1. Rephrase each answer choice.

2. Go back to the Scope of the question.

3. Find the difference between the choices.

4. Select the one that best answers the question.

Find out how you can challenge yourself with adaptive solo practice sessions on Grockit today.

Let’s look at how we might do this without even reading the passage with this Grockit question:

The main goal of this passage is to:

A            discuss the daily newspaper from a new sociological stance.

B            show the main arguments from a blog.

C            compare and contrast two views on art.

D            disprove a commonly held assumption about the value of art.

E            raise funds for research in an under-appreciated social field.

STEP 1: First let’s rephrase the choices in simpler terms:

1. Talk about a paper in a new way
2. Describe a blog
3. Talk about two viewpoints
4. Criticize something
5. Try to get more $$

Even without the passage, we can see that A, B, and C are more neutral in tone, so it is likely the correct answer will lie there. A and B focus on 1 thing: a paper and a blog. C talks about 2 things. Again, it’s more likely the “Final Two” will be A and B since they are the most similar.

1. Talk about a paper in a new way
2. Describe a blog’s main points
3. C.    Talk about two viewpoints
4. D.    Criticize something
5. E.    Try to get more $$

STEP 2: Let’s look at the Scope of the question. It’s a Main Idea question asking what the MAIN GOAL is of the passage, so we’re looking for a broad, expansive answer choice. Both A and B are relatively broad.

STEP 3: So, what is the difference between the choices? A focuses on a newspaper, and B focuses on a blog. At this point, we’d need to ask ourselves: what does the author spend the most time discussing? What is his focus? A quick look back to the first sentence of each paragraph reveals the following:

“During the summer of 1946, two large abstract paintings sold for $150,000 at Agatha & Agatha’s Auction House.”

“Now in 2007, 45 year-old James Ovariano keeps up a wonderful sociological blog called “Ovariano’s Tomorrow” in which he details his concerns regarding his family’s classist past.”

“James’ blog painfully accounts many times….”

“Another blogger, known only as Captain CapitalYay, disputes James’ assertion that society…”

STEP 4: We can see the focus here is on a blog, not a newspaper, which is likely a minor detail mentioned elsewhere in the passage. The correct answer is B.

Test your GMAT Reading Comprehension skills with this RC practice question!

1. Read above & below. Don’t expect the quoted line numbers to give you enough information to solve. Tricky answer choices will mimic the subject of the specific line number provided, but won’t accurately reflect the full situation.

2. Make a prediction and write it down. Once you understand the full situation as stated in the passage, write it down. Make sure you understand the process involved. It may help to use arrows or other symbols. Your ultimate goal will be to consider what is it “like” so make sure you understand the original situation well.

3. Eliminate the 3 choices that are the furthest from your prediction. When you’ve got it down to two choices, re-read your prediction. Ask yourself: which of these best fits the tone and the process of the passage?

Let’s look at an example question from Grockit’s question bank:

Of the following, which is the best example of a situation comparable to the challenge faced by the paleontologist mentioned in line 35?

We can tell this is a “New Situation” question because of the phrase “a situation comparable.” The key phrase “challenge faced by the paleontologist” tells us what we need to looks for in the passage. What is it he faces? The question cites line 35, but we will read about 5 lines above and below for context.

Denison
(30)  increasingly found himself called to task by irate students
and film buffs. At first, his response was to write testy letters
to critics, complaining bitterly that he did the best he could
with what he had at the time, and stating (in one oft-quoted
passage from a letter to New Yorker critic Pauline Kael), “I’m
(35)  like a paleontologist who has to construct an entire dinosaur
from a femur, a couple of ribs, and part of a skull… cut me
some slack, please?” But then, spurred on by the critics and
faced with the prospect of his book going out of print,
Denison hit upon the idea of creating a foundation that
(40)  would exist solely to update his book.

As we re-read, we want to “mentally highlight” the phrases that describe the “challenge” faced by the paleontologist. We can see that Denison is trying to exonerate his reputation, using the argument that he “did the best he could” with “what he had at the time” referring to a lack of technology that made his job more difficult.

Prediction: Difficult job → limited by past

Now we can examine the answer choices to look for three to eliminate.

