Back to the on-screen lesson ·
Use contrasting possible answers to identify information that would materially change an argument's support.
Paper packet. Every task here also exists on screen, where it is checked automatically; answers written on paper are not assessed by Nydus. When you are back at a device, enter your answers there.
Select an evaluative question whose answers bear differently on the argument's critical uncertainty.
You have identified facts that move support up or down. An evaluation question asks which missing information would help you decide between those directions. The answer is often a question, not the favorable or unfavorable fact itself.
| Term | What it means |
|---|---|
| Diagnostic question | A question whose possible answers distinguish between importantly different assessments. |
| Baseline | The condition before an intervention or comparison period begins. |
| Bottleneck | The limiting step that prevents a process from achieving its intended outcome. |
| Net comparison | A comparison that includes the relevant offsetting gains and losses. |
A question is useful for evaluating an argument when plausible contrasting answers have materially different implications for its support. If a school attributes a score advantage to a new program, knowing whether the schools already differed before the program matters. Comparable baselines remove one rival; a preexisting advantage may explain the later gap. Knowing the cover color of the program usually does neither.
Use the opposite-answer test carefully. Imagine a yes answer and a no answer, or two meaningfully different numerical answers, while preserving the original premises. Explain how each affects the inference. The effects need not be perfectly symmetrical. One answer may strongly weaken the argument while the other merely removes that particular objection. Both can still make the question useful.
Do not answer the evaluative question from outside knowledge. Your task is to identify why the information matters, not to guess what the answer would be in a real institution. A question that shares the passage's vocabulary can remain irrelevant if either answer leaves the crucial connection unchanged.
Another way: picture
Place the proposed question at a fork. Label one branch with a favorable answer and the other with an unfavorable answer. The branches should lead to different assessments of the same inferential link.
Another way: steps
State the conclusion and gap; select a candidate question; imagine contrasting answers; trace each answer's effect; compare how directly the questions test the critical uncertainty.
An argument may contain many unknown details, but not all unknowns matter equally. A profit prediction depends on revenue and costs, not merely on whether customers like a discount. A causal claim depends on whether the observed difference can be attributed to the proposed cause rather than a preexisting difference or concurrent change.
Write the uncertainty as a short relation: program to improvement, lower price to net profit, watermark to original writing date, machine availability to reduced waiting. Then ask which question tests that relation. This prevents collecting interesting background facts that would not affect the argument even if fully answered.
Suppose the candidate asks whether a discount started at the same time as a new display. A yes answer supplies a rival explanation for increased purchases. A no answer removes that particular rival but does not prove that the display caused the increase. The question is still useful because its answers change the evidential situation.
Do not force both branches to prove opposite conclusions. Evaluation is often about degrees of support. Also avoid branches that contradict a stated premise. If the argument explicitly says prices stayed constant, asking whether prices changed is already answered and may contribute little. The useful question concerns an uncertainty the passage actually leaves open.
A lower price can attract more orders while lowering profit. To evaluate the prediction, compare added revenue with added costs and the revenue lost on orders that would have occurred anyway. A question about demand alone addresses only one term of that balance.
The opposite-answer test may use amounts rather than yes and no. If additional margin exceeds the lost margin, the proposed mechanism gains support; if it falls short, the profit prediction weakens. No numerical values are needed when the question directly asks about that comparison. Do not substitute total sales, customer enthusiasm or an attractive product feature for the net result named in the conclusion.
Plans often assume that one obstacle is the main cause of an unwanted outcome. More self-service machines may shorten queues if delayed tasks can be completed on those machines. If the delays arise from tasks only staff can perform, the additional machines may leave the bottleneck untouched.
A useful evaluative question therefore tests the connection between the intervention and the limiting step. Asking whether the machines are available is relevant to feasibility, but asking whether they can handle the delayed tasks may be more central to the expected benefit. Compare the stage of the mechanism each candidate addresses instead of treating every operational detail as equally informative.
