Use this quick review after a missed question. Say the idea aloud, then return to the matching lesson.
Passage mapA compact record of each paragraph’s job and the author’s movement.
Case: A passage has a historical setup, two examples, a concession, and a qualified conclusion. What should a map record for each paragraph?Answer: Record each paragraph’s argumentative job and the movement from setup through evidence or concession to the qualified conclusion. Concept: A compact record of each paragraph’s job and the author’s movement.
Passage map — common trapA topic list is not a map; a map tracks how the argument develops.
Passage map — recognize itRecognition cue: Look for changes in claim, evidence, contrast, and conclusion. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Passage map — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Label a paragraph as setup, evidence, objection, example, or conclusion before answering. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Main pointThe central claim the passage develops, including a limiting qualification when one matters.
Case: A passage praises a policy benefit but argues that access and distribution limit the praise. Which sentence best captures the main point?Answer: The best main point preserves both the policy benefit and the limiting condition involving access and distribution. Concept: The central claim the passage develops, including a limiting qualification when one matters.
Main point — common trapThe first sentence or most memorable detail is not automatically the main point.
Main point — recognize itRecognition cue: Ask what the whole passage is trying to establish. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Main point — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? State the author’s position in one sentence without copying a minor example. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Primary purposeThe action the passage performs: explain, evaluate, defend, criticize, compare, or propose.
Case: A passage compares two explanations and ends by recommending a conditional standard. Which purpose accounts for the whole movement?Answer: The purpose is to compare explanations and develop a conditional standard for judging them. Concept: The action the passage performs: explain, evaluate, defend, criticize, compare, or propose.
Primary purpose — common trapA purpose that merely names the subject is too weak.
Primary purpose — recognize itRecognition cue: Use the verbs in the author’s final move as a clue. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Primary purpose — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Choose the purpose that accounts for the passage’s evidence and conclusion together. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Paragraph roleThe function a paragraph serves in the argument rather than its isolated topic.
Case: A controlled study compares 25 participants or samples in Group A with 25 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Paragraph role”; the measured outcome is 16 units in Group A and 20 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 4 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Paragraph role” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: The function a paragraph serves in the argument rather than its isolated topic. Concept: The function a paragraph serves in the argument rather than its isolated topic.
Paragraph role — common trapConfusing an example with the thesis makes later questions harder.
Paragraph role — recognize itRecognition cue: Remove the paragraph mentally and ask what argumentative job disappears. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Paragraph role — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? A historical example may provide context or evidence without being the author’s conclusion. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Author toneThe author’s attitude shown by word choice, emphasis, and degree of certainty.
Case: A controlled study compares 33 participants or samples in Group A with 33 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Author tone”; the measured outcome is 11 units in Group A and 17 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 6 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Author tone” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: The author’s attitude shown by word choice, emphasis, and degree of certainty. Concept: The author’s attitude shown by word choice, emphasis, and degree of certainty.
Author tone — common trapTone is not the topic’s emotional feel; it is the author’s stance toward it.
Author tone — recognize itRecognition cue: Notice evaluative adjectives, concessions, and certainty markers. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Author tone — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Qualified approval may combine praise with a specific limitation. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Reported viewpointA position the passage describes that may differ from the author’s own position.
Case: A controlled study compares 31 participants or samples in Group A with 31 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Reported viewpoint”; the measured outcome is 15 units in Group A and 20 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 5 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Reported viewpoint” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A position the passage describes that may differ from the author’s own position. Concept: A position the passage describes that may differ from the author’s own position.
Reported viewpoint — common trapTreating every quoted or summarized view as the author’s view reverses the argument.
Reported viewpoint — recognize itRecognition cue: Watch for “some argue,” “critics claim,” and contrast transitions. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Reported viewpoint — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Track whether the author endorses, limits, or challenges the reported view. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
EvidenceA fact, example, reason, or observation used to support or limit a claim.