A            a doctor trying to x-ray a bone with an x-ray machine

B            an actor with a wealth of material prepared for an audition

C            an overview of a director for whom only two films, out of 50, have survived

D            a student documenting the publishing history of a famous English literature professor from a respected university

E            a bird building a nest in a tree

(A) is the same subject matter as a paleontologist but does not deal with the limits of the past and an attempt to clear a reputation of past work. (B) and (E) also do not clearly relate to the past.

Now that we have narrowed it down to two, we can rephrase them to see more clearly.

C            Director’s reputation is small, films did not make it

D            Student documents he output of a professor

Only C refers to a lack of something, like the implied limits of the past on Denison. Thus, C is correct.

Test your skills with this GMAT reading comprehension practice question today!

Before answering the questions, we should be able to isolate the key information in the passage; not only will a big picture understanding of the passage help us with questions concerning the main idea, but they will increase our accuracy on detail questions as well. Below is a sample GMAT passage with the key elements in bold. It should serve as an example of how to isolate the main ideas from a passage:

Western analytical philosophy has contributed two major elements

to the theory of the political good. It is unfortunate that the

value of the first element, personalism, has been diluted by its close

association with the second element, valuational solipsism.

Personalism was developed in response to the belief that nations,

states, religions, or any other corporate entity have interests that transcend

the interests of the individuals that comprise them. The central

tenet of personalism, therefore, is that institutions are good or bad

insofar as they are good or bad for the individuals that are affected

by them. Institutions are not good, for example, because they preserve

the nation’s culture or because they protect the natural world,

unless preserving the nation’s culture or protecting the natural world

is good for the individual. As a philosophical assumption, personalism

is most useful in countering arguments for practices that harm

individuals in the name of “the greater good,” or the “society at large.”

The personalist credo basically states that when it comes to interests,

there are no interests but human interests.

However, an excessive devotion to the theory of personalism may

lead one to fall into the trap of valuational solipsism. The word

solipsism derives from the Latin for “lone self” and the theory of valuational

solipsism takes the isolated individual as the sole judge of

value. The problem with this viewpoint is obvious. By using the individual

as the measure of the good, valuational solipsism neglects to

consider the whole range of social values that are part of the political

experience. These values include citizenship, status, and community,

none of which can exist without reference to other individuals.

Instead, political theories are based entirely on non-social values such

as happiness, material welfare, and utility, which are not dependent

on interactions with others. Such a view obscures a fundamental

quality of the political good.

Now that we’ve bolded the key elements in the passage, let’s try to paraphrase those elements in a numbered outline:

1. The Western theory of the political good has two elements: personalism and valuational solipsism.
2. Thesis: The value of personalism is in danger of becoming weakened by its close association with valuational solipsism.
3. Personalism measures the good of a nation based on the good it brings to the people.
4. An excessive devotion to personalism may result in the trap of valuational solipsism, the idea that the individual is the sole judge of value.
5. Valuational solipsism is bad because it neglects the social values, like community, that contribute to the political experience, thus obscuring the fundamental qualities of the political good.

Notice that most of the key information comes in the first and third paragraphs. It would be a mistake to characterize this passage as a simple description of two elements of political theory. While the second paragraph is devoted to describing the first element, the rest of the passage tries to explain the reason for—and the unsettling consequences of—the close association between the two elements of political theory. Explaining the relationship between the two is really the purpose of the passage, and we get most of that information in the third paragraph, which is more densely marked up than the second paragraph.

Need more GMAT verbal advice? Check out GMAT: 8 Rules of Diction for Non-Native Speakers post.

“The classical realist theory of international relations has long

dominated both academic institutions and the American government.

Even at the birth of the nation, early political thinkers such as

Alexander Hamilton promoted a realist view of international relations

and sought to influence the actions of the government based on

this perspective. While the classical realist school of international

relations is not entirely homogeneous in nature, there are certain

premises that all classical realists share.”

1^st Sentence “The classical realist theory of international relations has long

dominated both academic institutions and the American government.”

The first sentence of a passage should, for the most part, introduce you to the topic of the passage. If the first sentence adequately introduces the topic, you should be able to answer the questions “what is the author writing about” and “why is he writing about it?” From our first sentence, we know that the author is writing about the classical realist theory of international relations and he is writing about it  because it has, for a long time, been the most dominant theory of international relations in both academic institutions and the government.

