rjetha - I see that you joined in 2009...but you have posted 3 messages and you only have done the first 55 problems of the CR part of the OG13. That tells me that maybe you are just starting to really study for this? If so this is a good time for you to get a solid approach together before you develop habits that might be harder to break.
Let's not talk about specific question types at this moment. Let's talk about the way to SEE the CR questions.
What does an Expert do? I would say two things: 1) Narrow the Focus and 2) Stop and gather himself and notice anything that is not quite what was expected.
1) Narrow your focus. I really do think that critical reasoning (as is true of the whole verbal section) is about narrowing your focus. You are given lots of information but not all of it is to be taken at the same level.
In this posting I walk you through the three parts of a critical reasoning question. The context (background information), the evidence (I call it the MIP), and the conclusion.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/02/ ... duncan-way. You need to learn to see the critical reasoning as made of these different parts.
I am just finishing up another article called
"Putting Critical Reasoning in Context." It discusses the role of the background information that they give you in each problem. Here is a short excerpt:
- "Clearly your attention should be focused on the evidence and the conclusion. This is where the path to the correct answer lies. But what role does the context play? Why is the context there if it is not something to focus on?
There are actually two roles that the context plays:
1)Fairness - the context is there to ensure that the critical reasoning section is not a vocabulary test. It ensures cultural and linguistic fairness so that everyone has a chance to answer correctly if they apply the right logic.
2)Distraction -the context is also there for a not so generous reason, many of the incorrect answer choices are based on focusing too much on the context."
By narrowing your focus, you can avoid most of the trap answers that catch so many test takers. Obviously you should not bring in outside information, but you also should not give too much of your focus to the background information either. It is the evidence that must lead to the conclusion.
2) Stop and gather yourself and notice anything that is not quite what was expected. Many people just push through a critical reasoning stimulus and fail to really take advantage of what is there.
An expert gathers himself after each phrase or each sentence just the way you should on Reading Comprehension after each paragraph!
An argument generally is constructed with the context first, then the evidence and the conclusion is often the last part of the argument. By stopping and gathering yourself you are able to see the argument form in front of you.
There are two big things to look for as you read, each of these will be easier to see if you pause and gather yourself.
1) Shifts in language. If you go through the CR explanations, you will see experts talking about shifts in language. These can be from one noun to another, for example, from "arrests" to "crimes committed." Clearly these are not the same and you can see what the Flaw, Assumption, Weakness, or Strengthen answer would likely be -- something to do with the difference between "arrests" and "crimes committed"
2) Unnecessary and unexpected wording. This often involves adjectives and adverbs. For example, maybe the argument is doing a fine job of telling you that
one cause of a recession is that wealthy people have too much of the money in a society. Yet the conclusion in the argument says "the
ONLY cause of recession is that wealthy people have too much..." Now you know that the Flaw or Assumption or Weakness, etc. has to do with this use of "only" which is not supported by the evidence.
If you can internalize these things you will be doing most of your work on Critical Reasoning as you read the argument itself and as you analyze it. You will know what to focus on and may even have a very strong idea of what the answer must be before you even move to the answer choices.
Using these techniques above I have become very successful at correctly answering Critical Reasoning questions that are read out loud - for example over the phone with a student. It is hard to answer questions that you cannot see, but with these techniques I can anticipate not only the answer, but very often what type of question it will be. For example, "based on this shift in language this is either a weaken or an assumption question that exposes the difference between "arrests"and "crimes committed." I am sure that other experts in Critical Reasoning could do the same since they also employ these same strategies.
When you have worked with these techniques please let me know if you have questions about particular types of CR questions.
