LSAT Reading Comprehension study plan
LSAT Reading Comprehension · Give each week a clear focus.
8 weeks · About 6 hours per week
Main idea or primary purpose & Information that is explicitly stated
State the primary purpose of a passage in one sentence before looking at any question
Separate the main point from three or more supporting details in every passage you read
Locate explicitly stated facts quickly by predicting where in the passage a given detail question will be answerable
Build a repeatable passage-mapping routine (paragraph function notes in the margin) and apply it to every passage
Your checkpoint
A passage log of 12 full passages, each with a one-sentence main-point statement, a paragraph-function map, and three explicitly stated details with line locations
Information or ideas that can be inferred & Main idea or primary purpose
Distinguish genuine inferences from restatements of the text by labeling each answer choice as 'stated,' 'inferred,' or 'unsupported'
Justify every inference answer with the specific textual warrant that forces the conclusion
Reject answer choices that are true in the real world but not supported by the passage
Re-confirm main point identification on passages where the author's thesis appears only in the final paragraph
Your checkpoint
A written analysis of 30 inference questions, each with the textual warrant for the credited answer and a one-line reason why each wrong choice fails
Meaning or purpose of words or phrases as used in context & Organization or structure
Paraphrase the meaning of a specified word or phrase using only its surrounding context, then check the paraphrase against the answer choices
Identify the structural pattern of a passage (thesis-first, contrast, chronology, problem-solution) within the first read
Describe the function of each paragraph relative to the passage's overall argument
Predict where the author signals a shift in position using transition and concession language
Your checkpoint
Structure maps for 10 passages, each annotated with structural pattern, paragraph functions, and three in-context vocabulary paraphrases
Application of information in the selection to a new context & Principles that function in the selection
Abstract a stated principle out of the passage before evaluating answer choices
Apply a passage's rule or principle to a hypothetical situation that does not appear in the text
Test whether an answer choice's scenario is governed by the same principle or merely shares surface vocabulary
Reject applications that extend the principle beyond the scope the author actually committed to
Your checkpoint
A set of 20 application and principle questions, each with the abstracted rule written out in your own words and a note on the scope limitation
Analogies to claims or arguments in the selection & Author's attitude as revealed in tone or language
Map the structural relationship in an analogy (cause-effect, part-whole, means-end) before matching it to an answer choice
Characterize the author's attitude using a ranked vocabulary (qualified approval, grudging concession, outright dismissal) rather than 'positive' or 'negative'
Locate the specific words in the passage that carry the author's tone and cite them
Distinguish the author's attitude from the attitude of a person the author is describing
Your checkpoint
A tone and analogy workbook: 15 analogy items with the relationship diagrammed, plus a 25-word attitude vocabulary list with a cited passage example for each term
Impact of new information on claims or arguments & Information or ideas that can be inferred
Predict, before reading the answer choices, what effect a piece of new information would have on a specific claim in the passage
Classify each new-information item as strengthening, weakening, or irrelevant to the targeted claim
Identify which claim in the passage a hypothetical fact is actually aimed at before evaluating answers
Combine new-information practice with inference practice to keep both skills sharp
Your checkpoint
A log of 20 new-information questions, each with a written prediction of the effect on the claim before the answer choices were read
Comparative reading: relationships between the two passages
Build a comparison grid for each paired passage set covering thesis, evidence type, and stance toward the shared topic
Identify whether the second passage agrees, qualifies, or rejects the first passage's position
Answer relationship questions by citing the specific point of convergence or divergence, not by summarizing both passages
Practice switching between passages without confusing the two authors' claims
Your checkpoint
Comparison grids for 8 paired passage sets, each with an explicit agreement/qualification/rejection verdict and supporting citations
Main idea or primary purpose & Information or ideas that can be inferred & Organization or structure & Comparative reading: relationships between the two passages
Execute full timed sections under test-day conditions without pausing to review
Classify every missed question into a domain and an error type (misread, scope, timing, over-inference)
Re-read passages you missed on and identify what a better first read would have captured
Consolidate personal checklists for each domain into a single pre-test review sheet
Your checkpoint
Three timed full sections with a complete error taxonomy, a score trend chart, and a one-page personal error-pattern review sheet
Milestones
Week 4: Score at least 70% on a mixed set of 40 questions drawn from Domains 1-7, and be able to state a passage's main point in one sentence within 30 seconds of finishing the read
Week 6: Score at least 75% on a mixed 40-question set spanning Domains 1-10, with no more than two errors attributable to misidentifying the main point or over-inferring
Week 8: Complete three timed sections at or above 75% accuracy with time remaining, and show a written error taxonomy where no single domain accounts for more than a third of total misses