2^nd Sentence: “Even at the birth of the nation, early political thinkers such as

Alexander Hamilton promoted a realist view of international relations

and sought to influence the actions of the government based on

this perspective.”

You might want to ask yourself “what does the second sentence do in context of the topic?” The second sentence provides evidence that the theory has long dominated the American government. The author says that even Alexander Hamilton, at the birth of the nation, subscribed to the realist theory, which helped shape the way he influenced the actions of the government. In the broad scheme of things, the second sentence serves to justify the claims made in the first sentence.

3^rd Sentence:

While the classical realist school of international relations is not entirely homogeneous in nature, there are certain premises that all classical realists share.”

First, note that the sentence begins with the word “While,” suggesting that there may be a logical turn or opposition in the paragraph. In this case, the author simply wants to qualify the main point of his paper, that there are certain premises that all classical realists share. We can be confident that the rest of the article will focus on detailing the general premises that characterize classical realism.

Try this GMAT reading comprehension question for more practice!

While those of us who read often are in better shape for the Reading Comprehension section on the GMAT, nobody is safe. The Reading Comprehension section requires a certain type of reading and thinking that must be practiced. Here are some basic steps you can take to prime yourself for GMAT-style reading even before you begin practicing with test material:

1. Read Articles: Get in the habit of reading quality writing in article form. Put down your remotes, your game controllers, and (you’ll rarely here this from an educator) your novels. Internet junkies surprisingly have an advantage here since most of the written information on the internet is in article form. If you’re not sure where to look, begin with regional newspaper websites, e.g. Los Angeles Times or New York Times. For quality articles infused with humor and a light tone, but that still maintain a scholarly bent with grown-up vocabulary, check out web magazines Salon and Slate. Remember, though, that you will rarely encounter humor on the GMAT.

2. Know Your Weaknesses: GMAT passages are generally broken up into physical and biological sciences, the social sciences, arts and humanities, history, and business. Though it’s far from a general rule, students often perform better on articles that they find interesting. If you are the arts and humanities type who abhors science, try reading some science articles (avoid esoteric articles in science journals, though, since they aren’t written for a specialized audience).

3. Read Actively and Take Notes: As you read these articles, try to rid yourself of the habit of reading passively. In other words, constantly ask yourself “what is the main idea or purpose of this article?” or “what is the purpose of this paragraph in the context of the passage?” Get in the habit of jotting down brief notes in the margins—or perhaps on a blank document on your computer—so you can more easily immerse yourself in the meaning and structure of the article. Pay close attention to the first and last paragraphs, and especially the first and last sentences of each body paragraph.

Find out how you can get your own personalized study plan on Grockit and target your areas in need for improvement.

Body Paragraphs are generally the parts of the passage that cause problems. Introductions and conclusions are generally straight forward, and they give us generalized bits of information that are easy to digest. It is really the body paragraphs that can confuse, disorient, or frustrate the reader with details. The key to staying focused while reading body paragraphs is to seek out information—rather than passively receive it—and ask yourself certain questions about the information you receive. Here are some techniques to help you stay on track:

1.       Ask yourself how a bit of information furthers the main idea:

2.       Ask yourself why a piece of evidence or example was provided

Below are the first two paragraphs of a GMAT reading passage—the first serves as the introduction while the second serves as the first body paragraph, which we will examine sentence by sentence.

Sign up for a FREE trial account and try Grockit free for 3 days with unlimited access to group and solo practice sessions!

The classical realist theory of international relations has long

dominated both academic institutions and the American government.

Even at the birth of the nation, early political thinkers such as

Alexander Hamilton promoted a realist view of international relations

and sought to influence the actions of the government based on

this perspective. While the classical realist school of international

relations is not entirely homogeneous in nature, there are certain

premises that all classical realists share.

The primary principle underlying classical realism is a concern

with issues of war and peace. Specifically, classical realists ask, what

are the causes of war and what are the conditions of peace? The members

of the classical realist school mainly attribute war and conflict

to what is termed the security dilemma. In the absence of any prevailing

global authority, each nation is required to address its own

security needs. However, each nation’s quest for security—through

military buildups, alliances, or territorial defenses—necessarily unsettles

other nations. These nations react to feelings of insecurity by

engaging in their own aggressive actions, which leads other nations

to react similarly, perpetuating the cycle.

