HOW TO DESTROY READING COMPREHENSION PASSAGES BY RHYME

Ok, here is a passage from OG:


--------------------------------------------------
Archaeology as a profession faces two major prob-
lems. First, it is the poorest of the poor. Only paltry
sums are available for excavating and even less is avail-
able for publishing the results and preserving the sites
(5) once excavated. Yet archaeologists deal with priceless
objects every day. Second, there is the problem of illegal
excavation, resulting in museum-quality pieces being
sold to the highest bidder.
I would like to make an outrageous suggestion that
(10) would at one stroke provide funds for archaeology and
reduce the amount of illegal digging. I would propose
that scientific archeological expeditions and govern-
mental authorities sell excavated artifacts on the open
market. Such sales would provide substantial funds for
(15) the excavation and preservation of archaeological sites
and the publication of results. At the same time, they
would break the illegal excavator’s grip on the market,
thereby decreasing the inducement to engage in illegal
activities.
(20) You might object that professionals excavate to
acquire knowledge, not money. Moreover, ancient arti-
facts are part of our global cultural heritage, which
should be available for all to appreciate, not sold to the
highest bidder. I agree. Sell nothing that has unique

(25) artistic merit or scientific value. But, you might reply,
everything that comes our of the ground has scientific
value. Here we part company. Theoretically, you may be
correct in claiming that every artifact has potential scien-
tific value. Practically, you are wrong.
(30) I refer to the thousands of pottery vessels and ancient
lamps that are essentially duplicates of one another. In
one small excavation in Cyprus, archaeologists recently
uncovered 2,000 virtually indistinguishable small jugs in
a single courtyard, Even precious royal seal impressions
(35) known as/melekh handles have been found in abun-
dance---more than 4,000 examples so far.
The basements of museums are simply not large
enough to store the artifacts that are likely to be discov-
ered in the future. There is not enough money even to
(40) catalogue the finds; as a result, they cannot be found
again and become as inaccessible as if they had never
been discovered. Indeed, with the help of a computer,
sold artifacts could be more accessible than are the
pieces stored in bulging museum basements. Prior to
(45) sale, each could be photographed and the list of the
purchasers could be maintained on the computer A
purchaser could even be required to agree to return the
piece if it should become needed for scientific purposes.
It would be unrealistic to suggest that illegal digging
(50) would stop if artifacts were sold on the open market.
But the demand for the clandestine product would be
substantially reduced. Who would want an unmarked
pot when another was available whose provenance was
known, and that was dated stratigraphically by the
professional archaeologist who excavated it?
------------------------------------------------------------

Question:
The author implies that all of the following statements about duplicate artifacts are true EXCEPT:
(A) A market for such artifacts already exists.
(B) Such artifacts seldom have scientific value.
(C) There is likely to be a continuing supply of such artifacts.
(D) Museums are well supplied with examples of such artifacts.
(E) Such artifacts frequently exceed in quality those already catalogued in museum collections.

Has it ever occurred to anyone non-native speaker that this strategy may seem impractical because of vocabulary shortage? I tried this strategy out and, when I bumped into a complicated passage with sophisticated vocabulary usage, it gave me a hard time to paraphrase the first sentences of the paragraphs as they were really hard to comprehend. A different matter is when you read the entire passage and able to construct the picture based on other sentences in the paras... Thoughts?

Thanks for the detailed explanation Rhyme; I will give it a shot and see how it goes. By the way any idea how long it might take to master this approach?

HOW TO DESTROY READING COMPREHENSION PASSAGES BY RHYME

There is a magic bullet for RC passages.

What? There's a magic bullet? Surely you lie rhyme!

I do not. Here it is: Don't read the passage.

Suprised? It works. The primary purpose of the RC passages are not to test your knowledge of grammar or theories or anything like that - they test your ability to RETAIN INFORMATION. Problem is, you've got a few minutes to read a passage on some of the most boring crap ever, and you somehow have to remember it? It can't be done.

So, how do you beat the RC down to it's knees and kick it in the groin?

You only read parts of it.

Lets try this with a long passage attached. (DONT READ IT YET!!)

Oh good god, thats atrociously long! So what do you do?

Step 1: Read the first paragraph and rewrite the key points. Rewrite in your own words.
Step 2: Read the first sentence of each subsequent paragraph. Rewrite in your own words.
Step 2a: SKIM the paragraph looking for key words - names, dates, key words. Write these down underneath the key sentence you wrote for each paragraph.
Step 3: Answer the questions.

