Verbal Reasoning

Yes that echoes my notes during the MGMAT post - gmat Assessment with Stacey Koprince. I need to slow down on CR and RC

I scored a 47 in verbal and the only LSAT material I used was the CR Bible. Most people don't know this, but the questions in it are licensed by PowerScore from past LSAT tests. BTW, I personally attribute much of my verbal score increase (from 36 to 47) to this book...

But after I finished my test I started looking over LSAT tests and found them a lot more challenging that what you'll see on the GMAT. The question structure of LSAT Logical Reasoning questions is a lot similar to that of CR, but it's "on steroids", so to speak.

Anyway, my take on it is that if you've run out of material, then why not? LSAT CR is definitely better than the CR you'll find in some prep companies' books - some of them are downright off and have nothing to do with the GMAT. The most common issue is that the answer choices are debatable:
- you either have to make too many deductions/even add assumptions to get there
- some seem better to me than their official answer

In case you're interested, check out the link below for two free LSAT sets.

https://www.beatthegmat.com/suggested-ls ... 44191.html

I'd highly suggest reading the PowerScore Bible for Critical Reasoning and ManhattanGMAT guide for Sentence Corrections. Doing TIMED practice sets from those two resources in conjunction with Official Guides helped me immensely and boosted my Verbal score from mid-20s to low 40s. I've more details about my prep here: https://www.beatthegmat.com/fist-pump-i- ... tml#198737

And read NY Times and The Economist before bedtime everyday to get the proper English lingo ingrained into your memory while you enjoy REM sleep.

money9111,

You mentioned that you did very well on the MGMAT CATs for SC, but struggled in the actual GMAT. Can you please provide more details on how they differ? The reason why I asked is that unlike CR and RC, SC follows a set of strict rules without interpretation of meaning and comprehension, and therefore I think the SC elements in MGMAT should accurately reflect those of GMAT.

I felt that the MGMAT SCs laid out the core groundwork in helping you identify the sentence structure and diagnose the grammatical errors. However, OG SCs were more layered but still followed a similar structure as described above. As a result, I felt that the Official Guide SCs were more representative of the actual GMAT even though the MGMAT SCs were similar although a bit simpler. The detective skills you gain from MGMAT SCs are still applicable to the GMAT SCs, and with further TIMED practice (<1 to 1.5 mins per SC) on OG SCs, the actual GMAT SCs won't seem so foreign.

I see. So using a math analogy, instead of making 2 step calculation as shown on MGMAT, OG and actual GMAT could have 3 or even 4 step calculation?