Thinking like the MCAT writers (verbal)

[ifonlyifonly]

---

Members don't see this ad.

So I'm having problems with verbal, and I've done lots of practice and stuff but I just can't seem to think in the right way. After I go over an explanation it makes sense, but when I'm doing it I can never get the right answer.

I've read around here that you should "think" like the MCAT writers, but could someone explain this? What do they want? What should I look out for? I've read the official guide too, but I just don't seem to understand what they want.

Thanks 🙂

 

[mehc012]

So I'm having problems with verbal, and I've done lots of practice and stuff but I just can't seem to think in the right way. After I go over an explanation it makes sense, but when I'm doing it I can never get the right answer.

I've read around here that you should "think" like the MCAT writers, but could someone explain this? What do they want? What should I look out for? I've read the official guide too, but I just don't seem to understand what they want.

Thanks 🙂

The biggest problem I've seen people have with the Verbal is that, when reviewing problems they missed, they cling to the fact that they COULD be right, in a certain interpretation.

👎

NO. Do you want to be right, or do you want a high score?
When reviewing your missed questions, do it with the mentality that YOU WERE WRONG. Because you were. Yeah sure, maybe with a different interpretation your answer would be acceptable...but that's quite frankly irrelevant.

For each wrong answer, you need to understand not only why the given answer was right, but also why your answer was wrong. This means saying "I interpreted it that way, but they wanted it this way, here's why my way was wrong"...eventually you will build up an idea of how the test generally wants you to interpret things. What you CANNOT do, and what too many people do, is dismiss those answers as "oh, I just interpreted it differently than they wanted." No, you interpreted it WRONG, because even though those two statements are functionally equivalent, one lets you excuse yourself and dismiss the problem, and the other kicks your brain into gear.

Get comfortable with being wrong...it's the only way you'll start getting the answers right!

 

[SN12357]

The biggest problem I've seen people have with the Verbal is that, when reviewing problems they missed, they cling to the fact that they COULD be right, in a certain interpretation.

👎

NO. Do you want to be right, or do you want a high score?
When reviewing your missed questions, do it with the mentality that YOU WERE WRONG. Because you were. Yeah sure, maybe with a different interpretation your answer would be acceptable...but that's quite frankly irrelevant.

For each wrong answer, you need to understand not only why the given answer was right, but also why your answer was wrong. This means saying "I interpreted it that way, but they wanted it this way, here's why my way was wrong"...eventually you will build up an idea of how the test generally wants you to interpret things. What you CANNOT do, and what too many people do, is dismiss those answers as "oh, I just interpreted it differently than they wanted." No, you interpreted it WRONG, because even though those two statements are functionally equivalent, one lets you excuse yourself and dismiss the problem, and the other kicks your brain into gear.

Get comfortable with being wrong...it's the only way you'll start getting the answers right!

This is very true, with the caveat that there ARE a very small handful of questions where even the highest verbal test-taking savant could not have reliably picked the right answer due to there legitimately being multiple interpretations.

However this factor doesn't kick in until you're reliably scoring 12+, and therefore doesn't matter for most test-takers. Understand why you're not answering correctly. Put aside your own opinion and concentrate only on the theoretical opinion of the author of the passage and the MCAT test-writer.

 

[mehc012]

This is very true, with the caveat that there ARE a very small handful of questions where even the highest verbal test-taking savant could not have reliably picked the right answer due to there legitimately being multiple interpretations.

However this factor doesn't kick in until you're reliably scoring 12+, and therefore doesn't matter for most test-takers. Understand why you're not answering correctly. Put aside your own opinion and concentrate only on the theoretical opinion of the author of the passage and the MCAT test-writer.

I would still argue that when reviewing, you ought to focus on the interpretation you were supposed to get, regardless of how fine the distinction is...the fact that some questions are vaguer than others doesn't change the strategy!

 

[Gauss44]

So I'm having problems with verbal, and I've done lots of practice and stuff but I just can't seem to think in the right way. After I go over an explanation it makes sense, but when I'm doing it I can never get the right answer.

I've read around here that you should "think" like the MCAT writers, but could someone explain this? What do they want? What should I look out for? I've read the official guide too, but I just don't seem to understand what they want.

Thanks 🙂

"Think like the test writers" or "think like someone else" is easier said than done. It's about perception. Anyone remember this? Here: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/YoungGirl-OldWomanIllusion.html

In verbal reasoning passages a lot of the time there is an interpretation other than the test makers, to a good portion of the passage, that also makes perfect sense. It would be great if you could wave a magic wand to see another's perspective.

Since you can't, the best advice I've heard is pause after each paragraph and ask yourself why the author included, paragraph 1, paragraph 2, etc. Most of the time, the overall thrust* of the passage will clue you in to the correct interpretation of ambiguous areas of the passage.

A perception that is "obvious" to one person, is often times invisible or nearly impossible for another person to see. It doesn't mean that someone is "trying to be right" if s/he doesn't get it after many explanations.

*"Overall thrust" would be like what most of the information in the passage supports, why the author included most of the information in the passage, or the purpose of the passage.