An inference from a physical feature to a historical date depends on the feature belonging to the relevant original object. A watermark on a later copy dates the copy's material, not necessarily the original text. Asking about originality directly tests that evidential relationship.
A population estimate depends on the observed sample's relation to the target group. If people who rarely use email cannot easily answer an emailed survey, ask whether their views differ on the measured issue. A question about an unrelated difference may add information without evaluating the estimate. The relevance lies in the connection to the feature being generalized, not in difference alone.
A strengthening answer is a supplied fact with a favorable effect. An evaluative answer identifies information that could matter in either direction. If the options are questions, do not select one merely because you can imagine a favorable answer. Test the contrasting answer too.
Some questions are already settled by the passage, some concern consequences other than the stated conclusion, and some require extra assumptions before either answer matters. The best question directly addresses the unresolved connection. Explain why the nearest rival is less useful: perhaps it checks popularity while the argument concerns profit, or checks appearance while the argument concerns reliability.
An extremely broad question such as is the plan good may merely restate the conclusion rather than isolate information that would evaluate its support. A focused question about the missing condition gives a clearer test. It identifies what evidence would actually change the assessment.
At the same time, do not demand a single perfect experiment when the task asks for the most useful question among options. A baseline comparison can be valuable even if other confounds remain. State the limitation honestly: this answer would resolve one important uncertainty, not every possible concern. That qualified evaluation is more precise than either declaring the argument proved or dismissing all partial information as useless.
Before collecting more information about a proposal, identify which uncertainty would most change your assessment. If the argument concerns whether an intervention caused an improvement, baseline and comparison information may matter more than another description of the intervention. If it concerns net benefit, costs and offsets need attention alongside gains.
The automatic activities assess your selection of a useful supplied question and your classification of the task. They do not certify that a real investigation has been completed. Review an error by writing the two contrasting branches in your notes or considering them mentally: what would yes change, and what would no change? If both leave the same support connection untouched, the question was probably peripheral. On later practice, name the gap before looking at options so an appealing but irrelevant question has less chance to distract you.
A relevant question can have asymmetric effects. It need not prove success on one branch and impossibility on the other. Check the actual conclusion, not a broader judgment of desirability.
Read the passage and question.
A principal credits a new reading program for higher scores at one school compared with another.
Which question would most help evaluate the causal claim?
The cause claim needs a comparison with the schools' conditions before the program.
Compare the five proposed answers.
1: Were the schools' reading scores comparable before the new program began? 2: What color is the program's cover? 3: Does the principal enjoy reading novels? 4: How many windows does the office have? 5: Is the school's name easy to pronounce?
Apply the question's test to each option; do not choose solely by shared vocabulary.
Explain the best answer.
Were the schools' reading scores comparable before the new program began?
A preexisting gap would weaken attribution; comparable baselines would remove that particular rival.
Account for every rejected answer.
2: Either color answer leaves the causal comparison untouched. 3: Personal taste does not establish the cause of the score gap. 4: No connection to reading-score changes is supplied. 5: Pronunciation does not test the proposed cause.
Each rejection identifies a specific mismatch with the passage or task.
Read the passage and question.
A company predicts a lower delivery price will raise profit because it will attract more orders.
Which question is most useful for evaluating the prediction?
Additional orders are not the same as additional profit.
Compare the five proposed answers.
1: Will revenue from the additional orders exceed their additional costs plus the revenue lost on existing orders? 2: Do customers like discounts? 3: Was the company founded in spring? 4: Are the vans the same color? 5: Does the office have a noticeboard?
Apply the question's test to each option; do not choose solely by shared vocabulary.
Explain the best answer.
Will revenue from the additional orders exceed their additional costs plus the revenue lost on existing orders?
The answer directly separates a net-profit increase from a volume increase that loses money.
Account for every rejected answer.
2: Liking discounts does not establish the net revenue-cost comparison. 3: Founding season does not test the proposed profit effect. 4: Color has no stated connection to incremental profit. 5: That detail leaves the relevant calculation unchanged.
