4,620
edits
SAT Reading section techniques, strategies & approaches: Difference between revisions
SAT Reading section techniques, strategies & approaches (view source)
Revision as of 14:56, 7 April 2022
, 7 April 2022→“Command of evidence” “paired” questions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 273: | Line 273: | ||
** note that the 2nd question frequently appears on the next page, so when you preview questions mark the 1st question to remind you to look at the 2nd first | ** note that the 2nd question frequently appears on the next page, so when you preview questions mark the 1st question to remind you to look at the 2nd first | ||
* there are two approaches to paired questions: | * there are two approaches to paired questions: | ||
# '''Strategy 1''': assess and test out the evidence in the second question first | |||
* | #* start by converting the question in the first question into a statement so as to clarify what evidence to look for | ||
** as you read through the possible sources of evidence, | #** as you read through the possible sources of evidence, repeat the statement from the 1st question so as to stay focused on the question: | ||
** | #*** that is, “what am I looking for?" | ||
** the evidence must be in the identified lines | #*** do not look at the possible answers in the first question, which will may confuse you | ||
** do not use evidence before or after those lines! | #** the evidence must be in the identified lines | ||
*** the only exception is if the evidence source contains a pronoun reference from a prior or subsequent line which may define its accuracy | #** do not use evidence before or after those lines! | ||
** once you find the evidence from the 2nd question, now repeat that evidence to yourself while you eliminate the possible answers from the 1st question | #*** the only exception is if the evidence source contains a pronoun reference from a prior or subsequent line which may define its accuracy | ||
#* eliminate any evidence lines that DO NOT ADDRESS the prior question itself | |||
#** this way you don't have to waste time testing a wrong answer and risk getting fooled by the wrong answer mis-match that the questions are designed to fool you with | |||
#** the strategy will usually help to eliminate 1-2 (sometimes 3) possible evidence sources, so it saves time | |||
#** it may not work on all paired evidence questions, however | |||
#*** especially ones in which the 1st question is open-ended | |||
#**** (thus leaving us no information with which to eliminate the evidence). | |||
#* once you find the evidence from the 2nd question, now repeat that evidence to yourself while you eliminate the possible answers from the 1st question | |||
#* if you cannot eliminate down to one source of evidence in the 2nd question, test each possible source directly against the possible answers | |||
# '''Strategy 2''' (recommended by College Board): answer the first question first, then test the possible evidence from the second question | |||
#* you must be confident of the answer here (use aggressive elimination) | |||
* see what works for you: only practice will yield best strategies here | * see what works for you: only practice will yield best strategies here | ||
* we recommend Strategy no. 1 | * we recommend Strategy no. 1 | ||
click EXPAND to see an example of Strategy no. 1 applied to College Board Practice Test 10, Reading section, questions 27-27 | |||
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"> | |||
<pre>Q 26) Which conclusion is best supported by the findings of Olausson's 1993 experiment? | |||
Q 27) | |||
A) lines 22-26 | |||
B) lines 26-28 | |||
C) Lines 28-30 | |||
D) Lines 37-38</pre> | |||
# test if the evidence matches the question itself from 26 | |||
#* here we see in the text that Q27 evidence lines A, B, & C do address the 1993 experiment, so we cannot eliminate yet | |||
#* we do see that Q27 evidence D) lines 37-38 do not regard the 1993 experiment (it regards a 1999 experiment), so we eliminate D) | |||
#* now we read the evidence lines 22-30 more closely | |||
#** Q27 A) Lines 22-26 describe the techniques of the experiment but do not offer a "conclusion" to draw from it | |||
#*** so we eliminate A) without even testing out the possible answers to Q 26. | |||
#* Now we consider B & C, lines 26-30, and decide which of those two support Q 26 and "a conclusion" from the 1993 experiment. | |||
#** since both do address the 1993 experiment and we might be able to draw a "conclusion" from them, we have to test them against the possible answers to Q26 | |||
#* write B) and C) on either side of Q26 and eliminate separately | |||
#** we then see that the Q27 C) does not support any of the possible answers | |||
#** and Q27 B) does not support 3 possible answers, but it does support the correct answer Q26 C). | |||
</div> | |||
=== “Command of evidence” without a paired "evidence" question === | === “Command of evidence” without a paired "evidence" question === | ||
* usually to find evidence for an excerpt: | * usually to find evidence for an excerpt: | ||