NOW TRY THIS ON THE ATTACHED PASSAGE BEFORE YOU READ MY NOTES BELOW

What did your notes look like?

My notes might look something like this:


Black Death severe epidemic, ravaged 14th cent Europe. Intrigured scholars since Gasquet 1893 study. Gasquet contends epidemic intensified political / religious upheaval that ended middle ages. Later, Coulton agreed but oddly attributed a good thing to the BD - propersity as a result of less competition for food, shelter and crap.

1930s, Evgeny Kosminksy claimed epedemic as not a key player.
World War, Marxist, fedualism

Role of BD also challenged in other way.
Twigg, Sherwburry, trade ship, havoc, bubonic, nile, 1912

Although Twigg cites conditions needed for BD, he ignores too much and is faulty in his logic.
Speculation, fault, trade ship, rodents, animals, europe

..........................


Now I've boiled the entire thing down to a few sentences. Try re-reading the first sentences now if you are confused about the point of the passage. Whats the passage saying? DB was bad, lots of people have studied it, one guy argues it helped end the middle ages, some other guy said it helped foster prosperity, someone else argued against that, some other guys cahllenged it too, some guy named Twig is wrong. Ok, so the authors talking about the DB, and specifically some different theories about it. No problem.

What happens though when you get the question:

"Which of the following statements is most compatible with Kosminksy's approach to history as it is presented in the passage?"

Easy. Find Kosminsky in your notes. Oh, there he is, in the second paragraph. Ok, now go look back at the second paragraph. Find his name. Read ONE sentence around his name. If you don't see the answer, read TWO sentences. If it's not in either of those sentences, see if his name comes up somewhere else in the passage. The answers to the specific questions become REALLY REALLY EASY if you use this method. Why? The GMAT LOVES to test your ability to remember the impossible.

What are the answer choices for this question?

Quote:

(a) The middle ages were ended primarily by the religious and political upheaval in fourteen century europe
(b) The economic consequences of the BD included increased competition for food, shelter and work.
(c) European history cannot be studied in isolation from that of hte rest of hte world
(d) The number of deaths in the fourtheenth century has been exaggerated
(e) The significance of the black death is best explained within the context of evolving economic systems.


Do you see the GMAT's trap? They do this ALL the time with specific questions like this one. "OOOH OOH I REMEMBER READING ABOUT HOW THE MIDDLE AGES WERE ENDED BY RELIGIOUS UPHEAVAL... ILL PICK THAT." Or, maybe you don't remember that and you pick B becuase IT LOOKS FAMILIAR AND YOU REMEMBER IT. How many names came up in this passage? A half dozen? Evgency, Coulton, Gasquet, Twigg, Shrewsbury! The gmat is trying to trick you to do one of two things - either (A) pick based on what you remember or (B) worse, make you go back and re-read half the Oops passage.

You will do neither of these.

Now, go back and read only two sentences around the word Evgeny Kosminsky. Do you see the answer? There's only one possible answer that even COMES CLOSE. Lets say you have no FRICKING CLUE what the hell Kosminsky is trying to say, even if you HAVE NO Oops CLUE, there's only one option that has a very similar word to those two sentences. "economic" and "economically". How easy did that become?

Now what if they asked you a general question?

Quote:

The passage is primarily concerned with:
A) Demonstrating the relationship with the bubonic plague and the black death
B) Interpreting historical and scientific works on the black death
C) Employing the black death as a case study of disease transmission in medieval Europe
D) Presenting aspects of past and current debate on teh historical importance of the black death
e) Analyzing differences between capitalist and marxist interpretations of the historical signficance of the black death


No !@(*!(#@ problem. Remember how you broke down the passage in to a few sentences? What did it say? Did you write bubonic plague anywhere? No, not in any of your key sentences. Eliminate A. Is there any mention of case studies anywhere? No not really, so eliminate C. Did you write down anything about capitalists? No, eliminate E. Ok, so you are down to B and D. Look back at your sentences - is the author interpreting things for you or just telling you that there are different views? In other words, is he interpreting or presenting? He's presenting. Answer is D.

Did you get both these questions right? Hopefully you did. Did you notice how you never actually read the !@(#!(@ passage?. Cool eh?

