Published by Think Clearly Prep · Updated .
Use roles instead of copying details
After a paragraph, write a short role label such as “introduces a dispute,” “presents a traditional explanation,” or “qualifies the new proposal.” Then name the relation to the next paragraph: support, contrast, example, objection, or resolution.
A map should be brief enough to use. Rewriting every sentence consumes time without revealing structure. Proper names and technical terms often matter as labels; you can return to their definitions when a question asks for a detail.
An original mini-passage
City planners sometimes evaluate a public square by counting visitors. A crowded square may indicate popularity, but a visitor count does not reveal whether people can comfortably rest, meet neighbors, or move through the space. A square beside a transit station may be crowded primarily because people must cross it.
Visitor counts are therefore useful when combined with observations of how the space is used. A redesign that reduces total foot traffic but creates more accessible seating might improve the square for some intended users. The evaluation should state whose needs it aims to serve before deciding what counts as success.
Map the passage
Notice the qualification “useful when combined.” A choice claiming that visitor counts are worthless would be too strong. A choice saying that every redesign should reduce traffic would turn a hypothetical example into a universal policy.
- Paragraph 1: introduces a common measure and explains why it can be misleading.
- Paragraph 2: proposes a qualified evaluation and ties success to the intended users.
- Author’s position: visitor counts can help, but should not be the only measure.
Match the question to the evidence needed
For this passage, the transit-station example demonstrates an alternative reason for crowding. It does not establish that transit stations always damage public spaces or that commuters never use seating. Those claims exceed the evidence.
- Main point: identify the claim that covers the passage’s central development, including its qualification.
- Author attitude: look for evaluative language and keep the degree of approval or criticism proportional.
- Function: explain why a sentence appears in the reasoning, not merely what the sentence says.
- Inference: choose a claim supported by the passage without importing an outside explanation.
Practice an inference
Which statement is best supported: (A) the busiest square always serves users best, or (B) an evaluation can depend on which users the project is meant to serve?
B follows from the final sentence. A conflicts with the passage’s critique of using crowd size alone. State the supporting phrase before deciding; a familiar or plausible claim is not enough.
Compare paired passages
Build a map for each author separately before deciding how they relate. They can agree on a problem while disagreeing about its cause or solution. A claim supported by passage A alone cannot automatically be attributed to both authors.
During review, mark each disputed choice A, B, both, or neither, then point to the relevant sentence. This exposes answers that transfer one author’s attitude to the other.
Review for transferable mistakes
- Find the exact sentence or relationship that settles the question.
- Name the wrong answer’s error: too strong, wrong speaker, reversed relationship, unsupported addition, or wrong scope.
- Re-answer later without looking at the explanation.
- Use official LSAC practice as well as original teaching examples when preparing for the actual test.