Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills Section - Skill 2: Reasoning Within the Text
Questions that test Reasoning Within the Text differ from those assessing Foundations of Comprehension in that they ask you to integrate separate passage components into a more generalized and complex interpretation of passage meaning. Questions assessing Reasoning Within the Text will direct your attention to an argument, claim, or theme presented in the passage and then ask you to judge the passage according to specific criteria. The criteria could be the logic and plausibility of the passage text, the soundness of its arguments, the reasonableness of its conclusions, the appropriateness of its generalizations, or the credibility of the author and the sources he or she cites. The questions require you to dig beneath the passage’s surface as you examine evidence, biases, faulty notions of causality, and irrelevant information and to determine the significance of and relationships among different parts of a passage. Additionally, some questions may require that you analyze the author’s language, stance, and purpose. For example, plausible-sounding, transitional phrases may in fact be tricky. If read quickly, the words appear to make a legitimate connection between parts of a passage; however, when subjected to scrutiny, the links they appear to have established may fall apart.
This may sound like a long list of possible critical and analysis skills to have mastered, but they are skills you probably already possess and use every day. Similar to your reactions when you hear someone trying to convince you about something, persuade you to think a particular way, or sell you something, these questions often invite you to doubt and then judge the author’s intentions and credibility. Questioning an author is a legitimate and often necessary analysis strategy that can serve test takers well when making sense of complex text. Answering these questions requires looking beyond contradictions or omission of facts or details to find clues such as vague or evasive terms or language that sounds self-aggrandizing, overblown, or otherwise suspect within the context of the passage. Credible sources—essayists, scientists, lecturers, even pundits—should be both authoritative and objective and should clearly demonstrate expertise. Blatant, one-sided arguments and rigid points of view are easy to identify, but some authors are more nuanced in presenting biased ideas in the guise of objectivity. The key to identifying bias lies in identifying the author’streatment of ideas, which you achieve by analyzing and evaluating different aspects of the passage. For example, an author who uses demeaning stereotypes or derogatory labels is not likely to be a source of objective, judicious analysis.
It’s important to remember that Reasoning Within the Text questions do not ask you to provide your own personal opinion. You may, in fact, disagree with the author’s overall conclusion yet find that the conclusion is a reasonable inference from the limited information provided in the passage. If you happen to know some obscure fact or anecdote outside the scope of the passage that could invalidate the author’s conclusion, ignore it. The content of the passage or new information introduced by the questions should be the only sources on which you base your responses. Achieving a good score on the Critical Analysis and Reasoning Skills section depends on this!