I really hope that made some sense. In my mind, this is the fullproof way of DESTROYING the RC on the GMAT. You can obliterate it if you take the time to do this stuff. Oh and don't forget, its much faster to read twelve sentences than to read 70.

Someone pointed out a stickied verbal thread called "USeful verbal documents" or something like that. In there, it says this about RC:

Quote:

Try to read the whole text of the passage once, if possible. Many people think you should just skim the passage or read the first lines of every paragraph, and not to read the passage. We believe this is an error: if you misunderstand the main idea of the passage, you will certainly get at least some of the questions wrong. Give the passage one good read, taking no more than 3 minutes to read all of the text. Do not read the passage more than once – that wastes too much time. If you have not understood it completely, try to answer the questions anyway.


A few comments. First, I'm not advocating you skim the passage. I'm advocating you read the entire first paragraph and the first sentence of each subsequent one, and then skim. What I find shocking in the advice above are two things:

1) "If you don't the main idea of the passage you will certainly get at least some of the questions wrong."

Not necessarily. This is only true if you get a bunch of general questions, but you are EQUALLY likely to get a bunch of specific questions - where your understanding of the whole passage is not important.

2) "Do not read the passage more than once – that wastes too much time. If you have not understood it completely, try to answer the questions anyway."

Good Lord. Who came up with this strategy? Read the whole thing once, if you don't understand it, try anyway! You want to talk about a sure fire way of NOT getting things right? Think about it... the whole POINT of RC is to test your ability to retain information, the whole POINT of the questions is to try and force you to go back multiple times and re-read sections again and again. According to the strategy posted in the word doc in that thread, you should just read it once and then "do your best"? Sorry, but this has got to be some of the worst advice I could imagine.

Reading the whole passage once will do a few things:

(1) It will take more time than my method, AND you won't have any notes at the end!
(2) You will GUARANTEE confusion. There is a reason the GMAT picks dry scientific passages and not passages from some Tom Clancy novel. (Even though those suck too). It's because they are PACKED with information, often TERTIARY information - it's meant to be hard to digest this stuff. On top of it, they suggest 3 minutes to read AND understand the text?

The advice they give sounds familiar. It sounds like Kaplan. Read the whole thing! Then take notes! Then answer questions! HAY GUYZ, ITS 75 MINUTES YOU KNOW? It's crazy advice.

Theres one more thing I want to say about RC.

You know those questions about "The author infers....." or "It can be inferred...." ?

I'm going to try and find an example of this tonight if I can, but when they say that, they really DONT want you to infer much. They really just want you to find what the author said. I can't explain this very well without an example, but I will look for one. If anyone knows of one in the book somewhere, just PM me it or give me a page/probl # or post it here.

No, thats not what I'm saying - I think you the issue is how you understand skimming.... . I'm saying PARAPHRASE THE FIRST PARAGRAPH and THE FIRST SENTENCE OF EACH PARAGRAPH. Thats it. Not the entire passage. DON'T EVEN READ the other paragraphs, just skim and write down names or dates in case they come up in the exam. If you are good at skimming text to look for names - you can do what I do, dont even bother skimming the paragraphs. Just read the first paragraph and the first sentence of each paragraph.


By skim, all I mean is GLANCE. I don't read sentences.

For example: (dont read it yet, read my notes first, then try it)

If the second paragraph said:

"Though the basic concept of the strip is straightforward, Herriman always found ways to tweak the formula. Sometimes, Ignatz's plans to surreptitiously lob a brick at Krazy's head succeed; other times Officer Pupp outsmarts the wily mouse and imprisons him. The interventions of Coconino County's other anthropomorphic animal residents, and even forces of nature, occasionally change the dynamic in unexpected ways. Other strips have Krazy's simple-minded or gnomic pronouncements irritating the mouse so much that he goes to seek out a brick in the final panel."

Paraphrase first sentence: (I'll time myself)

"Strip straightforward, but author found ways to tweak. "

That took me about 20 seconds.

NOW, DO NOT READ THE REST OF THE PARAGRAPH. GLANCE OVER IT, JUST LOOKING FOR KEY WORDS. NAMES, DATES, THINGS OF THE SORT. (I'll explain why in a minute)

All I would write is: (I'll time myself again)

Herriman, Ignatz, Krazy, Officer Pupp, mouse, Coconino, residents, Krazy.

