gmathopeful25 wrote:
Congrats on the high verbal score! I consistently get between -1 and -2 on CR and RC. Any advice on how to improve once someone gets to that level? I took the GMAT a couple of weeks ago and got a Q45 (but a weird split of q50 for DS and q38 for PS).
I'm sorry but by "-1 and -2 on CR and RC" are you referring to just one or two misses? I'd say for me the main improvement for CR I ever had was as I described above when you basically start to analyze the argument as you do the AWA argument in which you start to notice when there is an assumption or they jump to a conclusion or state some kind of link and mark down (mentally or in writing) that moment.
Is there any kind of pattern in regards to the question type you are missing? For example do you typically miss a "strengthen" CR or a "weaken" or so on? Maybe it's the subject matter more than the question type? Let's go through 2 problems and tell me if either of these you made a mistake in (I did not face any CR much harder than these but neither is particularly difficult)
-------------------------------------
"The media claim that the economy is entering a phase of growth and prosperity. They point to lower unemployment rates and increased productivity. Their analysis is false, though. The number of people filing for bankruptcy has increased every month for the last six months and bankruptcy lawyers report that they are busier than they have been in years. "
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. Unemployment rates are not useful indicators of growth and prosperity.
B. Economic growth cannot be measured in terms of productivity.
C. Legislation has not been recently passed to make legal bankruptcy easier to obtain.
D. There has not been an increase in the number of bankruptcy lawyers.
E. The media often misrepresent the current state of economic affairs.
Okay so when I read the above I pick up the key words and simplify it in my head "media claim...phase of prosperity...evidenced by lower
RATES and increased productivity........this is false though because the
NUMBER people filing for bankruptcy up, and lawyers busier than normal"
Notice I went crazy with bolding and capitalizing "rates" and "number". It's frequent on GMAT CR that an argument or conclusion is based on comparing a percentage to a total number (this is common in DS too so I imagine you might have noticed)
A. Unemployment rates are not useful indicators of growth and prosperity.
"Unemployment rates" is only mentioned initially, the argument doesn't refute or even mention itB. Economic growth cannot be measured in terms of productivity.
Same as above, the argument is battling that there is growth and then cites other reasons, doesn't seem to care at all about measuring productivity or unemployment rates, argument has it's own agenda focusing on bankruptcy otherwise there would have been an explicit attack on A or B. GMAT isn't very ambiguous, either something was explicitly attacked or it typically isn't relevantC. Legislation has not been recently passed to make legal bankruptcy easier to obtain.
I'm all about this. The argument is saying economy isn't doing so well because the bankruptcy numbers are up. Well if it's a whole lot easier to file for bankruptcy now then that would ruin this argument.D. There has not been an increase in the number of bankruptcy lawyers.
bleh, argument said they're busier than ever, if there were more lawyers it would only prove his point furtherE. The media often misrepresent the current state of economic affairs.
What the heck does this have to do with anything? Get out of here EAssumption questions aren't too dissimilar from a weaken question. You're basically saying which of these would most hurt this argument by being false.
---------------------------
"In 1886, the paintings of Vincent Van Gogh began to exhibit simple, elegant lines and vivid colors. Art historians explain this change as the incorporation of another culture's artistic tradition and argue on this basis that Van Gogh became interested in Japanese art at this time."
Each of the following, if true, provides some support for the art historians' account described above EXCEPT:
A) Black contours typical of Japanese Yamato-e paintings appear in Van Gogh's work from 1886 on but at no earlier time.
B) Van Gogh's notebooks dating from the inception of his art career until 1885 contain hundreds of sketches for paintings, none of which exhibit the style distinctive to Japanese artwork.
C) A thriving market for Japanese ukiyo-e woodblock prints existed in Paris, where Van Gogh settled in early 1886.
D) Bridge in the Rain, which Van Gogh painted in 1885, exhibited striking similarities to Sudden Rain at Ohashi Bridge by Japanese print master Hiroshige.
E) Some of Van Gogh's sketches were drawn using a reed shaped into a quill, a traditional Japanese instrument Van Gogh began to use in 1886.
