I was coaching a GMAT client the other day through some tricky RC questions, and he was getting stuck on main point questions. Unsurprisingly, he was also getting really stuck on understanding what the passage was saying at all.
Here’s the advice I gave him:
- For all passages, the main point can be found in the first sentence or two of each paragraph. You can confirm it by looking at the last sentence of each paragraph.
- If there’s an unfamiliar term in the first sentence or two of each paragraph, you can be certain that term’s really important for the main point. Find the part of the paragraph where they define it, which will likely be the next sentence.
- For tricky passages, you have to pay really close attention to point of view: who believes what? Does the author believe what’s in that sentence, or does one of the people mentioned believe it? Does the author agree with that person?
Let’s do an example. I’ve copy pasted a passage below in quotation marks, as well as a main point question.
” Micro-wear patterns found on the teeth of long-extinct specimens of the primate species australopithecine may provide evidence about their diets. For example, on the basis of tooth micro-wear patterns, Walker dismisses Jolly’s hypothesis that australopithecines ate hard seeds. He also disputes Szalay’s suggestion that the heavy enamel of australopithecine teeth is an adaptation to bone crunching, since both seed cracking and bone crunching produce distinctive micro-wear characteristics on teeth. His conclusion that australopithecines were frugivores (fruit eaters) is based upon his observation that the tooth micro-wear characteristics of east African australopithecine specimens are indistinguishable from those of chimpanzees and orangutans, which are commonly assumed to be frugivorous primates.
However, research on the diets of contemporary primates suggests that micro-wear studies may have limited utility in determining the foods that are actually eaten. For example, insect eating, which can cause distinct micro-wear patterns, would not cause much tooth abrasion in modern baboons, who eat only soft-bodied insects rather than hard-bodied insects. In addition, the diets of current omnivorous primates vary considerably depending on the environments that different groups within a primate species inhabit; if australopithecines were omnivores too, we might expect to find considerable population variation in their tooth micro-wear patterns. Thus, Walker’s description of possible australopithecine diets may need to be expanded to include a much more diverse diet.
8. The passage is primarily concerned with
(A) comparing two research methods for determining a species’ dietary habits
(B) describing and evaluating conjectures about a species’ diet
(C) contrasting several explanations for a species’ dietary habits
(D) discussing a new approach and advocating its use in particular situations
(E) arguing that a particular research methodology does not contribute useful data “
So, if we do first sentence, last sentence we get:
- “Micro-wear patterns found on the teeth of long-extinct specimens of the primate species australopithecine may provide evidence about their diets…His conclusion that australopithecines were frugivores (fruit eaters) is based upon his observation that the tooth micro-wear characteristics of east African australopithecine specimens are indistinguishable from those of chimpanzees and orangutans, which are commonly assumed to be frugivorous primates.”
- “However, research on the diets of contemporary primates suggests that micro-wear studies may have limited utility in determining the foods that are actually eaten…Thus, Walker’s description of possible australopithecine diets may need to be expanded to include a much more diverse diet.”
In our first paragraph, our first sentence introduces something that may be true. Our last sentence introduces someone’s conclusion relating to microwear (note: the author thinks this may be true, the person mentioned thinks this is definitely true).
In our second paragraph, our first sentence suggests a reason the previous sentence might not be true. Our last sentence suggests modifying someone’s description.
So, overall, our passage is definitely describing conjectures and evaluating them, which brings us to B.
You might be tempted by C, but we don’t see any clear contrasting here (putting one explanation up against another and saying how they’re similar or different). It looks like the author’s treating each conjecture individually.
If you found this explanation helpful, you should check out my RC ebook, the GMAT RC Process. I also have a Youtube channel where I discuss test prep topics, including a video on the GMAT RC process for slow or “bad” readers.