prethinking for CR

I'd recommend 'prethinking', but, don't think of it as a way to predict the exact correct answer. Sometimes, if you're doing particular problem types where the answer is often 'vague' and 'boring' (assumptions come to mind), you may very well be able to predict the actual answer ahead of time. In other problem types, though - such as Strengthen/Weaken, where the right answer will often introduce a brand new fact - you shouldn't waste your time trying to predict the exact form of the answer. Instead, 'prethink' about these three things:

1. Why does the author believe his/her conclusion? Get into the author's head, rather than taking their argument for granted. Ask yourself why the author believes that the evidence supports the conclusion. In what way does it support the conclusion?

2. Why is the argument logically weak? CR arguments are always weak (unless they're Inference or Discrepancy problems, which don't have a conclusion at all!). Articulate the biggest problem(s) with the argument.

3. What sort of thing are you looking for in the right answer? It isn't enough to just say that it'll 'weaken' the conclusion. Specify to yourself specifically what it would mean to weaken the conclusion. For example, you might think to yourself 'okay, I need to find an answer choice that shows that the government's plan won't lead to increased revenues', or 'I need to find an answer choice that shows that the better quality of carpentry in older buildings isn't due to greater carpentry skill.'