I did that in about 15 seconds. . I know that sounds crazy, but try it - just glance over it looking for names, dates, or otherwise things that might appear important - anything in capital letters for example. This includes scientific names. So if you see something like "proto-plasmic neurons" in the middle of a passage, scribble it down.

I haven't read the above paragraph, and to be honest I have no idea what it says.

In order to understand why this works you have to understand the two types of RC questions that come up.

Type 1 is general. These are questions that ask things like "The author is most concerned with" or "the primary purpose of hte passage is" or "the author would most agree with..."

IN ORDER TO ANSWER THESE YOU ONLY NEED TO KNOW THE GENERAL POINT OF THE PASSAGE. THIS POINT IS ALWAYS MADE DURING THE FIRST PARAGRAPH AND TOPIC SENTENCES (FIRST SENTENCE) OF EACH SUBSEQUENT PARAGRAPH. THATS IT. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE DETAILS BEHIND THE GENERAL POINT. IN FACT, USUALLY, KNOWING THESE DETAILS THROWS YOU OFF BECAUSE YOU'LL SEE AN ANSWER THAT LOOKS REALLY SIMILAR TO SOMETHING YOU JUST READ.

Thats type 1. Type 2 is the SPECIFIC QUESTION. These are things like "Dr. Neilsen agrees that ...." or "In 1914, the primary differences between colonial europe and the americas were... " or "The author states what about proto plasmic neurons?"

In every single case, these questions will boil down to a sentence, or at most two sentences, SOMEWHERE in the passage.... thats it. So, if you scribbled down key words, it should take you a few seconds to figure out what paragraph the answer is in and another few seconds to read the setnence it's in. The answer is always there - plus or minus one sentence.

The key to understanding this methodology is: you are not trying to understand the passage. You only need understand the first paragraph, and first sentence of each piece.

We'll do one more together.

I'll time myself and try to write down details of what I read and did not read.

It's attached at the bottom.

First paragraph:
Time taken to read and take notes: 1 minute 20 seconds

My notes: Solar ponds circulation incomplete + high salt concentration that increase w/ depth. This traps heat. Low water traps heat, higher water insulate. Heat thus retained at depth.

Second paragraph:
Time taken to read first sentence and paraphrase: 27 seconds.

My notes: Artificial pond made in dead sea to test its ability to convert heat to electricity.

Second paragraph SKIMMING:
Time taken to SKIM and write down key words: 17 seconds.

My notes: water. solar ponds, chemicals, penetration, algae

(NOTE how quickly that was done. SKIM SKIM SKIM)

Third paragraph:
Time taken to read first sentence and paraphrase: 9 seconds.

My notes: Algicide proposed to control algea.

Third paragraph SKIMMING: 16 seconds.
My Notes: Dead sea, chemcials, lucrative, tourist, contaminated.

Fourth paragraph first sentence: 15 seconds.
My notes: Recent exp more promising for controlling algea

Fourth paragraph skim: 24 seconds.
My notes: repress, distortion, bouyancy, storage layer, destroyed , evaporation, diluted, algea.

Total time taken: 3 MINUTES 20 SECONDS

Thats pretty decent, maybe even a bit slow - but notice how quickly I ate up the remaining paragraphs. I skimmed paragraphs 3 and 4 in under a minute....

Its not about READING the paragraphs. Just skimming. You may have noticed that my skim notes are out of order - words that come later are first... the reason this is the case is because I let my eyes see a word, write it down, if it then sees another word that I didnt see, even if its before, i write it down. I know that finding the word again will take me a few seconds - if you can write them in order, all the better. I found that I can be much faster if I just glance and write - even if its out of order.
How did I do it so fast? I have not read a single sentence (other than the first sentence) in paragraph 2,3 or 4. I have no idea what details are in there - but I do know what they generally talk about BECAUSE I WROTE DOWN THE FIRST SENTENCE, WHICH ALWAYS INTRODUCES THE PARAGRAPH'S TOPIC. That's all I need to know to answer a question like:

"What is the author primarily concerned with?"

Well, without even looking at answer choices, I know he's primarily concerned with salt water ponds and their suitability to generate electricity.