Notice that the first paragraph reveals the topic of the passage—the classical realist theory of international relations–and what the author will say about the topic—the premises that all classical realists share. We can expect, then, that the body paragraphs will each outline a specific premise of the classical realist theory of international relations. Let’s examine the first body paragraph in detail:

1^st Sentence: The first sentence of any body paragraph is generally the most important, for it introduces the topic or argument of that body paragraph. Here, we can anticipate that the paragraph will talk about how classical realism is generally concerned with “issues of war and peace.”

2^nd Sentence: The second sentence specifies the general claim made in the first sentence; classical realism actually concerned with the causes of war and the conditions of peace.

3^rd Sentence: The third sentence finally gives us some particular information about how classical realists view the causes of war (“the security dilemma”).

4^th and 5^th Sentences: The fourth and fifth sentences explain the “security dilemma” introduced in the third sentence; basically, the security dilemma naturally arises as nations that fortify themselves out of self-interest unsettle other nations.

6^th Sentence: This sentence explains how the security dilemma just described can provide the necessary circumstances for war: nations left unsettled by the fortifications of other nations tend to act aggressively, thus prompting other nations to react aggressively.

Try this GMAT reading comprehension practice question today!

While the introduction and body paragraphs almost always reveal the topic of the passage and the evidence or details to support an argument, respectively, the conclusion has a less consistent function. On the GMAT, passages are edited heavily so that every bit of information has a function; as a result, some passages do not have conclusions devoted to reiterating the main points of the passage. Often, a concluding paragraph will take the form of a body paragraph, but somehow the new information will resolve the information presented throughout. The best way to approach a conclusion is to be aware that it may not be what you expect, but in any case, it provides valuable information that will likely be tested in a question. Below is a sample GMAT reading passage in its entirety; read the introduction and skim the body paragraphs to get a good sense of the main idea, but then read the conclusion closely:

The classical realist theory of international relations has long

dominated both academic institutions and the American government.

Even at the birth of the nation, early political thinkers such as

Alexander Hamilton promoted a realist view of international relations

and sought to influence the actions of the government based on

this perspective. While the classical realist school of international

relations is not entirely homogeneous in nature, there are certain

premises that all classical realists share.

The primary principle underlying classical realism is a concern

with issues of war and peace. Specifically, classical realists ask, what

are the causes of war and what are the conditions of peace? The members

of the classical realist school mainly attribute war and conflict

to what is termed the security dilemma. In the absence of any prevailing

global authority, each nation is required to address its own

security needs. However, each nation’s quest for security—through

military buildups, alliances, or territorial defenses—necessarily unsettles

other nations. These nations react to feelings of insecurity by

engaging in their own aggressive actions, which leads other nations

to react similarly, perpetuating the cycle.

It is important to note that for realists, unlike idealists or liberal

internationalists, international conflict is a necessary consequence of

the structural anarchy that nations find themselves in. Whereas other

schools may see international conflict as the result of evil dictators,

historical chance, flawed sociopolitical systems, or ignorance of world

affairs, classical realists see war as the logical result of a system that

by its nature lacks a true central authority.

Hand in hand with this view of conflict as an inevitable condition

of the global power structure is the realists’ view of the nation as a

unitary actor. Because classical realists see international relations as

a continuing struggle for dominance, the nation can not be viewed

as a collection of individuals with disparate wants, goals, and ideologies.

The realist view requires the formulation of a national interest,

which in its simplest terms refers to the nation’s ability to survive,

maintain its security, and achieve some level of power relative to its

competitors.

Realism is not without its critics, many of whom challenge the

premise that war is the natural condition of international relations or

that there can be a truly national interest. However, the realist school

of international relations continues to shape foreign policy because of

the successes it has had in describing real world interactions between

nations.

From the introduction, we know that the author is writing about the classical realist theory of international relations and he is writing about it because it has, for a long time, been the most dominant theory of international relations in both academic institutions and the government. The author simply wants to show  that there are certain premises that all classical realists share, so we can be confident that the body of the article will focus on detailing the general premises that characterize classical realism. Now, let’s examine the conclusion’s function within the context of the passage:

1st  sentence: Realism is not without its critics, many of whom challenge the premise that war is the natural condition of international relations or that there can be truly national interest.

