CR Strategies

[Hqta]

Please share your CR Strategies here!!!

[TranTuan]

Tôi học CR qua cách của Mahattan, cấu trúc cụ thể như sau :
- Tách một argument (đoạn thông tin người ta cho) thành các thành phần nhỏ : premise, conclusion....
- Tìm mối liên hệ logic giữa các phần và đưa ra các loại câu hỏi có thể gặp.
- Và cái đặc biệt hay trong cuốn sách là với mỗi loại câu hỏi họ luôn sử dụng câu hỏi trong OG10, OG11, việc này mang tính khách quan và rất chính xác.
Các bạn thử cuốn đó xem sao nhé

[binhnth]

Em có đọc trên scoretop.com một vài tip liên quan đến CR-Boldface. Em xin quote ở đây, nếu có vi phạm về bản quyền, mọi người delete giúp ạ.

Boldface question is totally new on computer-based test, but is easy to tackle. All you have to do is to understand the argument: identify the conclusion, evidence, and the reasoning from evidence to conclusion. Sometime, you are required to critique the validity of the argument.

How to approach Boldface Question

1. Identify the conclusion. Ask yourself what the conclusion is, what the author trying to prove, or what the author????s main point is.

2. Look for the evidence that the author uses to support or argue against a position.

3. Search for argument indicator to determine the relationship between evidence and conclusion.

Conclusion Indicators

so
thus
therefore
as a result

consequently
accordingly
hence
imply

conclude that
follows that
means that
infer that


Premise Indicators

because
since
for
as

if
assume
suppose
evidence

on the basis of
the reason is that
may be derived from
in that


Counter-evidence Indicators

actually
despite
admittedly
except

even though
nonetheless
nevertheless
although

however
In spite of
do
may


4. Before you pick up the answer choices, make sure you did NOT mistake counter-evidence as evidence.

[binhnth]

Đây là một post khác, em tách ra để mọi người dễ đọc hơn
Principle: something fundamental that we do not question. This would be somewhat stronger than a fact because it is not specific to a limited number of cases but instead, apply to a broader range of scenarios(and often deeper in meaning). For instance, you will not talk about the principle that crime is increasing in large cities. Instead, it is a fact which applies to large cities. However, you will talk about the principles of Physics or the fundamental principles of Human Rights. I believe principles convey a stronger connotation than mere facts.

Fact: something taken as true at face value (stats, historical events)

Evidence: what is used to support a conclusion (examples, stats, historical events). Although these may include facts, it is usually stronger than facts because they are direct elements needed for the conclusion to stand whereas facts are not necessary for the latter to stand

Pre-evidence: This is a bit of a stretch. It will not often be on the test but it seems very similar to "background" information as described below.

Background: Elements needed to put the evidence into context but which, as stand alone pieces of information, might not constitute what is called an evidence necessary to arrive at a conclusion. For instance, blood tests performed on one thousand persons may reveal that 35% of those persons were HIV infected. However, the background information could be that the test was performed in more underinformed regions of the world where AIDS knowledge is at a minimum. As you can see, the fact that the test was performed in more underinformed regions is not in and of itself an evidence because it does not allow us to come to a conclusion. Instead, the 35% stats, as a stand-alone piece of info, is what will lead us to the conclusion we want. However, the background info is also crucial and cannot be omitted; it is required background info.

Consideration: Something which was taken into account or given some thought before arriving to the conclusion.

Premise: This is usually a required statement to arrive at a conclusion. Evidence and facts want to prove something to you whereas premises are there to logically lead you to a conclusion. The best example of premises is the ones included in syllogisms. For instance, you can say that(premise1) when it rains, you go outside. Then, it rains(premise2). You have to be outside(conclusion).

Assumption: Unstated information which will link the argument to a logical conclusion. Without this, the argument falls apart.

Conclusion: Self-explanatory

Inference: Something that might not be explicitly stated or proved. For instance, you may say that 95% of GMAT test-takers have over 340. We can reasonably infer that Anthony will get more than 340 on his GMAT based on the fact given. I think the main difference b/w an inference and a conclusion is that the former might not be the final line of an argument. For instance, there could be facts/evidence given, an inference in b/w, and then the conclusion. An inference can be an intermediate step before the conclusion which will sum up the whole passage. Also, a conclusion seems to be stronger because it is based on stronger facts/evidence. As in my previous example, we can reasonably infer that Anthony got 340+ on his GMAT but we cannot conclude that he got 340+. See the nuance?

[binhnth]

When you see one of these questions in your actual GMAT, the first thing you should do is congratulate yourself on having done well enough to have brought the BF challenge upon yourself in the first place. In the final analysis NOT getting a BF question or two during the exam is definitely WORSE than getting them. So, you??re already doing something right. The key is to use what you know to split the answer choices. Here's my approach:

(1) Read the argument. Read it quickly, as you ask yourself ? What's the point here?

(2) Identify the Main Conclusion. You've got to identify the main conclusion to proceed??the main conclusion is your ??port of entry?? into the BF question. So, find the main conclusion as quickly as possible and note whether it is one of the bolded phrases.

(3) Go directly to the answer choices. Do not, I repeat DO NOT, spend any time trying to figure out what roles the bolded phrases play within the argument without some idea of the terms that are being offered in the answer choices. It??s a waste of precious time.

IF the main conclusion IS one of the bolded phrases, then find the answer choices that offer that option for the respective bolded phrase (first or second). A significant number of BF questions can be answered correctly with this information ALONE. If there is only one choice that matches up with the bolded main conclusion then you??re done. Mark it and move on. Otherwise??

Have a quick look through the choices to discover the terms in play (see below).

(4) Return to the argument and determine the relationship between each bolded phrase and the arguments main conclusion. Does each basically agree with the conclusion of the argument? Does one but not the other? Neither? What other relationships occur to you?

(5) Return to the answer choices and use these relationships to discard at least two (and probably) three choices. Here is the short-list of likely terms:

Main Conclusion: a summary of the arguments primary position;
Intermediate Conclusion: a position utilized by the argument as a stepping stone in order to advance toward the main conclusion;
Premise: a theory or proposition upon which an argument is based or from which a conclusion is drawn;
Fact: information generally believed to be true OR known to be true usually advanced as evidence to support a premise;
Evidence: specific type of fact offered in support of a theory or premise;
Context: a frame of reference of value in the interpretation of aspects of an argument or the arguments components;
Consideration: a factor (fact) to be taken into account in forming a judgment or decision;
Position: a point of view or attitude about an issue or question;
Assumption: a position or belief that is taken to be true, without proof;
Principle: a basic or essential truth (stronger and broader than a fact).
Judgment: an opinion formed from a consideration of the facts.
(6) Now, take each of the remaining choices one by one, matching the similar part of each answer choice to its respective BF phrase, then discriminate between the dissimilar part of each answer choice and its respective BF phrase. That should take you the rest of the way home.