Case: A controlled study compares 24 participants or samples in Group A with 24 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Evidence”; the measured outcome is 12 units in Group A and 20 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 8 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Evidence” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A fact, example, reason, or observation used to support or limit a claim. Concept: A fact, example, reason, or observation used to support or limit a claim.
Evidence — common trapEvidence is not always proof; the author may present it as partial or suggestive.
Evidence — recognize itRecognition cue: Look for examples followed by interpretation. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Evidence — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Ask which sentence the evidence makes more credible. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
ConcessionA point the author grants before narrowing, qualifying, or redirecting the argument.
Case: A controlled study compares 37 participants or samples in Group A with 37 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Concession”; the measured outcome is 11 units in Group A and 16 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 5 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Concession” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A point the author grants before narrowing, qualifying, or redirecting the argument. Concept: A point the author grants before narrowing, qualifying, or redirecting the argument.
Concession — common trapThe concession is not necessarily the author’s final view.
Concession — recognize itRecognition cue: Signal words include although, admittedly, and granted. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Concession — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Use the concession to predict the author’s next qualification. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
QualificationA condition that prevents a claim from being absolute.
Case: A controlled study compares 25 participants or samples in Group A with 25 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Qualification”; the measured outcome is 9 units in Group A and 16 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 7 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Qualification” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A condition that prevents a claim from being absolute. Concept: A condition that prevents a claim from being absolute.
Qualification — common trapDropping the condition usually makes an answer too broad.
Qualification — recognize itRecognition cue: Find only, unless, often, may, generally, and under these circumstances. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Qualification — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? If a policy works only when local participation exists, preserve that condition in an application. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
ContrastA deliberate distinction between positions, cases, or consequences.
Case: A controlled study compares 32 participants or samples in Group A with 32 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Contrast”; the measured outcome is 12 units in Group A and 17 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 5 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Contrast” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A deliberate distinction between positions, cases, or consequences. Concept: A deliberate distinction between positions, cases, or consequences.
Contrast — common trapA contrast does not mean the author rejects both sides equally.
Contrast — recognize itRecognition cue: Mark but, rather, unlike, whereas, and instead. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Contrast — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Identify what the author wants the reader to notice about the difference. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
InferenceA conclusion strongly supported by the passage even if not stated word-for-word.
Case: A controlled study compares 37 participants or samples in Group A with 37 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Inference”; the measured outcome is 10 units in Group A and 18 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 8 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Inference” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A conclusion strongly supported by the passage even if not stated word-for-word. Concept: A conclusion strongly supported by the passage even if not stated word-for-word.
Inference — common trapA choice can be plausible in real life and still unsupported here.
Inference — recognize itRecognition cue: Ask whether you can point to two passage facts that require it. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Inference — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Select what must or probably follows from the supplied evidence. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Detail questionA question asking what the passage explicitly states or describes.
Case: A passage states that a committee met twice before changing its policy. Which answer accurately reports that detail without adding an inference?Answer: The answer should restate the meeting detail exactly, without importing a conclusion about why the committee acted. Concept: A question asking what the passage explicitly states or describes.
Detail question — common trapDo not answer from memory of the general argument.
Detail question — recognize itRecognition cue: Look for a choice that paraphrases a precise passage detail. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Detail question — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Return to the exact sentence and compare the wording with every choice. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Meaning in contextThe meaning a word or phrase has in its local sentence and argument.
Case: A passage calls a policy “qualified success.” Does qualified mean complete approval, or success limited by a condition stated nearby?Answer: “Qualified success” means success limited by the condition stated nearby, not complete approval. Concept: The meaning a word or phrase has in its local sentence and argument.
Meaning in context — common trapThe dictionary’s most familiar meaning may not fit the passage.
Meaning in context — recognize itRecognition cue: Read one sentence before and after the target phrase. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Meaning in context — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Replace the phrase with each choice and test the sentence’s logic. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Function questionA question asking why the author includes a particular sentence or example.
Case: A passage includes a historical example immediately before its thesis. What should you ask: what argumentative job does the example perform?Answer: The example’s answer should identify its argumentative role, such as supplying evidence or clarifying a contrast, rather than merely repeat its content. Concept: A question asking why the author includes a particular sentence or example.
