Serious RC Problems

Hi bruinbear,

GMAT RC and CR prompts are remarkably similar to LSAT RC and LR prompts, although the GMAT versions include fewer variations on question types and logic. The steps to dealing with RC on the GMAT are the same regardless of length, difficulty, etc., so NO imagination is required to do the job.

As a litigator, you're utilizing the entire world of possibilities to make your arguments; that type of "baggage" is what's killing your performance on RC. When answering an RC question, you are expected to utilize ONLY the material that appears in the prompt - NOTHING ELSE. A certain degree of note-taking is expected (and required); knowing the handful of RC question types and the common wrong answers also helps. It might also be that you need a GMAT Course to train you in the right way to "think" about RC.

What have your full-length practice CAT scores been (what are your Quant and Verbal Scaled Scores on each?)?

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

Hi Bruinbear,

RC on the LSAT and the GMAT is largely similar. It seems to me that you're probably applying too much real-world logic to the passage: "what if X really means Y?" You have to put aside real-world knowledge and assumptions, and just answer the questions based solely on what's provided in the passage.

If you find that you have trouble narrowing down the answer choices, it may be that you're focusing to much on which answer is "right," and not finding any that fit that criteria of perfection. What you should look for instead is the least-wrong answer. Focus on proving answer choices wrong - which ones can you most easily eliminate?

Wrong answers on GMAT RC often fit one of the following:
- too extreme (using words like: any, all, most, never, only, etc)
- perhaps true, but answering the wrong question
- based on real-world assumptions, but not given in the passage
- a twist / opposite of what we're looking for

Here's an article that can help you frame your approach: https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... ed-dating/

Taking a practice test every weekend definitely sounds like overkill. You should only take practice tests when you've done enough work in the interim to expect to see a change. Taking the practice test itself doesn't add value - the real learning comes from how deeply you REVIEW the practice test. As a general rule, you should spend longer reviewing the test than you spent taking it in the first place.

Instead of drilling a ton of new problems, focus on the ones you've already done. What connects the wrong answers you've chosen? What patterns do you notice in the ways that wrong answers are written versus the way that right answers are written?

In my experience, studying when you're exhausted is almost pointless, since you're not really absorbing much. Try to carve out 15-20 min mini study sessions in the morning, on your lunch break, etc. Those might be more productive.

bruinbear wrote:I think I may be the only person in the world with this problem. I am an attorney and can do quite well on SC and CR; however, I can barely break 50% on RC. Because I play with words, hypothetical situations, and definitions every day as a litigator (arguing over the definition of the word "is"), I find myself never really liking an answer choice. I can make an argument for anything, and it seems that this habit is intruding on my RC psyche. I didn't have this problem with the LSAT. Any advice?

Hi bruinbear,

Here are both of my cents:

If you find that your attorney skills are preventing you from eliminating answer choices, you need to be very aggressive/ruthless when examining the answer choices. Don't be the DEFENCE attorney for the answer choices; be the PROSECUTING attorney! So, rather than looking for reasons to keep an answer choice, look for the smallest hint of a flaw in each answer choice, and if you find something that smells off, eliminate it immediately and move to the next answer choices.

Additional tips on finding the correct can be found in our free video at https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat- ... on?id=1127

Cheers,
Brent