Each rejection identifies a specific mismatch with the passage or task.
Read the passage and question.
A historian infers the date of a letter from the watermark on the sheet carrying its text.
Which question most helps evaluate the inference?
Original surface and later copy give a watermark different dating significance.
Compare the five proposed answers.
1: Is the sheet the original writing surface rather than a later copy? 2: Was the letter's writer tall? 3: Is the archive open on Fridays? 4: Does the historian prefer blue ink? 5: Has the archive changed its logo?
Apply the question's test to each option; do not choose solely by shared vocabulary.
Explain the best answer.
Is the sheet the original writing surface rather than a later copy?
An original surface can constrain the writing date; a later copy dates the copy's material instead.
Account for every rejected answer.
2: Height has no connection to the watermark's dating relevance. 3: Opening hours do not establish originality of the sheet. 4: Preference does not test the proposed date inference. 5: The logo does not affect the paper's evidential relation to the original writing.
Each rejection identifies a specific mismatch with the passage or task.
Check the difficult boundary.
An original surface can constrain a date without establishing the exact day or year the author wrote.
This last check preserves the exact strength and scope of the answer rather than turning it into a broader claim.
Identify the prediction.
A clinic expects an online form to reduce long waits at reception.
The plan assumes the form can replace tasks causing those waits.
Choose the diagnostic question.
Can patients complete the tasks responsible for most delays through the online form?
Yes supports shifting the bottleneck; no leaves it in place.
Preserve the remaining uncertainty.
A city predicts that a new car park will reduce congestion by moving parked cars off the street. Which question most helps evaluate the net congestion prediction?
A retailer claims a new display increased purchases because purchases rose after the display appeared. Which question best tests a competing explanation?
A company predicts that a shorter application form will increase completed applications because applicants abandon the present form halfway through. Which question most helps evaluate the prediction?
A town expects a new footpath to reduce short car trips because the path connects two busy neighborhoods. Which question would be most informative?
A museum will replace paper maps with an app, expecting easier navigation because the app can locate visitors inside the building. Which question best tests the expectation?
An orchard expects a barrier to reduce fruit loss because many damaged fruits show marks consistent with deer feeding. Which question most helps evaluate the plan?
A publisher predicts higher profit from a cheaper edition because lower prices will increase sales volume. Which question is most useful?
A library predicts that more self-service machines will reduce waiting times at busy periods. Which question most helps evaluate the prediction?
A bakery moves its proofing trays to a temperature-controlled cabinet and subsequently fewer loaves collapse. During the same period it also begins using a stronger flour. A coordinator concludes that the intervention caused the improvement, arguing that stable proofing temperature prevents excessive expansion. Which question would best help distinguish the proposed explanation from its stated rival?
A coastal rescue station adds reflective markers to its landing route and subsequently crews reach the dock faster at night. During the same period it also introduces a navigation refresher course. A coordinator concludes that the intervention caused the improvement, arguing that markers make the approach easier to identify in darkness. Which question would best help distinguish the proposed explanation from its stated rival?
A store plans to replace its paper catalogue with an online catalogue. The owner predicts that sales will rise because the online version can display more products. No evidence about customers' use of online catalogues is supplied. Which question would most help evaluate that prediction?
Answer three reserved questions without hints. These cases are separate from lesson practice.
A manager predicts that moving a meeting online will increase attendance because travel is inconvenient. Which question most helps evaluate the prediction?
A warehouse predicts that adding shelves will reduce retrieval time by giving every item a designated place. Which question is most useful?
A researcher uses respondents to an emailed survey to estimate the views of all employees, including those who rarely use email. Which question most helps evaluate that estimate?
Tomorrow, apply the opposite-answer test to an unfamiliar causal claim. Name the gap before testing a question. Next: read longer passages by mapping their main point and structure.
17. Test the plan's limiting step, step 3
A yes answer does not guarantee patients will use the form.
One useful question need not settle the entire plan.