Function question — common trapRestating the detail is not explaining its function.
Function question — recognize itRecognition cue: Connect the target to the paragraph’s claim and the passage’s thesis. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Function question — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Explain what the detail does for the surrounding claim. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Strengthen questionA choice that makes the author’s reasoning more credible or fills a relevant gap.
Case: An argument assumes that a reported association reflects the proposed cause. What new fact would make that bridge more credible?Answer: A fact showing that the proposed cause, rather than a competing explanation, produces the association strengthens the bridge. Concept: A choice that makes the author’s reasoning more credible or fills a relevant gap.
Strengthen question — common trapNew information that is merely interesting does not strengthen the argument.
Strengthen question — recognize itRecognition cue: Ask which choice would make a skeptical reader less doubtful. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Strengthen question — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Find the assumption connecting evidence to conclusion, then support that link. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Weaken questionA choice that undermines evidence, exposes a limitation, or offers a competing explanation.
Case: An argument infers a general rule from one successful example. What new fact would most directly expose the overreach?Answer: A fact showing that the successful example depends on a condition absent from other cases exposes the overgeneralization. Concept: A choice that undermines evidence, exposes a limitation, or offers a competing explanation.
Weaken question — common trapA fact that contradicts a minor example may leave the main argument intact.
Weaken question — recognize itRecognition cue: Locate the conclusion and test each choice against its support. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Weaken question — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Choose a fact that attacks the argument’s necessary link, not its background. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
AssumptionAn unstated condition the argument needs in order to work.
Case: An argument recommends a program because one pilot improved attendance. What unstated condition must connect that pilot result to the recommendation?Answer: The needed assumption is the bridge connecting the pilot’s attendance result to the broader recommendation. Concept: An unstated condition the argument needs in order to work.
Assumption — common trapA helpful fact is not necessarily an assumption.
Assumption — recognize itRecognition cue: Look for the bridge between evidence and recommendation. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Assumption — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Negate a candidate assumption; if the conclusion collapses, it is likely necessary. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
ApplicationA new situation that preserves the passage’s reasoning relationship.
Case: A controlled study compares 38 participants or samples in Group A with 38 in Group B. The groups differ only in the condition represented by “Application”; the measured outcome is 12 units in Group A and 19 units in Group B. What comparison, mechanism, or limitation should you use before interpreting that difference?Answer: The observed difference is 7 units, but interpret it only after checking that the groups were comparable, the outcome was measured reliably, and the condition represented by “Application” is a defensible explanation. Core concept: A new situation that preserves the passage’s reasoning relationship. Concept: A new situation that preserves the passage’s reasoning relationship.
Application — common trapMatching vocabulary or topic is less important than matching structure.
Application — recognize itRecognition cue: Translate both situations into “because X, therefore Y, when Z.” Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Application — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Abstract the rule first, then match the new facts to that rule. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
AnalogyA comparison based on a shared relationship, not superficial similarity.
Case: Two arguments concern different subjects but share the same because-therefore structure. Which relationship, rather than shared vocabulary, determines whether they are analogous?Answer: The analogy depends on matching the causal or argumentative relationship, not the topic or shared vocabulary. Concept: A comparison based on a shared relationship, not superficial similarity.
Analogy — common trapA shared subject does not make two arguments analogous.
Analogy — recognize itRecognition cue: Ignore names and topics; compare the logical pattern. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Analogy — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Map the roles and causal relations before comparing details. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
New informationEvidence introduced in a question that must be evaluated against the passage’s argument.
Case: A question adds evidence that the passage’s proposed condition is absent in a new case. Does the new evidence strengthen, weaken, or leave the reasoning unchanged?Answer: The added evidence is evaluated by whether it supports, attacks, or leaves unchanged the passage’s relevant premise or conclusion. Concept: Evidence introduced in a question that must be evaluated against the passage’s argument.
New information — common trapDo not assume new information automatically overrides the passage.