Notice that this is the first sentence of the conclusion, but it introduces a somewhat new idea. We’ve spent the first four paragraphs discussing the premises of classical realism, but now we want to acknowledge that, despite its prevalence, it has its critics. This sentence reveals a reasonable objection to classical realism—the premise that war is a natural condition can be viewed as pessimistic.

2^nd sentence: However, the realist school of international relations continues to shape foreign policy because of the success it has had in describing real world interactions between nations.

The final sentence, which reiterates the main point made in the passage, is only strengthened by the anticipated objection raised in the first sentence. In other words, despite the possible objection, the realist school of international relations is still quite influential because of the success its had in describing international relations.

Find out what makes Grockit the world’s fastest growing online test prep for the GMAT! 

Global tips

Read the passage thoroughly before you hit the questions.  I cannot stress this enough; you don’t know how many questions you will get, and unless you are a Verbal wizard, you cannot afford the time it will take to re-skim for relevant information for each question, or the risk of getting the question wrong.  The main idea of a paragraph does not always appear in the first or last sentence (which is also true of CR).

Do untimed practice as well as timed practice.  Timed practice is essential to success; the more you do timed practice, in particular full-length practice tests,  the more the real test will feel like just another practice session (i.e. with less pressure and stress).  If you are struggling with RC, though, untimed practice is key.  With infinite time, you can learn what it feels like to really understand a passage before you get to the questions; you can move on to the questions with confidence when you have that feeling, and decide whether to review the passage when you do not.  With infinite time, you can develop your strategies and methods, and more importantly get faster at them.

Take notes.  The act of note-taking is more important than having the notes themselves for review later.  It takes very little time to jot down key ideas, but help fix them more firmly in your mind.  Don’t bother with full sentences or outlines — just brief notes, more akin to what you might do if you were taking a message on the telephone.

Pre-read.  Some students struggling with RC find it helpful to do more than one complete reading of the passage.  One student I worked with saw immediate (and dramatic) results when he approached his passages by reading only the first and last sentence of each paragraph initially, then tackled the passage as a whole once he had a rough idea of what was going to happen.  He more than doubled his accuracy immediately in exchange for some additional time spent on the initial reading.

Solutions to common RC problems

Losing focus within the passage.  If you find yourself daydreaming or barely comprehending often, get in the habit of making the end of every paragraph a “check point”, where you pause to summarize the main idea of the paragraph you just read.  Aside from forming a solid ongoing basis for your understanding of the passage, it also prevents you from continuing onward and compounding your lack of comprehension.

Passage is too boring.  Note-taking is the most useful here; by forcing yourself to pay attention to something, your mind focuses more in general (this is also a fantastic technique for staying sharp in lectures and staff meetings, by the way!).  You can also challenge yourself to take very concise, effective notes, which has the effect of forcing you to synthesize ideas and entire paragraphs  into very small, meaningful phrases.

Passage is too interesting.  This is a challenge, and is in some ways a little unfair:  why should we have to stomp out a brief moment of fun in a four-hour stretch of concentration and challenge?  The truth, of course, is that you don’t need to stomp the fun out of it — you do, however, need to focus.  The strategy for people who “space out” also works here:  if you find yourself getting carried away by “fun” passages, make the end of every paragraph your “check point”, where you make sure to summarize mentally what the passage actually addresses without your outside knowledge and interest.  If you do this and get the score you want, go on Amazon after your GMAT and buy yourself a book on whichever topics caught your attention on the test.

Understanding the passage, but getting the questions wrong.  If this is happening, only one of two things can explain it:  you aren’t understanding the passage as well as you think you are, or your specific approach to the type of question(s) is flawed.  If the questions truly are the problem, invest the time required to develop an error log, where you track not only which questions you get wrong and their type, but what type of wrong answer tempted you (you may also want to log which wrong answer choices were very tempting on questions you got right).  Patterns will emerge from the log.

