Just about EVERYONE loves to suggest completing LSAT Logical Reasoning questions by question stem type.
I also recommend this, of course. I even suggest going through LR questions this way in my LSAT study schedules.
2 major reasons LSAT prep folks recommend this:
1. You have to understand what the question is asking in order to solve it. Drilling by question-stem type can help you solidify your understanding of what sort of information the question asks.
2. It's easy to categorize questions by their question stem. You can do this without taking the time to read the stimulus.
A surprising insight about Logical Reasoning questions
After teaching the LSAT for a while, I realized something:
What happens when ---
INSTEAD of thinking about questions by their "question-type" (AKA question stem)
you think about each question by the method of reasoning in the stimulus???!!!
Once I started having my students approach questions this way...their scores improved dramatically!
So I'm going to share some tips on how to think about Logical Reasoning questions by focusing on:
-the method of reasoning
and
-the gap between evidence and conclusion.
Bottom line: instead of thinking about the question-stem, let's focus on the STIMULUS.
By thinking about Logical Reasoning questions based on the method of reasoning in the stimulus, you get a better understanding of the argument. And this lets us understand each question on a deeper level and make connections across question-stem categories.
We could hypothetically categorize many LR questions by the flaws or gaps exhibited in their stimuli.
Here are just a few:
* Necessary/Sufficient Condition Confusion
* Correlation/Causation Issues
* Confusing a "Could" for a "Must"
* Taking "absence of evidence" as "evidence of absence (of evidence)"
These sorts of issues don't just come up in flaw questions. They come up in several "types" of questions.
Changing Logical Reasoning Questions
I want to SHOW you how argument gaps are important to lots of different question-types, so think about this for a second:
Some stimuli can easily be changed from one question-stem type into several others.
In other words, we can view the same stimulus and correct answer choice from a variety of perspectives.
By leaving the correct answer choice the same, by negating it, or by changing it just a little bit, we can change the question stem and still have a perfectly valid LSAT question!
Crazy huh?
All we have to do is change our point of view!
For example, we can easily change Necessary Assumption questions into the following types of questions:
Must Be True, Cannot Be True, Flaw, Strengthen, Weaken, Evaluate the Argument, and Resolve the Paradox / Discrepancy
And next time, I'll walk you through how to do this with an example from one of my favorite LSAT questions of all time.
Til next time,
Steve
Recommended Resources:
1. LSAT Courses
The best of my LSAT material with exclusive access to attend my Live Online LSAT Master Classes + Q&As, and on-demand video lessons you can watch anytime. Plus, LSAT study plans to keep you on track. Save hundreds of dollars with an LSAT course package.
2. Logical Reasoning Explanations
The explanations that should have come with the LSAT. These don't just fall back on "out of scope," but actually tell you why the wrong answers are wrong, why the right answers are right, and the easiest way to get the correct answer.
3. Logical Reasoning Cheat Sheet
Based on what I'd typically do in college: read what the professor emphasized and condense it all onto a single piece of paper. It gave me a quick reference, making things a lot less threatening and a lot more manageable.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment