Critical Reasoning: Stop ARGUING With the Argument
Picture your last budget meeting. Someone puts up a slide that says sales dropped because of the new pricing. Before they finish the sentence, you have three objections ready. Wrong time frame. Ignored the competitor launch. Cherry-picked region. You poke, they wobble, you win. That reflex is a big part of why you have the job you have.
On Executive Assessment Critical Reasoning, that same reflex is a TERRIBLE habit. I see it all the time with experienced professionals: the sharper you are in a meeting, the harder you fight the argument on the screen, and the more points you leave on the table. That is not a judgment of your brain. It's a judgment of your process, and the process is fixable.
What you're actually facing
The Executive Assessment (or EA) is GMAC's test for Executive MBA programs. It's 90 minutes, split into three 30-minute sections: Integrated Reasoning, Verbal Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning. The Verbal section gives you 14 questions in 30 minutes, and it mixes three types: Sentence Correction, Critical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension. You can see the full layout on GMAC's assessment structure page.
A Critical Reasoning question (CR, for short) gives you a short argument, usually a few sentences. Then it asks you something about that argument: what would weaken it, what would strengthen it, what it quietly takes for granted. Then you get five answer choices, (A) through (E).
Do the math on the clock. 30 minutes for 14 questions is a little over 2 minutes per question, on AVERAGE. You do not have time to hold a debate with every prompt. You have time to read it the right way once.
The one rule that changes everything
Here it is. The facts in the argument are TRUE. Every one of them. The test writer is not lying to you about the numbers. Your job is not to win. Your job is to spot where the conclusion jumps further than the facts can carry it.
Some quick vocabulary. The conclusion is the main claim, the thing the author wants you to believe. The premises are the facts offered as support. The gap is the missing link between them, the thing the author needs to be true but never says. That missing link is also called an assumption.
At work, you attack premises. On CR, you accept the premises and study the gap. Think about a boxing coach watching tape of the next opponent. He doesn't yell at the screen that the punch was illegal. He watches HOW the guy moves, finds the opening, and plans for it. That's you on CR. You are scouting, not fighting.
Your notes, every time
Some people think they're too smart to take notes on a five-sentence argument. I'll bet those same people re-read the argument at least once on most CR questions. Re-reading is where your time goes. Here's what goes on your pad instead, and it takes about 20 seconds:
- C: the conclusion, in a few words.
- P: the key fact or two, in a few words.
- GAP: what the author is taking for granted.
If you can't write the gap, you are not ready to look at the answers. Stop and find it. Now try one.
4 ways your work brain costs you points
- Attacking the premise. You read "complaints fell 30 percent" and think "says who?" That question wins meetings. Here it wins nothing, because the test already settled it.
INSTEAD: Treat every fact as locked. Put your energy on the jump from facts to conclusion. - Bringing your industry into the room. Say you work in logistics. You KNOW chat systems have problems the prompt never mentions. So what? The right answer has to work from the argument on the screen, not from your career.
INSTEAD: Ask one question of each answer: does this connect to the gap I wrote down? If it needs your outside knowledge to matter, it's out. - Choosing the answer that sounds the toughest. In a meeting, the loudest, broadest objection often wins. On CR, a big dramatic answer that misses the gap scores the same as a blank.
INSTEAD: Pick the answer that does the specific job the question asked for. Weaken means attack the gap. Strengthen means fill it. Quiet and precise beats loud and vague. - Debating in your head. When you argue mentally, you lose track of what the author actually said, so you re-read. Then you argue again. Then you re-read again. Your 'pacing problem' on Verbal is often just this loop.
INSTEAD: Write C, P and GAP on paper, every question, during practice and on test day. Then answer from your notes.
Stop and check yourself
Before you read the next line, think about the last CR question you missed. Why did you miss it? You are NOT allowed to say "I don't know." Was it the premise you didn't trust? The answer that sounded like something your boss would say? The outside fact you couldn't let go of? Name it.
Here's my wager. Go back to five CR questions you got wrong, and I'll bet at least a few of them come down to one thing: you were arguing with the author instead of reading what the author needed.
Now the forced choice. What do you want MORE on test day: the satisfaction of proving the argument is dumb, or the point for finding exactly where it's weak? You can't have both in 2 minutes.
Your assignment for today
Pull five Critical Reasoning questions you've already done. Cover the answer choices. For each one, write C, P and GAP on paper in one line each. Only then uncover the choices and pick. Time yourself on the notes alone. If writing the gap takes you more than 30 seconds, that's your real skill to train this week. Not more questions. That one move, done over and over until it's automatic.
You've spent years training yourself to argue. Spend a few weeks training yourself to read. Start tonight.
