AnmolKukreja wrote:
Hi Mike
As per your recommendation,I just started reading the Wall Street Journal and the Economic times but i have a small question.What is the correct way in which i should read all these newspapers and joyrnals. Should i be sceptical about each and every line or should i read it in a flow without paying much attention to the structure. I get very finicky about the proper strucuturing stuff when i start reading the newspaper and so always end up leaving this habit of newspaper reading.Please help
Dear
AnmolKukreja,
That's a great question. In articles that are simply describing factual information, reporting on some objective situation, I would say: simply assume everything they are saying is true. In such articles, you still should pay attention to the structure in the sense of: how is the information organized? What are the roles of individual paragraphs? How are individual sentences structured? This is good practice for GMAT RC & SC.
In OP/ED pieces in the WSJ and in any
Economist magazine in which the author is expressing an opinion or making a prediction about future events & trends, then be a little more skeptical, and try to discern the structure of the argument. In addition to all the GMAT RC & SC skills, you can also practice your GMAT CR skills.
It's true that, in some sense, GMAT RC skills and GMAT CR skills and GMAT SC skills are three different skill sets.
GMAT RC skills (useful in all articles)
What is the main idea of the passage?
What is the role of each paragraph?
Why are specific details mentioned where they are?
What can we infer?
What could be conclude about the author's perspective?GMAT SC skills: (useful in all articles)
Pick long sentences, and look for idioms, modifiers, etc. Make sure you understand the advantages of organizing the sentence in the way that it is organized. GMAT CR skills: (useful in OP/ED pieces, articles with opinions & predictions)
Identify premises, conclusions, and assumptions of each argument.
Identify possible strengthener & weakeners.
What further information would we need to know to evaluate the strength of the argument?
What can we infer? If the article presents two opposing points of view:
What weakeners of one argument does the other side present?
How does voice #2 respond to the arguments of voice #1?Does all this make sense?
Mike