I know this because he introduces them in the first paragraph, mentions an expirement in #2, cites a possible solution to some problem in #3, and then says theres a better solution in paragraph #4. I know all this just by reading hte first setnence of each paragraph. I do NOT know WHY or WHAT the better solution is - but if I get asked, I know where to look. (It'll be somewhere in paragraph #4)

QUESTION: The primary purpose of the passage is to:

(a) discuss ways of solving a problem that threatens to limit the usefullness of an energy source.
(b) explain the mechanisms by which solar heat may be converted into energy
(c) detail the processes by which algae colonize highly saline bodies of water
(d) report the results of an experiment designed to clean contaminated bodies of water
(e) describe the unique properties of solar ponds in the dead sea.

Can you see which one it is?
Look again at the first sentences and the first paragraph.

(1) Solar ponds retain heat
(2) Artificial pond made in dead sea to test its ability to convert heat to electricity.
(3) Algicide proposed to control algea.
(4) Recent exp more promising for controlling algea

What story is this telling? There are some ponds, there's one in the dead sea, theres some problem with it, algicide is one solution, but there is a better one. Look again at the answer choices.

Do you see it?

(b) explain the mechanisms by which solar heat may be converted into energy ------- Well no, that doesnt really jibe with the topic sentences... He mentions it, but the topic sentences aren't describing a mechanism, they decribe a problem.

(c) detail the processes by which algae colonize highly saline bodies of water ---- No, again, theres not much discussion of processes in the topic sentences. The guys talking about a problem.

(d) report the results of an experiment designed to clean contaminated bodies of water --- Possibly, but this is really only part of the passage probably. I dont know for sure, because I haven't read it, but again if you look back at the notes, he's not so much reporting as much as suggesting something.

(e) describe the unique properties of solar ponds in the dead sea. - Well, definetly not. For starters, i dont remember it saying solar ponds in the dead sea were the only ones that existed, plus, again, the word Dead Sea doesnt come up much in the topic sentences.

(a) discuss ways of solving a problem that threatens to limit the usefullness of an energy source. - Hmm ok, that makes sense. There is a pond, there is an experiment to check it as an energy source, there are some solutions to that problem, but one solution is better. Yea, thats exactly what he's saying.

Now say you got a specific question:

"According to the passage, the growth of algae was considered a threat to the sucess of the artificial pond near the dead sea beacuse the algae..."

(a) produce excess oxygen that lowers water temperature
(b) restrict the circulation of the pond
(c) enable heat to escape through the upper level of the pound
(d) prevent light from penetrating to the lowest level of hte pond
(e) prevent accurate measurement of the heat collected in the pond.

How do you solve this given that YOU HAVENT EVEN READ THE PASSAGE?

Just find where Algae and Dead sea come up. Dead sea comes up first in the second paragraph - we know this because I wrote it in my SKIM NOTES for the second passage.

Did the word algae come up?

Lets go look at what I wrote as my SKIM notes for paragraph two.

My notes: water. solar ponds, chemicals, penetration, algae

Yea, there it is. If your notes are lucky, you might notice that I wrote down the words algae and penetration... gives you a pretty huge hint what it might be, but thats kind of dumb luck... so lets pretend I didnt write that down.

How do we find the answer?

Find the sentence with algae in the second paragraph, because that's where we first saw Dead Sea.

"An immediate threat to the sucess of the venture was the growth of algae".

Ok, that doesnt give us the answer, what about the sentence right next to it.

"Water in solar ponds must be kept maximally transparent to allow penetration of light to the deep storage area."

Ok, look back at the answer choices.

The answer should jump out at you now. It's D.

It's not A because theres NO MENTION of oxygen.
Its not B becuase theres NO MENTION of circulation.
It's not C becuase theres NO MENTION of heat
Its not E because theres NO MENTION of measurement.

The only answer that even has words that match words in that sentence is D.

Now how much did you read to answer that? TWO SENTENCES.

How long did it take you to find them? 10, maybe 20 seconds. Tops. 20 more seconds to read them. You've answered the question in under a minute.

How long do you think it would have taken to find that answer otherwise? I mean, all the other options SOUND reasonable right? Circulation was mentioned in paragraph 1, heat definetly came up somehwere, and there might even be a mention of oxygen somewhere I missed.

the point is this:

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO READ THE PARAGRAPHS TO GET THESE RIGHT. ONLY READ THE FIRST PARAGRAPH AND FIRST SENTENCE. SKIM THE REST. AND BY SKIM, I MEAN 20 SECONDS, KEY WORDS, DONT EVEN READ THE SENTENCES, JUST WRITE DOWN SCRIBBLES.

With time, you can get really really fast at it.