Problem

[rdown2b]

Are my reading comprehension skills way below par when I have answering some passages even after reading it multiple times and dont fully comprehend everything?

[chike_eze]

I guess the question would be: Are you missing more "big picture" questions (like main point and synthesis Q's) or are you missing more detail questions?

...even after reading a [RC passage] multiple times [I still] dont fully comprehend everything?

However, if your question is "Why don't I understand everything about a passage I've read?"... then the short answer is, for RC, it is not necessary to understand everything. It's more important to understand the reasoning, conclusion and structure, than exactly what "carbo-hydro-X-fing-olysis" really means word-for-word.

I've improved on RC (speed increasing too) by focusing more on structure and relationships and less on specific detail. Due to this shift, I've improved my score especially on Science passages (and we both know how dense these passages tend to be).

I think we lose the forest for the trees when we try to understand everything (in detail) about a RC passage. In my opinion, it is more efficient to understand the structure of the passage, notice the relationships between paragraphs, and map out (to the extent possible) the important points and major shifts in the passage.

Here's Advice I've received, over and over again. Still a work in progress for me; hope you find it useful too.

- Be comfortable with uncertainty (still working on this)
- Read for structure (recognize common patterns)
- Reread passages (for structure, sides-if-any, main-point)
- Revise your annotation if it's not working for you (mine is evolving)

Cheers!

PS. I'll also add 1 or 2 great RC strategies from MLSAT Experts below. (You can also traverse the forum for other posts)

[chike_eze]

Focus on the following...

What is the central argument/s?
Who are the proponents of each side of the argument/s?
What is their central evidence?
What is the organization of the passage?

If the passage does not contain an argument but is descriptive in nature instead, focus on passage structure/organization. How does each part of the article/passage fit together with the rest of the paragraphs?

Here's an example. Suppose you have a four paragraph passage with the following purpose for each paragraph:

1. illustrate a phenomenon
2. provide a history of how the phenomenon came to be
3. provide an example of the phenomenon
4. provide a second example of the phenomenon

That would be a descriptive passage. If however the structure was more like:

1. illustrate a problem
2. provide a history of how the problem came to be
3. provide examples of the problem
4. suggest reasons why you should care about the problem

Well now you have an argument!

I've incorporated this into my practice sessions.

Here are some questions I'd ask myself to measure [my RC] understanding [during practice].
...

RC
1. am I organizing the information in the passage before starting with the questions?
2. what information is important?
3. do I see any common patterns in the passages (ex: a phenomenon is introduced, an explanation is offered to explain it, evidence is offered in support of that explanation, the author provides evidence against that explanation, and then the author offers an alternative explanation)

...

... think about those questions above!

Source: lr-specific-advice-on-timing-issues-t4599-10.html

I think #3 is key to beating the RC! Pattern recognition through multiple practice sets. Awesome!