How to Analyze a Reading Comprehension Problem on the GRE
In recent articles, we’ve discussed how to analyze practice problems when we’re studying, and we’ve also talked about how to read RC passages. (If you haven’t already read those articles, you may want to do so before you continue with this article.)
Today, we’re going to do a question from the Language Power passage that we reviewed in a previous article, and we’re going to analyze that question using the how to analyze a problem process. If you haven’t already read this passage (or if it has been a while since you read it), go take a look at the Language Power article first (linked above). Give yourself roughly 3 minutes to read through the passage and take notes, then read the rest of that article.
Okay, finally, you can get started on this article! Below is the full text of the passage followed by the question.
Sarah Meyers McGinty, in her new book Power Talk: Using Language to Build Authority and Influence, argues that while the simple lingual act of declaring power does not help a powerless person gain influence, well-considered linguistic techniques and maneuvers do. McGinty does not dispute the importance of factors such as expertise and ability in determining stature, but argues persuasively that these power determinants amount to little in a person unable to communicate effectively. Many surveys have shown that the ability to communicate effectively is the characteristic judged by managers to be most critical in determining promotability in the workplace or an academic environment.
McGinty divides speech into two categories: “language from the center” and “language from the edge”. In McGinty’s words, “Language from the center makes a speaker sound like a leader. McGinty suggests that language from the center is not only for those in high positions of power, but also for those of lower ranks who wish to gain more power and credibility. A speaker using language from the center exhibits the following characteristics: he directs rather than responds; he makes statements rather than asks questions; he contradicts, argues, and disagrees; he uses his experience persuasively; and he maintains an air of impersonality in the workplace. McGinty suggests that the use of language from the center can alter or create a new balance of power. These assertions are supported by studies that show that people accept leadership from those they perceive to be experts.
Language from the edge stands in stark contrast to language from the center. Language from the edge is careful, exploratory, and inquiring. It is inclusive, deferential, and collaborative. A speaker using language from the edge responds rather than directs; asks questions; strives to make others feel heard and protected; and avoids argument. The main purpose of language from the center is to claim authority for a speaker, while language from the edge strives to build consensus and trust. McGinty argues that true power comes from a deep understanding of when to use which style and the ability to use both as necessary.
What distinguishes McGinty’s discussion of effective communication is her focus on communication skills as a way of gaining power; this contrasts with most workplace communication theory, which focuses on communication skills as a way of preventing misunderstandings, avoiding conflict, and fostering interpersonal relationships. McGinty, however, holds that language not only helps maintain relationships but also lends authority. According to Power Talk, effective communication skill is an understanding of how situation shapes speech and how speech shapes situation and an understanding of how speech styles and the forces that affect those styles . . . can build your authority, and enhance your credibility and impact.
And here’s the problem; give yourself about 1 minute to answer it.
The primary focus of the passage is on which of the following?
(A) Demonstrating the effectiveness of a certain framework in the business world
(B) Explaining the advantages and disadvantages of a proposed approach to business communication
(C) Analyzing the details of a controversial theory of business
(D) Presenting a new model of business communication
(E) Articulating the major differences between two types of language
Okay, so you’re done with the problem. Now what? Well, the first thing everybody does is check the answer “ but, interestingly, the analysis doesn’t depend much on whether we get it right or wrong. We all want to know, though, so go ahead and check the answer; just be aware that this doesn’t change your review process much. The correct answer is D.
Now we’re going to analyze our work. I’ve reproduced the questions from the How To Analyze article below, but in a shorter form. I’ve followed the questions with italicized notes. These notes represent what I would think to myself when analyzing this problem.
Note: I’m going to pretend that I chose answer choice B (so I got it wrong!). Answers A and E are actually the most commonly chosen wrong answers on this problem, with wrong answer B following close behind.
1. Did I know WHAT they were trying to test?
Questions: Was I able to categorize this question? Did I comprehend all the words, vocab, concepts, and answer choices? Do I know what I’m supposed to do for questions of this type?