Finishing the passage and missing the main idea.  I suppose this is a subset of the problem directly above this one, but a short strategy helps (and doesn’t require an error log):  when you’ve finished the passage, take a moment to decide whether the author expressed an opinion (whether advocating something or refuting something) or simply explained.  Did the author say one thing was definitely better than another thing?  The answer to this question alone can help you eliminate wrong answer choices on detail and tone questions as well as main idea ones.

Taking too much time.  Practice is key of course, but pay particular attention to what is taking too much time.  You should finish the passage in under five minutes, ideally under four; questions should ideally be a minute or less each.  If you are spending too much time on questions, perhaps you are not grasping the passage as well as you should; an extra 30 seconds on the passage might save you that same amount of time on each of multiple questions.  If the passage is the time-consuming one, there is less that can be done, unless you are taking too much time for one of the other reasons listed in this series of articles — consider adding some outside reading to your study schedule.  One student I worked with even took a speed-reading course, and saw some immediate (but not huge) improvement in her pace.

Unfamiliar subject matter causing problems.  If you find yourself misapplying patterns from other passages, take a step back and simplify your approach to unfamiliar topics.  Take brief notes and summarize the general idea after each paragraph as best you can.  Aim for 80% comprehension; it’s a bit of a gamble, but you cannot afford to spend 10 minutes or get five wrong in a row on one passage.  Another good rule is to look at the transitions between paragraphs; if you know you didn’t fully understand one paragraph, it is a safer gamble to proceed anyway the more the subject shifts in the next paragraph.  For example, if paragraph 1 describes a theory or approach and paragraph 2 describes a different one, it is safer to move on, even if you didn’t fully understand that first paragraph; your understanding of the previous material may well increase after reading the later material, as you will then further define the theory or approach in the first paragraph by what it is not (namely, whatever is in the second paragraph).

I hope this gives you a good overview of Reading Comprehension as it appears on the GMAT and as it relates to you.  Thanks for reading (and comprehending)!

Common RC problems

Losing focus within the passage.  How many times have you been reading a book, newspaper, or web site and gotten to the bottom of a page, glanced over the words you just read, and recognized both that you did “read” it (you remember seeing certain phrases, for example) and that you somehow “spaced out” and didn’t really process the information?  Everyone does it, even on the GMAT, but it can be costly, especially on the GMAT.  The further you go without understanding, the greater your risk of incorrect answers and the more likely you are to have to read parts of the passage multiple times.

Passage is too boring.  People studying for the GMAT often complain that certain topics (or, in some cases, all reading on all topics) bores them, and that they have trouble making themselves stick to it.  They get impatient, hoping they can skim for answers, or simply don’t put as much effort into “boring” things.

Passage is too interesting. Conversely, some people run into passages that are extremely relevant to their interests and backgrounds.  It is in some ways even flattering to see a passage on your area of expertise — for a moment, you feel smart and well-informed, and may well learn something new about a topic important to you.  The interested reader brings in all of his or her outside knowledge in an attempt to assimilate the contents of the passage into an existing framework of information, losing sight of the very limited and technical reading required on GMAT RC passages.

Understanding the passage, but getting the questions wrong.  Not all passages are challenging on their own; some people run into problems making the shift from understanding the passage to applying that same understanding to questions.  In theory, comprehensive understanding of the passage leads to quick movement through the questions; in practice, some students find themselves getting certain question types wrong consistently.

Finishing the passage and missing the main idea.  Because the GMAT so frequently tests both details and logical structures from passages, it is easy to get lost in those smaller components of the passage.  It is entirely possible to finish a passage with a solid understanding of all the major concepts, but have missed all the words related to tone.  I recently had one student who understood a passage very well, but somehow missed that the author was advocating a course of action — despite the fact that the word “should” appeared seven times (!) in the second paragraph.

Taking too much time.  There is generally enough time to read the passage once thoroughly, assuming you can read and understand a passage in five minutes or so.  Sometimes and for some students, though, either the passage or the questions take much more time than expected, and unlike other question types, overall timing of RC is much more challenging because of the large initial time investment and uncertain number of questions on that passage.

Unfamiliar subject matter causing problems.  Lack of familiarity with the subject causes some people to try to apply patterns from more familiar passage types — for example, reading an explanatory contrast between two political theories as an argument advocating one over the other.

In the next (and final) installment, we’ll cover ways to address each of these problem areas, as well as some general strategies for success!