Okay so whats the gist/crux/essence/point of the argument? In 1886 our guy Vincent started using a style that historians say indicates his interest in Japanese art at this time. "This time"? Okay that's clearly a key indicator we're likely going to see answers giving us a timeline to pick from. Furthermore you can see the question says that each answer is similar to each other except for 1. I love these questions because
even if you don't know what's being asked you can guess based on which answer is most differentA) Black contours typical of Japanese Yamato-e paintings appear in Van Gogh's work from 1886 on but at no earlier time.
Alright I see 1886 and no earlier, looks to stay on messageB) Van Gogh's notebooks dating from the inception of his art career until 1885 contain hundreds of sketches for paintings, none of which exhibit the style distinctive to Japanese artwork.
No Japanese styling all the way until 1885, so basically nothing before 1886, stays on messageC) A thriving market for Japanese ukiyo-e woodblock prints existed in Paris, where Van Gogh settled in early 1886.
He moved to a Japenese vibe area in the year in question, stays on message by lending support to the hypothesisD) Bridge in the Rain, which Van Gogh painted in 1885, exhibited striking similarities to Sudden Rain at Ohashi Bridge by Japanese print master Hiroshige.
Woah woah woah... He had a painting BEFORE 1886 (the year in question) that was similar to a Japanese painting? All the other answers have been saying the same thing, that he didn't really have any Japanese styling until 1886 now this answer is giving me something different. I don't even remember the question but the fact that D gives me something different from A/B/C strongly indicates this is likely the right choice.E) Some of Van Gogh's sketches were drawn using a reed shaped into a quill, a traditional Japanese instrument Van Gogh began to use in 1886.
Yup back to the pattern, using a Japanese tool starting in 1886I honestly did forget the question for a moment while I did this and found the answer then confirmed by rereading the key elements (typically evidence/hypothesis/conclusions).
Like GMAT math, the verbal actually has
several approaches and ways to get to the answer as well. I highly recommend you practice and anytime, and I mean
anytime you miss a question or even get it but only had it narrowed down to a couple answers and got lucky, do the google search I mentioned previously and read the explanations on this forum. You'll find excellent explanations in different forms.
For example you'll get my explanations which are terribly casual breakdowns in which I say things like "My boy Vincent didn't get his Japanese on until 1886". I find casualizing (making up a word for this) it into bullet points really helps me remember and by making it less formal it also somewhat reduces stress. Others have entire very formal laid out systems in which you rewrite the key points and then eliminate answer choices as you go. I have found I use both approaches depending on the problem.
If it's a very information heavy problem then it definitely helps to write down key points and then cross out answers (a/b/c/d/e) on the notepad as you go along (including answers you don't like but not sure why, sometimes the answer is the lesser of two evils so even though you don't like it you don't like the other answers more).
CR really is similar to the AWA in which you're given a statement and you know for a fact
somewhere in there is an assumption or link between two things that you can strengthen/weaken/tear apart/explain with the tools providing to you in the answers, select the best weapon to do so.
For RC I believe it comes down mostly to practice, if you build up your stamina it gets a lot easier to read about 1960's chemical isotopes from the moon if it feels like you just started the test. You also start to figure out YOUR best approach in regards to reading the passage, maybe you prefer to just glance over it and then coming back depending on questions, or read the entire thing taking notes, try multiple approaches.
Sorry I can't be more of a help as I truly am lucky to be able to almost play it by ear on some of these questions because of my upbringing; but it is worth trying it out my approach a couple times and if it works that's fantastic and if it doesn't I'm sorry but now you know. All I can do is say what worked for me.
That said you should definitely look at some of the sticky posts on gmatclub's CR and RC sections, and also google "site:gmatclub.com ace verbal" or whatever it is you're thinking and there's likely a thread with some very helpful tips and strategies you can use. Of course I'd love to answer anything you ask me here or through PM but that's how I found 95% of what I've learned.
Edit: Wow I am terrible at being brief. First I thought my debrief would be short and it ended up 2,800+ words and now this response is an essay. I apologize for the length, hopefully reading it will help you build up RC stamina