New information — recognize itRecognition cue: Identify which premise or conclusion the new fact touches. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
New information — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Decide whether it strengthens, weakens, or leaves the reasoning unchanged. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
ScopeThe breadth and limits of the author’s actual claim.
Case: A passage says a method works under one set of conditions. Which answer improperly extends that claim to every setting?Answer: The overbroad answer extends a conditional claim beyond the setting and evidence described in the passage. Concept: The breadth and limits of the author’s actual claim.
Scope — common trapBroad words can turn a supported answer into an overstatement.
Scope — recognize itRecognition cue: Compare the nouns and quantifiers in the passage and choice. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Scope — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Reject a choice that extends a local or conditional point to every case. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Extreme wordingAbsolute language such as always, never, completely, or only.
Case: A passage says a policy may help under certain conditions. Which answer improperly changes that qualified claim into an absolute rule?Answer: The absolute answer drops the passage’s stated condition and therefore overstates its conclusion. Concept: Absolute language such as always, never, completely, or only.
Extreme wording — common trapExtreme wording is not always wrong, but it requires equally extreme evidence.
Extreme wording — recognize itRecognition cue: Circle universal quantifiers before evaluating the choice. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Extreme wording — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Prefer a qualified answer when the passage itself is qualified. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Outside knowledgeInformation not supplied by the passage and therefore unavailable as evidence.
Case: A passage provides all evidence needed for a question, but a choice adds an unrelated historical fact. Should that outside fact be used?Answer: No unrelated fact should be imported; use the passage and only the hypothetical information supplied in the question. Concept: Information not supplied by the passage and therefore unavailable as evidence.
Outside knowledge — common trapA historically true statement can still be the wrong answer.
Outside knowledge — recognize itRecognition cue: Ask whether every part of your reasoning appears in the text or in the stated hypothetical. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Outside knowledge — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Use the passage plus any hypothetical facts supplied by the question; do not import unrelated facts. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
EliminationRemoving choices that contradict, overstate, reverse, or fail to answer the question asked.
Case: A choice contradicts the passage, another overstates it, and a third answers a different question. Which elimination labels help you compare the final choices?Answer: Use labels such as contradicted, too strong, irrelevant, and supported to compare the remaining choices against the exact stem. Concept: Removing choices that contradict, overstate, reverse, or fail to answer the question asked.
Elimination — common trapDo not keep a choice because it sounds sophisticated.
Elimination — recognize itRecognition cue: Label each choice as supported, too strong, irrelevant, or contradicted. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Elimination — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? After eliminating, compare the remaining choices to the exact stem. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
Comparative argumentA structure in which two views, cases, or theories are compared for a specific purpose.
Case: A passage compares two programs for cost and access rather than declaring one universally best. What shared feature and decisive difference should the map preserve?Answer: Preserve the feature shared by both cases and the specific difference the author uses to evaluate them. Concept: A structure in which two views, cases, or theories are compared for a specific purpose.
Comparative argument — common trapThe author may compare without declaring one side wholly correct.
Comparative argument — recognize itRecognition cue: Build a two-column note and record the author’s evaluation. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Comparative argument — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Track both the shared feature and the decisive difference. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.
PacingA repeatable method for managing passage reading, questions, and review.
Case: A timed passage set takes 9 minutes to read and 6 minutes to answer. What should you record before changing the strategy on the next set?Answer: Record accuracy, uncertainty, and time by passage before changing the pacing method; speed alone is not the diagnosis. Concept: A repeatable method for managing passage reading, questions, and review.
Pacing — common trapSpeed without comprehension creates avoidable inference errors.
Pacing — recognize itRecognition cue: Practice with a time budget for each passage set. Then state the predicted consequence in your own words before looking at the answer choices.
Pacing — retrieval promptWhen a passage or data set points to this concept, ask: what variable, mechanism, or comparison would I predict next? Use a short map, answer from the text, and flag uncertainty rather than rereading endlessly. Your answer should name the direction, condition, or limitation that makes the prediction defensible.