<p>ok...so I just purchased "Cracking the NEW SAT" by Princeton Review and I'm having a hard time getting myself to use the "Joe Bloggs" concept...has anybody used the Joe Bloggs concept on past SATs? How helpful is it?...Are ANY of the PR concepts helpful???</p>
<p>I did. It really helps. You should not regard it as a law, but it works most of the time.</p>
<p>bluthunder06, most of the techniques in PR books are also in Kaplan books and Arco books and Barron's books... They work well in certain situations on certain problems for certain students. Students scoring in the 400-600 range on any given section tend to benefit most from the techniques, but others can benefit as well. The problem is that few of the books go into enough detail. It's amazing to me how little detail can fill a 600 page book.</p>
<p>That said, learn the techniques in the PR book, especially Plugging In. Practice on problems you could do algebraically, and then when you get to the hard stuff, you'll find Plugging In might be the only way to solve a problem. Just spend some other time actually reviewing the math concepts behind the problems, too.</p>
<p>The thing I disagree with most in PR is the idea that you shouldn't read the critical reading selections before answering the questions. This seems ridiculous to me, and I did just fine on the verbal section by ignoring it (and I'm not even a fast reader). Besides, wouldn't one want to? Sometimes they're interesting!</p>
<p>the math tricks work much more effectively than verbal tricks. And generally the tricks only work well up to a score of 700. It will take brains/luck to get u to the 800.</p>
<p>"The thing I disagree with most in PR is the idea that you shouldn't read the critical reading selections before answering the questions. This seems ridiculous to me, and I did just fine on the verbal section by ignoring it (and I'm not even a fast reader). Besides, wouldn't one want to? Sometimes they're interesting!"</p>
<p>I have to disagree. Often there will be two choices - one which would make sense if you read the whole passage but didn't focus as much on the quote/line, and one which makes more sense if you take the line out of context, with the latter being the answer. I found that not reading passages cut my errors quite a bit on the critical reading section because I didn't make the mistake of glancing over the quote when I saw an option I knew applied to the whole story. For people who have a tendency to get the first option we see that could possibly be the answer set in our heads, like me, not reading the passage before you answer the question can be beneficial in these situations.</p>
<p>In any case, can somebody post some of these "tricks"? I don't have the money to spend on a pile of review books :P</p>
<p>library perhaps?</p>
<p>I love the PR math tricks...I had a 670 PSAT math, and I'm currently hovering at a 790/800 math. Their tricks have helped, but I've also become more aware of ETS' traps and whatnot.</p>
<p>Verbal and writing are so so, but their math is pretty good.</p>
<p>the PR techniques are awesome. Reading the questions before reading the passage was a good method for me to follow, I saved a lot of time.
Plugging in the answer choices is another really useful technique, again it saves a lot of time.
And when I'm solving the tough questions, Joe Bloggs is practically my best friend. I am usually a somewhat careless and overconfident person but looking out for traps and pitfalls really helped.
The PR techniques helped so much that I actually got time to check my work thoroughly on each section :)</p>
<p>Can anybody describe the "Joe Bloggs" technique for those of us without the book? The only PR book I have is the 11 practice tests book.</p>
<p>Joe Bloggs technique is just that you pick the obvious answer. They portray Joe Bloggs as an average guy who just picks the obvious answer and does not look out for the traps. This way, he gets the easy ones right and hard ones wrong.</p>
<p>Joe Bloggs is completely useless.
PR tells you to avoid picking the A choice, if that's the answer you get from your calculations, rather re-check your calculations = time wasting.
The joe bloggs techniques comprise of other useless and frivolous tricks, which personally I would'nt even bother with.
And such a stupid name!!!!</p>
<p>"Joe Bloggs is completely useless"
yup, thats totally right. so, they want us to answer CR questions witout reading the passages???? wow thats so crazy.</p>
<p>Nitinrao, have you really tried the method or have you decided that the method is crazy based on intuition? </p>
<p>When it comes to Critical Reading, there is NO method that is universally BETTER. There is a good amount of subjectivity involved. On a personal note, I have used several different methods, and I can tell you that answerin the questions without reading the entire text does WORK, and very well to boot. </p>
<p>The issue of reading the passage first or later is really a meaningless and pointless discussion. The real question to answer is: how do you maximize undersatnding and recollection of information. Since students' brains work in different ways, you are bound to obtain different results. </p>
<p>FWIW, if I asked you to look up Constantinople in an encyclopedia, would you start with the letter A and work your way to C? Nope? Because the encyclopedia is organized by alphabet. In the same way, the questions on the CR are arranged in the order of the passage. </p>
<p>In the end, it is all a matter of MASTERING the technique one selects. No method works for dilettantes. Again, have you really tried the method?</p>
<p>xiggi, by the statistics on this website, most ppl who have tried this technique have done bad in CR. this technique involves looking at only line numbers and the blurb. do u think that just by the knowledge of the "important sentences" would be enough knowledge about the whole passage? if yes, then y did the author ever bother putting "excessive" info? reading the whole passage and comprehending it is the better technique, and in my oppinion, it is the best. there are many ways to tackle a CR passage, but this is the technique most ppl chosse and are successful with.</p>
<p>"if I asked you to look up Constantinople in an encyclopedia, would you start with the letter A and work your way to C?"