 

[mehc012]

"Think like the test writers" or "think like someone else" is easier said than done. It's about perception. Anyone remember this? Here: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/YoungGirl-OldWomanIllusion.html

In verbal reasoning passages a lot of the time there is an interpretation other than the test makers, to a good portion of the passage, that also makes perfect sense. It would be great if you could wave a magic wand to see another's perspective.

Since you can't, the best advice I've heard is pause after each paragraph and ask yourself why the author included, paragraph 1, paragraph 2, etc. Most of the time, the overall thrust* of the passage will clue you in to the correct interpretation of ambiguous areas of the passage.

A perception that is "obvious" to one person, is often times invisible or nearly impossible for another person to see. It doesn't mean that someone is "trying to be right" if s/he doesn't get it after many explanations.

*"Overall thrust" would be like what most of the information in the passage supports, why the author included most of the information in the passage, or the purpose of the passage.

I'm not talking about people not getting it. I'm talking about when people review their practice sections and argue about whether or not their interpretation is better than the author's, even though they can see both interpretations. Honestly, I've seen that a LOT more often than people simply not understanding the explanation given. It's very rarely a case of "this answer is inexplicable" and very often a case of "But I thought these details mattered more...mine is equally valid, this is just a bad question."

In the end, it's really ineffective to 'prove' that your interpretation could be considered right, and doing that won't help you understand how to tell what the test-maker was trying to get at.

 

[Gauss44]

I'm not talking about people not getting it. I'm talking about when people review their practice sections and argue about whether or not their interpretation is better than the author's, even though they can see both interpretations. Honestly, I've seen that a LOT more often than people simply not understanding the explanation given. It's very rarely a case of "this answer is inexplicable" and very often a case of "But I thought these details mattered more...mine is equally valid, this is just a bad question."

In the end, it's really ineffective to 'prove' that your interpretation could be considered right, and doing that won't help you understand how to tell what the test-maker was trying to get at.

If someone is arguing the things you outlined, they probably have a different perspective. If you really really don't understand the correct answer, you might genuinely wonder if the answer key is wrong.

And you might have to explain your reasoning for other people to see where you're coming from, and vice versa.

I've been on SDN regularly for about 9 months now and haven't seen anyone who genuinely understands the author's perspective argue against it. I have seen people get, from my perspective and in my opinion, wrongly accused of "trying to be right" in rather harsh ways. I think that people struggling with verbal reasoning should get the benefit of the doubt, especially on verbal reasoning. The people who lack reading skills often also lack writing skills, and cannot express themselves as well, leaving themselves wide open to misunderstandings and mischaracterizations.

This so far leaves out the possibility that there may have been a genuine error in an answer key at some place during some time. There would then be also an incentive for someone who wants to "sound smart" to pretend to agree with the answer key and BS, essentially saying, "I am so smart. I get this. Look at me as I explain." Just saying that motives are unclear from every angle sometimes.

OP: I think what they mean by looking at it from the perspective of the author (I paraphrased), is to read for and look for his or her point of view and what s/he is trying to express. Alternatively, one might make the error of reading for information and gathering facts, rather than focusing on the author's point of view (as you should). I use to struggle with this a lot and I hope this helps you too.

 

[mehc012]

If someone is arguing the things you outlined, they probably have a different perspective. If you really really don't understand the correct answer, you might genuinely wonder if the answer key is wrong.

And you might have to explain your reasoning for other people to see where you're coming from, and vice versa.

I've been on SDN regularly for about 9 months now and haven't seen anyone who genuinely understands the author's perspective argue against it. I have seen people get, from my perspective and in my opinion, wrongly accused of "trying to be right" in rather harsh ways. I think that people struggling with verbal reasoning should get the benefit of the doubt, especially on verbal reasoning. The people who lack reading skills often also lack writing skills, and cannot express themselves as well, leaving themselves wide open to misunderstandings and mischaracterizations.

This so far leaves out the possibility that there may have been a genuine error in an answer key at some place during some time. There would then be also an incentive for someone who wants to "sound smart" to pretend to agree with the answer key and BS, essentially saying, "I am so smart. I get this. Look at me as I explain." Just saying that motives are unclear from every angle sometimes.

OP: I think what they mean by looking at it from the perspective of the author (I paraphrased), is to read for and look for his or her point of view and what s/he is trying to express. Alternatively, one might make the error of reading for information and gathering facts, rather than focusing on the author's point of view (as you should). I use to struggle with this a lot and I hope this helps you too.

Ah. I'm mostly thinking of people I've spoken to in real life, not on SDN. I usually avoid SDN verbal threads with a 10 foot pole because of exactly the problems you describe 😳 Then again, some of my friends have quite a bit of ego, and a hard time letting go once they decide they're right on something. We always had people answer the passage questions w/o discussion first, so that at the end people who got the question right could explain how they got there, without the whole "I'm going to agree with the book because hindsight is easy and I'll sound smart" issue you mentioned.

Actually, that's a good tip for Verbal in general, I think. If you're having trouble, have a friend take the passage blind, and then if they get your incorrect problems right, you can ask them for their thought process!

 

[onedirection]

What that Mehc person said

There is no interpretation in the choices

There is just one right answer and it's based off what is written in the passage. If the choice isn't explained in the passage, it's wrong...At least that's what my SAT CR strategy was, and it's carried over nicely overall