Hi. Amazing staff,
When i read a Passage, theres two mindsets options available:
1st option: I am going to get best possible understanding of this text then later when i finish the comprehension process, Start to analyze it with VIEWSTAMP vernacular (including marking) -usually when i finiah comprehending a paragraph, i spend some time of disecting each paragraph with VIEWSTAMP, then move on.
2nd option: start to end, I am going to read every bit of text with VIEWSTAMP consciousness mind
Prior, i tried the RC Section with more closer to the 2nd option oriented due to the fear of time limit.
But these days, i go with threading method more oriented towards the 1st option, and the accuracy rate went up. do you advise me to stick with my current approach or there is something wrong with my method?
Important MindSet question regarding Viewstamp
In my experience, the "comprehension" aspect of RC is overrated. Trying to learn what the passage is teaching, rather than taking note of where the key evidence is so you can quickly find it later when facing the questions, is typically a waste of time and effort. Understanding helps, but it's not the goal. Don't "dissect" the passage, but just use VIEWSTAMP as a guideline to tell you what is worth notating. If you see a viewpoint, note it! If you see an argument, note it! If you find an indication of tone, note it! You do NOT need to stop at the end of the passage and do a full analysis! All you need to do is prephrase the main point and the tone, and then move to the questions, using your notes to tell you where to look each time to find evidence to support your answers.
I compare this to reading an old school paper road map. You don't have to memorize all the main streets and intersections, or the topography of the town. You don't even have to memorize where any specific thing is on the map. You plan to go to the theater later? Mark the theater on the map in such a way that later, when you look at the map, you can find it and then figure out how to get there. Want to know how to get back to your hotel afterwards? Mark the hotel, so that later, when you pull out the map, you can plan the route. Make sure the theater and the hotel are marked in different ways so that you don't confuse them and can quickly tell what you are looking at at a glance. You wouldn't just underline them both, because then how do you know which one is which? For the same reason, don't just underline words and phrases in the passage, because then your notes will tell you nothing about where to look later when you want specific info.
Also, continuing this analogy before it breaks down too much, you shouldn't spend a bunch of time marking all the different routes from the theater to the hotel to the airport to the restaurant, etc., or marking a bunch of stuff on the map that you don't anticipate you will need to find later. Keep your markings simple clean, and base them on what you expect to need later. VIEWSTAMP tells you a lot about what you may need later, so use that to help you determine which few things are noteworthy.
Your old process sounds much too intense and time-consuming, and not based on addressing what you are going to be tested on in the questions. Your newer process sounds too fear-based instead of proactive and efficient. Don't be afraid! Be predictive, be efficient, take command of the situation, and get moving. Read, take a few key notes, prephrase, and get to work. Don't make it harder, or more frightening, than it needs to be!
Adam, thank you so so much with amazingly detailed explanation and guidance. I am so sorry to ask this :
what do you mean, comprehension aspect of RC is overrated. Also i agree with your amazing comparison with - old map - but this part i don't get, how can you draw a good indication sign where you gonna go without really knowing the details of map? as in you have to know where the school is in order to make a indication sign of a school . if you have better understanding of a map, wouldn't one has better leverage to draw a better guidance ?
What I mean is that Reading Comprehension has little to do with actually comprehending what you read. Instead of testing your understanding of what you read, it's testing your ability to find evidence within the passage to support your answer choices. Reading Comprehension would be more accurately called "Use of Evidence", in my opinion.
For that map analogy, you don't have to understand the entire map in order to use it. You look it over, scanning it for certain things, perhaps as you are riding in the back of a taxi from the airport to your hotel (since I am going old school it's a taxi, not Lyft or that other rideshare company). As you ride, you see a few things out the window, and you note them on your map. The note doesn't have to mean anything to anyone but you! Maybe a pictogram of a book for a school, or maybe a little schoolhouse, or maybe the word "school". For the hospital you could draw a caduceus, or the symbol for prescriptions, or anything else. What you would not do is underline the school and underline the hospital and underline the restaurant and so on, because later, when you want to find the hospital, those underlines don't help much. You end up looking at all of them all over again.
What you do not have to do is know everything about that map so well that you can have an intelligent discussion with someone else about the symbols used, the layout of the streets, the distances between key objects, etc. You just need to have enough information so that later, when asked, you can use it to find your way back to the key items you took note of. As you read the passage, take notes just like you would on that map, observing the things that seem important along the way and marking them in ways that will help you find them later if needed.
Adam, I am seeking your wisdom and advice about this.
Adam, in my last LSAT test performance which would be known as prep test 84, I got every question correct until my last passage began, that one i got 6/8 wrong. Now, prior, lack of time and accuracy rate has been biggest problem for me during my RC. both of the areas, i saw vast improvements. Now, usually, lack of time is the just biggest problem generator. my last lsat, i had least amount of time for the last passage as well. I can clearly see if i utilize what you advised me, my reading speed will likely increase. considering i have 23 days to go, do you think it is worthwhile to change my RC reading strategy to what you recommend ? Or should i just use this strategy for the future LSAT ?
I hear that a lot, lathlee, that "lack of time is the biggest problem", and I try to get my students to adjust their perspective on that. The time limit is fixed - it doesn't change, and it moves no faster or slower each time you take a test. It's the same amount of time that everyone else gets, and 35 minutes is enough time to complete a section on the LSAT. Lack of time is NOT the problem - an inefficient process is the problem. Focus on improving your process, rather than focusing on how much time things are taking, and when you get a better process then the time you are allotted will be sufficient.
I think you should practice for a week or so with these adjustments to your RC process and see how they go. They will probably not go well at first, because like any new thing they will take some practice to get used to, but be patient and stay with it. Doing more of what you have been doing, instead of finding a better, more efficient process, will not get you better results. If you give it a fair try and things get no better, then try something else instead, but any improvement is going to have to come from finding a better way to do things. Nothing you do will change the amount of time you are given (other than getting approved for special accommodations, of course), so you cannot expect to see better results without making changes in the way you approach the test.
Of course, if the changes you try make things worse after having given them a reasonable opportunity and practice, go back to what you were doing! Finding the right method can be a process of trial and error.
Adam, slight confusion part clarification question, of VIEWSTAMP and comprehension, in order to summarize/make a brief note of structure condensed form for paragraph - AKA: S of Viewstamp, MAYBE Deep Comprehension is not necessary but A level of Comprehension is Still required. Agree? . so you are saying is when one reads for RC, make a note of viewstamp, underlines, and signs.have some level of comprehension.. then form a paragraph's brief structure based on those . right?
Yes, but only at a very high level. Structure is just "what happened, in what order", and that doesn't take much comprehension of details. "A hypothesis was presented, evidence for and against it was examined, concerns were raised, and a recommendation was made" is a typical structure answer. More detail than that and you are no longer answering a structure question, but are writing an analysis of the passage. Keep it simple!
Hi. Adam, i am sorry to ask again an additional Q, what do you mean by, "at a very high level (comprehending)," can you provide More detailed level , broke down, explanation sentences? I assume the following ideas since the sentece of at a very High Level Reading, were about how to read as a Correct very High Level Reading during a RC passage?
When I say "a very high level" I mean getting the overall structure without worrying much about the small details. I'm not sure how to explain that without using certain English language idioms with which you may be unfamiliar, like "the big picture" or "the broad strokes", or telling you to avoid "missing the forest for the trees." Look at the passage as a whole, not as lots of discrete parts.