Verbal Reasoning Tips & Strategies

[SN2ed]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Here are a few threads and posts that may help you with VR:

Vihsadas: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=6022602&postcount=96

QofQuimica: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=223930

BloodySurgeon's Verbal Guide: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=509702


ONLY POST TIPS OR STRATEGIES. ALL OTHER POSTS WILL BE DELETED.

 

[ModernAlchemist]

The best part about this thread is that all of these guides have been featured on the Official Guide here on SDN for years, but this thread is necessary because people continue to post threads and SN2ed always has to post the same responses.

Here is another verbal guide that I've seen on here that has helped people:

"Mike's Verbal guide"

It's old, but I've heard people even recently say that their scores have improved significantly with this advice. It's good to try a few and see what works best for you.

Also, if this is a verbal guide, here are some common answers to some common questions:

*ExamKrackers 101 Verbal Passages, The Princeton Review Hyperlearning Verbal Workbook, and The AAMC Official Guide to the MCAT are what are considered the most representative of the real MCAT besides the AAMC CBT practice full length tests.
*No, don't get the Verbal Mastery book.
*No, there isn't a trick that works for everyone. That's why there are people who use Kaplan, Princeton Review, ExamKrackers, SDN, and even no verbal strategies and still end up getting 13+.
*If you're about to ask a question about verbal, check the above guides first. If it's not on there, do a search. If it's STILL not there, I'm sure that's what this thread is for.

Good luck, everyone! Thank you for making a stickied thread for this SN2ed! I'm sure people will post some new strategies on here that will end up saving people when it comes to their method.

Oh and I mirror ridethecliche's opinion. You've been my hero from the first time I read your 3 month schedule thread 🙂.

 

[SN2ed]

Yeah I think this thread will become a good source for verbal strategies. Hopefully people will actually READ it unlike the MCAT Guide sticky that says read before posting and had these verbal strategy threads in it already...

And thanks for the appreciation 🙂


An important note, while the AAMC FLs are the most representative of the current MCAT's VR, do NOT take them until you're ready to take the WHOLE FL.

 

[dougkaye]

These are all great posts. I would encourage folks that want to really improve on verbal to do several untimed tests (1 or 2) before doing the timed versions. I jumped right into strict timed tests and was basically wasting test material (EK 101) because I hadn't practiced applying a good strategy under less harsh timing, and then analyzing the strategy, honing it, etc. After doing 9 full 60-min tests, I'm stopping and focusing more on strategy. Wish I had know that before -- there is such an emphasis on doing everything timed, which is good once you get rolling but I think can be counterproductive in the beginning. Good luck all!

 

[tttgo]

Here's Mike's original thread with more comments. I haven't tried it, but it does seem a little unorthodox. might or might not work for you.
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=39366

 

[Cinclus]

I find that the more interested I can make myself in the passages, the more insight I tend to have. I look back at the passage less when answering questions, too. I just took EK 101 Test #7, and reading with as much interest as possible, I finished with 10 minutes to spare, was able to go back and check my iffy answers, and ended up with a respectable 12. To make myself interested, I imagine that the info in the passage will somehow prove very useful to me in the future.

 

[Futuredoctors]

I thought I should share my opinion on the matter.

To get better in verbal:

1. YOU CAN IMPROVE your verbal beyond a 9/10 if you have enough time and are willing to work for it.

Well, what should you work for you ask...

2a) Read, read, read, read, read, read, and read some more. Everything from literatary criticism to metaphysics to philosophy of religion. In my opinion there is no point reading things like the New Yorker or Economist. The language and degree of complexity in those journal are moderate at best. On the other hand, books on metaphysics for example are complex and difficult to read.

b) Improve your vocabulary (I would suggest that you review all your SAT vocabs).

c) MOST MOST MOST important. LOGIC!!!!!

i) Strawman's fallacy...to distort/to make something extreme (i.e chocolate is ALWAYS bad WITHOUT exception)
ii) Red herring...irrelevant premise (i.e. Capital punishment should be allowed because murder is immoral. The fact that murder is immoral has NOTHING to do with the posited conclusion WITHOUT OTHER ASSUMPTIONS...SEE IV)
iii) Denying the antecedent (formally, if p then q, if not p then not q. For example, if you receive chemtherapy, then you will most likely recover. It does not follow that if you DON'T receive chemotherapy, then you will NOT recover)


For example, to see the above three fallacies in action. See the short paragraph I wrote up.

"Science is merely a manifestation of the dominating utilitarianism nowadays. Therefore, scientific theories propounded will soon be replaced by philosophical quests attempting to discover overarching epistemological truth."

Strawman: You CANNOT infer that theory of ultimate truths are BETTER than theories which focus on usefulness. (all I wrote above is that one will REPLACE the other).

Red herring: The statement "men of science argue that science goes beyond merely serving the needs of human" DOES NOT weaken the above statement. Just because men of science say that DOES NOT falsify the premise (this by the way is know as an Appeal to General Beliefs)

Denying the antecedent: If science can strip itself of the overarching utilitarian principles, then science will not be replaced. This is a FALLACIOUS argument. For starters, we are denying the antecedent here. Secondly, even if science strips itself of utilitarianism it does not mean that it will become a theory that seeks the ultimate truth (Another fallacy known as False dilemma...i.e only offering two possibilities to a scenario)


Good luck 🙂

 

[ridethecliche]

Quality practice over quantity practice.