ok, the CR passage is not ordered that way. the encyclopedia has an order of how things are arranged. For this example, it is arranged by letters to help you navigate. But in a CR passage, you dont really know where the "A" is or the "C" is. it is not organized so that there is an answer right in front of your eyes. it is implied and the "excessive" sentences support that topic, and helps you understand the topic.</p>
<p>So you say that the questions are ordered that way? ok, i agree with you partially on that. even thou they are arranged in a chronological order, it doesnt mean that the question is asking about the right spot of the passage. the surrounding sentences and the sentences after the line number the question is asking about may also give you clues to answer those questions. so, we can conclude from this that even though the questions are presented in an order, the answer is not presented the same way. Especially on the question (that are the first questions most times) that ask you about the passage as a whole.</p>
<p>i used to get pretty confused on the CR sections but i tried the whole skip the passage then read questions and come back to it approach and it worked excellent! so i guess it depends on the person b/c if i just search for a specific part, i do really well but if i read the whole thing then on the questions i end up overanalyzing them and thinking-welll... they did also mention.....
so try it out and see whatever fits for you</p>
<p>Nitinrao, I am not sure how you might attempt to compile statistics for THIS website. Do I have to assume that you went back to 2002-2003 and religiously read more than 60,000 posts? </p>
<p>From my vantage point, I believe that you'll find students having equal success with the different methods. Again, you have to understand that I am not pushing one method over the other. </p>
<p>There is, however, one undeniable fact: the CR tends to cause the most problems for students. I will venture as far as claiming that the MAIN reason why students do poorly is because they are trying to UNDERSTAND the entire text without considering that the passage is filled with irrelevant words. Although there are questions that require some inference, most of the questions are DIRECT line references that beg for PRECISE answers. In fact, the understanding of the proposed answers is more important than understanding the passage. Knowing which answers to eliminate is the key. </p>
<p>Allow me to make an analogy ... to do well on the CR sections, you do not need a shotgun but a precision rifle. If a student is able to focus on the direct questions and hunt for the correct answers, the general questions will become REALLY easy. </p>
<p>Please realize that I have nothing to gain in arguing about this subject. I've spent enough time on the SAT to know what works well and what does not work that well. There are merits to a number of strategies, and one has to TRY them in earnest. One of the biggest misconceptions is that the use of strategies represents a shortcut for PREPARATION TIME. Nothing could be further from the truth. The strategies only work for people who invest an adequate amount of time in troubleshooting the techniques and ascertain the relevance to their individual case.</p>
<p>Xiggi, lol, i am not arguing. i thought we were having a nice convo. But remember, i am not trying to post facts, I am only trying to tell my point of view on PR. Anyways, I believe that CR is the hardest part in the SAT, or in any other standardized tests, especially for foreigners (which I am). In the past, I had many problems with the CR passages. My main reason was that I couldn't comprehend the topic. With all the hard sentences, which we have to convert into another complicated sentence to answer the questions was very hard for me. I have rapidly tried the PR technique. Despite its satisfactory SC and Analogy approaches, it fails to tackle the CR section. They try to publish their own tests so that the students may endorse its techniques and find it helpful in the PR-published tests. But is it true in the actual tests? No. I have not gathered statistics of the CC site. However, I have read massive amounts of posts about the PR technique on CR. </p>
<p>They are presenting a misleading approach to try to solve the CR questions. Are we merely supposed to just read the topic and the specified line numbers and be expected to get a 40/40 (or even 30/40) on the CR?? Not according to the posts that I have repeatedly seen. Most people, as I can remember, had 8-15 wrong just by using this technique. When I used this technique, the min. amount of questions I answered wrong was 11. So this is the reason why I switched over to Barron's.</p>
<p>Just by looking at all the posts will not tell you that the PR technique doesn't work. Maybe you have not had an experience with it. When we use this technique, the topic is a huge confusion to us and we are practically clueless about the rest of the passage. For the intelligent students, this worries them and they start to panic that they do not understand the rest of the passage and as a result, they fail on the CR (this might me a reason to why smart students doing well in academics have difficulties on the SAT-panicking and anxiety). But when I used Barron's book, I was very happy about my CR results. I felt very comfortable that I understood the whole passage and learned to "imply" the main points and convert the answer choices into simple words. Since the Barron's tests are harder than the actual tests, it helps because you are actually tackling harder passages and so, the easier passages would be no sweat. </p>
<p>I have also spent enough time understanding the SAT. I have used Barron's techniques (combined with other prep books) to get the idea. I also memorized most of Barron's 3500 words and did all the math practice problems. And yes, I have tried every strategy of many SAT books (including Cliff notes). So I am well aware of the techniques. PR makes their book more useless by presenting their "Joe Bloggs" technique. It is very confusing. The best books out their are: Barron's, 10 Reals, Kaplan's, PR, and Cliff Notes, in that order. </p>
<p>Xiggi, you talk about the amount of time. One who is absolutely insisting to get a good score on the SAT will have absolute commitment. This means that they will set a good amount of time and commitment to study. So, why will they try a cursory way to escape from the CR questions??? They would want to use the best technique, and not care about how much time it takes. And this is what most student on this site are trying to do.</p>
<p>Nitinrao, you mentioned you switched over to barron's, is this because you find some of their CR strategies better than those from PR? And if so, which ones?</p>
<p>i love how the ceo of princeton review hates the sat. read the preface and chapter on essay writing in "cracking the new sat." hilarious.</p>