 2: for, because of new evidence"). I don't find myself referring back to the notes often, and when I do, it's only briefly, but the act of notetaking itself helps me organize my thoughts.

What I finish every passage knowing: Scope of the passage and whether the author is arguing/advocating or merely explaining. These two things help enormously in eliminating wrong answer choices, sometimes simply with a vertical scan of key verbs in the answers.

Jim@Grockit wrote:Question first: I never read the question first in RC; I find it too distracting when I have to keep in mind the question (which may be a detail question or inference, rather than main idea) as well as the flow of the passage. I am good at reading and it still bothers me. "Question first" is much better for CR (though I don't do it there either, for the same reason -- I have a small brain and it's all full).

Notes: When the passage details different theories or processes in each paragraph, I will summarize them briefly in notes (Like "1: against, because of old evidence 2: for, because of new evidence"). I don't find myself referring back to the notes often, and when I do, it's only briefly, but the act of notetaking itself helps me organize my thoughts.

What I finish every passage knowing: Scope of the passage and whether the author is arguing/advocating or merely explaining. These two things help enormously in eliminating wrong answer choices, sometimes simply with a vertical scan of key verbs in the answers.

That's a nice strategy !!!

At times the passages are so dense that idea of skimming or gaming the passage, becomes counterproductive ,and leads to more delays in processing the raw information.