Expecting improvement over a week is impractical. Expecting it over 2-3 months is not as long as you're doing things in a way that work for you.

As always, it's harder to get up from a 10-->12 than it is from a 6-->8.

 

[Futuredoctors]

Hi Guys, On my first MCAT I scored a 38 (14, 10, 14) R. The only reason that I didn't get a 40+ was because of my verbal. I have therefore since last October committed to significantly improving my verbal skills.

On some recent practice tests I have scored as high as 13s. Based on my experience, I hope to give you guys some tip


So more on verbal prep. Guys please let me know about your opinion on it. I have gathered the below from personal experience.

For verbal reasoning TESTS (not logic/outside reading I mentioned in the previous post) in particular,

1. Author's opinion, opinion, and opinion. Of course the main thesis is important, but also anytime the author gives his opinion (i.e this approach is works "surprisingly" well. It is very "heart-warming" that blah blah blah blah).

2. Main thesis

3. Whatever that is extreme/signifies ranking/definition
-This approach is BETTER than the other
-This is the "essence" of verbal reasoning
-The "key" to singing is to blah blah blah
-This is the "worst" scenario that can happen to someone

4. Inferences. What the author said, what the author DID NOT say.

---
One more issue:

Memory!! (I can't stress how important this is).

I know that a lot of you (including me several months ago) can't remember details. Basically once you finish reading you forget a lot of things except maybe the main idea stated in a very vague way. You therefore need to refer back to the passage every single question.

I was like that before. Now just reading through the passage once (perhaps a bit slower...in 3:30 minutes or so), I can recall literally all important details and know where they are. I know refer back to the question if I want to double check my answer or my memory.

The way to do this (for me anyways) was to develop an acute sense of VISUAL memory. For instance, if the author talks about civilization is the cause of discontent, I will have a image made up of a bunch of buildings, an arrow, and an unhappy person. For difference images you try to order them in a place that you are familiar with (for my, my home). I was taught this method by my first year psychology professor, but never thought about it until this January.

Initially you will read very very slow as you need to think about what images should correspond to what (maybe 50-100 words a minute) This is OK!! Over the past four months this process has become almost second nature to me. For very difficult books on psychoanalysis/metaphysics/literary criticism for example, I can read at least at 150 words a minute. For pretty much all MCAT level passages on EK, 200-250 words/minute.

Good Reading!!

 

[epsilonprodigy]

For anyone struggling with hitting a verbal score "ceiling," I may have a few tips that will help.

Most importantly, you must, must MUST categorize your errors. In the sciences, you know if you have trouble with math or trouble with technical passages, so when you see such things, you know to be on the lookout. So why should verbal be any different? Maybe you "hate Roman numeral questions." Why? Do you tend to make faulty inclusions or faulty exclusions? How are you at extracting details? How are you at establishing the general structure, timeline and progression of the passage?

When I analyze my verbal tests, I have broken skill types down into categories. If I make a mistake, I usually chalk it up to one of the following:

• Faulty inclusion/exclusion- mostly specific to Roman numeral questions. Missing these is usually a matter of assuming something that requires an extrapolation of information, or being too concrete in your thinking and therefore excluding something that was implied but not stated. Know which side you tend toward- are you an includer or an excluder?
• Incorrect detail-pulling/quote pulling- the test writers will try to trick you by trying to make you associate a reference made in the question stem with an unrelated example from the passage. For me, good highlighting is the key to avoiding this type of mistake. Predict which expressions, names, dates, and anecdotes will likely show up in the questions as you read the passage, and highlight accordingly. Also, special attention to names will help you avoid associating the wrong quote with the wrong person. This can especially be a problem if two mentioned "experts" have similar opinions on something
• Incorrect characterization of cause/effect relationships- If A is often associated with B, and B is known to cause C, does A cause C? What's the surrounding evidence? What does the author think about any stated or implied correlations? Most importantly, is there evidence stated to back up the relationship one way or the other? Two things help me out with these types of questions most: 1) actively recognize when you are reading support or evidence for a claim, and make a mental note of WHERE it is in the passage. 2) Ask yourself, does it depend on any particular assumption? 3) Highlight, or at least make note of, any superlatives. According to the author, what is "the most significant contributor," "the worst thing Mr. So-and-so did," or the "most shocking example of blah blah blah." Also, be aware of turning points. If you see a phrase like "paradigm shift," "revolutionary," etc., be on the lookout for a cause for the stated change.
• Vague or incorrect characterization of author- this is closely tied in with identification of the main idea. Highlighting "opinion words," i.e. words that aren't necessary but convey certain feelings, will help you decide what the author thinks. General absence of these might mean the author isn't trying to persuade anyone but rather just inform or discuss.
• Vague or incorrect definition of "X"- Many times, verbal passages lop off the introduction and just start referring to a person, idea or object that is never explicitly defined. Again, be on the lookout for words that are meant to make you feel one way or the other. For example, if the author starts referring to the self-serving and greedy behavior of Bob, and goes on to talk about how Bob is primarily interested in protecting his wealth at the expense of others, what action of Bob's would the author be most surprised by? What kind of guy is Bob most likely to be? What is generally implied about Bob, and what does the author think about it?
• Structure/mapping/progression issues- Try to have a general awareness about where things are in the passage. As you're reading, say to yourself, "OK, now I'm reading about the beginning of Era X." "Now, I'm reading about what happened after the beginning. Now I'm reading about what changed." "Now, I'm reading about what the critics say." This will help you if you ever have to answer a question about the general structure, and often helps in identifying main ideas as well.
• Ear-pleasers- We all know that answer choices containing superlatives and extreme generalizations are usually wrong. But there's something ingrained in our heads about "non-PC" answers that don't sound "nice enough" or "open-minded enough." Sometimes I have found that I'll choose the watered-down version of what the passage actually stated, because the other (correct) answer choice isn't consistent with my notion of what's usually said in polite and professional society. Ask yourself, is the author being professional, polite or PC? Or are they downright pissed?

