Basic 3-Step Process
1)Read Stimulus: underline Main Conclusion (MC), and Spot the Issue
2)Read Question: guess Correct Answer (CA)
3)Scan answers for CA: Circle And Move On (CAMO)
READING
1)Spend ~3 mins reading. Just get the main stuff, don't stress details. Absorb (i) MP and (ii) Tone (MP and tone questions are standard)
2)Once finish passage, take a moment to note (iii) basic structure. Structure question is frequent, and noting it helps drill in comprehension, active engagement
3)On questions, always attempt same 1-2-3 approach as on Logic (guess CA, Scan, CAMO).
3(a)If cannot guess CA, keep MP extra in mind as scan answers -- scanning for right tonal or subject matter words, do not read each one, stop if answer feels off
More Detail
1(a)Underline MC: as few words as possible. For electronic version, quick highlight of just a few words
1(b)Spot the issue: what jumps out as notable? What seems to be the key. There is some not-explicitly-stated thing you should pick up on, infer, deduce, spot
As a threshhold matter, notice whether MC seems valid or unsupported (ie whether argument seems strong or weak)
2)Most important step. Without a CA guess, (i) you'll often be snared by answers; (ii) without CAMO'ing on most questions -- which requires a CA guess, so you can scan for it -- you'll run out of time
CA guesses should be in simple terms, but specific to the stimulus
E.g., “computers are bad, because they hurt our relationships”
Frame guess in “minimum parameters” (CA will at minimum do this). Specificity you add beyond that (how it will do this) is good, but could be wrong, so keep Minimum in mind
E.g., Minimum: “there is a problem with professionals serving on jury (when case involves their profession); versus Specific (prob right, but not necessarily): ” bad b/c sionals will be biased” (could be another problem)
3)On most questions, you should be able to form a fairly accurate CA guess, and then it should pop out at you
CAMO without reading other answers. Time is short, must CAMO on most questions. Be confident
Syllogism Breakdown
1)First breakdown is: Premise or Conclusion (or aside)
PremiseStatement of fact (whether actual fact of the world, or merely asserted as such in the syllogism)
ConclusionAny non-fact, any opinion. Any should, thus…
AsideStatement (fact or opinion) not used in the syllogism; merely an aside
2)Next: is Conclusion a Subsidiary Conclusion or the Main Conclusion
Subsidiary ConclusionLeads to a further conclusion, just a step along the way
Main ConclusionDoes not lead to a further conclusion, but is itself the end of the chain
Note also
LSAC uses words “premises” and “support,” and a variety of words. Do not rely blindly on labels
A fact sentence (premise) and a Subsidiary Conclusion might both be called “premises,” or “support,” but the SubsidCon referred to as “premise” is still also a conclusion
And a sentence/sentence (usually a fact, but could be either) might not really function in the syllogism, so much as just introduce the subject matter, or be an afterthought (an Aside)