I knew that this was a main idea question because they ask about the primary focus. Main idea correct answers are usually fairly middle of the road: they can’t go into too much detail but they also can’t go beyond what the passage actually says.
2. How well did I HANDLE what they were trying to test?
Questions: How was my approach? Did I have the skills to follow through? Did I make any careless mistakes? If so, WHY did I make each mistake? How could I have made an educated guess? Do I understand the traps built into the question, including wrong answers?
Well, I got it wrong, so clearly there’s got to be a better way. : ) The explanation for answer B pointed out that, while the passage does talk about McGinty’s proposed theory in positive terms at times (for example, she argues persuasively, according to the passage), the passage never discusses any disadvantages. It just talks about what McGinty’s theory is and how that compares and contrasts with other existing theories. And that’s pretty much what answer D says, but I wasn’t paying that much attention to answer D by the time I read it, because I already thought B was the right answer.
So, how can I avoid making that mistake next time? First, I have to make sure that I haven’t locked myself into an earlier answer so much that I don’t really read the remaining answers. I should have thought of B as this might be it rather than I already found the right answer.
Next, I need to make sure that I’m paying attention to every word in the answer. I liked B originally because it talked about a proposed approach, which is similar to a theory or hypothesis, and because I felt that the author did like McGinty’s theory and discussed its advantages. I glossed right over the word disadvantages, but I do know that every word has to be supported “ and there’s no support in the passage to justify the word disadvantages.
Answer D, on the other hand, is so vague but that’s precisely what makes it work. The passage does present a new model “ McGinty’s model “ and it is a model of business communication. Done.
3. How well did I or could I RECOGNIZE what was going on?
Questions: Did I make a connection to previous experience? Can I make any connections now, while I’m analyzing the problem? HOW will I recognize similar problems in the future?
I didn’t have any problem recognizing that this was a main idea question, but I did forget that any details in an answer choice MUST be justified by the passage, or I have to cross that choice off. I knew that already “ how am I going to remember that for next time?
Okay, I’m going to go through the wrong answers and articulate exactly why each one is wrong. In A, the word effectiveness goes too far; the author presents McGinty’s theory but never shows how effective it is. In B, as I already noted, the word disadvantages isn’t justified by the passage; similarly, the word controversial in answer C isn’t supported by the passage either. There isn’t any major conflict or controversy in the passage. Wow, all three of those answer choices can be eliminated because one word is off or not supported by the passage.
Oh, I can see how E would be really tricky because of the two types of language part. It was all about the two types of language! But the major differences between the two types? That’s a detail of McGinty’s overall theory, but that’s not the overall theory, or main point, of the passage, nor is it even the main point of McGinty’s theory. Her main theory is that people can use both types of language in order to develop true power. This one’s an example of getting too detailed “ this info was in the passage, but it was detail, not the main idea.
In my notes, I’m going to write main idea = middle of the road and must justify each word as my two main takeaways here. That will help me to remember that I have to make sure that every word is supported by the passage and that I don’t want to fall for a too detailed answer. Because the first issue was the biggest problem for me, when I do more RC passages later this week, I’m going to keep a note out that just says Justify! in big letters to remind myself to do that when examining the answers. Hopefully, by the end of the week, I’ll have that step burned into my brain as part of my standard answer elimination process for RC.
And there you have it “ that’s how to analyze an RC problem. Note that I didn’t answer every single question on the lists of questions. You don’t need to do that (if you tried, you’d be studying each problem for half an hour!). Rather, pick and choose the particular questions that you need based on how things went for each problem. You can also go through some questions more quickly. I knew that I correctly recognized the problem type, so I didn’t spend much time thinking about it. I messed up on evaluating the answers, however, and fell into a trap, so I spent a lot more time examining that part of the problem. On another problem, I might misread the question or misread something in the passage, and then I would spend more time analyzing that aspect of things.