Feel free to add... this technique has been really helpful for me in identifying the trends and general pathology of my verbal errors. Hope it helps somebody!

 

[Futuredoctors]

I post on this forum to help you guys with verbal. My decisions to retake is irrelevant in this discussion.

As for one of the above replies on visual memory. For instance, take this famous quotation from Freud's Civilization and Discontents.

"...admittedly an unusual state, but not one that can be stigmatized as pathological ... At the height of being in love the boundary between ego and object threatens to melt away. Against all the evidence of his senses, a man who is in love declares that 'I' and 'you' are one, and is prepared to behave as if it were a fact."

1) Understand (of course) what the paragraph is saying
2) Change the written information to a visual one. In much the same way if I describe to you a beautiful sunset you would automatically imagine what I am saying.
3) Compartmentalize the image you created in a place you know really well (for instance, your house).
4) Move on to the next paragraph and repeat above steps.

Eventually you should be able to do 1 and 2 SIMULTANEOUSLY. You won't have time on the real MCAT to do step 1 and 2 separately. This has to come automatically to you even in a fairly difficult passage as above.

 

[Futuredoctors]

Also, I thoroughly agree with the one of the posts above regarding the importance of categorizing errors. For me, there are only 5 types of possible errors.

1) Irrelevancy
-The answers don't even deal with the question
-The answers don't satisfy one or more of the conditions of the question

2) Opposite
-Well simply opposite to the passage propositions. This is very easy to detect unless you don't understand the passage to begin with

3) Extremes
-I.e using words such as always, never, prove, refute, decry...etc
-Answers that an educated person would never say (i.e prisoners are better suited for mandatory labour.... even without reading the passage you should eliminate that answer)

4) Vagueness
-You NEVER EVER pick an answer that is vague. Vagueness is a topic treated extensively in most intro philosophy (logic) textbook. Take a look

5) Distortion
-Strawman fallacy. This is probably the hardest error to detect and improve upon (at least for me). Essentially you are distorting the author's argument. The best way to attack distortion is by thinking about the possibility of invalidating a necessary assumption (check out what this term means in your philosophy textbook).

 

[SN2ed]

Only post tips or strategies. All other posts will be deleted.

 

[epsilonprodigy]

I just had a bit of a "eureka" moment on a practice test. My VR scores in the past week have been 10-11, which was a little to close to the brink for comfort, especially since my test is next week!

So I put my foot down and said, this has GOT to go somewhere. I realized that while I rarely have timing issues on verbal, going back to marked questions is largely unproductive: I bounce back and forth, and much of the time (about half) the changes I do make are wrong.

This time, I paused while I read and mentally identified the purpose and function of each paragraph. As in, exactly what was that paragraph doing there? This really helped me see the larger picture, as one big problem I have is failing to see situation A in the context of situation B, i.e. "missing the forest for the trees." It really helped... ended up with a 14 this time! Hope I can reproduce it on test day.......

 

[artsciencelove]

I was getting 9-10 consistently on my practice exams, and my scores were going nowhere. I kept trying different strategies recommended by others that were having no effect.

Then I started approaching the passages differently. First I glance at the questions and identify any proper names, dates, unusual words, etc., so they will pop out at me when I read the passage. Then I imagine I have been handed the passage and tasked with re-writing it in a way a high schooler can understand. I don't actually write anything, but as I read, I think about how I would rephrase each paragraph to make it understandable to a young student.

At the end of the passage, I mentally answer the question "what is the main point". I don't write anything at all while doing VR.

Then I attack the questions. For me, the most important thing is trying to answer the questions BEFORE looking at the answer choices. Some of the wrong answers seem good and will make you start trying to justify them in your mind.

Doing this simple stuff immediately boosted my scores to the 13-15 range. Quite a relief going into the MCAT in 2 weeks. I just thought I would post my strategy here in case it helps anyone.

 

[KMCAT]

I find this to be helpful - I know that it's very, very old but it seems to work for me.

• Mike's Verbal guide: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...l-a-guide-for-those-who-care-to-listen.39366/