#feedback I don't find it helpful when the explanations talk about what the answer choices could have said to make them a good answer choice. The over analysis often leaves me confused and I feel it's information that's irrelevant to the question at hand. Additionally, it makes the explanations way too in depth with excess information.
I agree with this; it can be difficult to follow the lengthy explanations along and I have to rewind or rewatch certain portions to understand the main point of why an answer is wrong. I think if the explanations focused on breaking down the answers to their main points and narrowed in on small things that prove a question wrong, it'd be more helpful. I noticed that there's a lot of small linguistic stuff that points you in the right or wrong direction that is often missed in our explanations.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! We're always looking to improve, so I've passed this on to our team. Feel free to let us know if you have any further feedback.
I am, too! Sometimes I get them right, but I can't explain with full confidence why that's the case. I don't think they're that difficult, but something clearly isn't clicking.
HMMM OFFICIALLY GOING TO QUIT I THOUGHT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT ANTIBIOTICS THAT DOCTORS GIVE YOU...... wow this test will make you feel as if you have a rock as a brain
Have not gotten 1 question right since starting this module lol. This is so discouraging. I just don't get the logic behind the choices here. None of them seem to make sense for what the question stem is asking.
Hi! I am sorry to hear that. My brain oddly had a challenging time with MC questions so I feel you....
For this question, the goal is to find a piece of support that, within the case of bacteria in sewage sludge, heavy metal → resistance to antibiotics (the actual statement is not must be true/valid, but this is how my brain thinks about it).
B is correct because in this scenario, the bacteria that live in sewage sludge /heavy metal and /resistance to antibiotics. This supports the argument because in the absence of heavy metal, given the conditions were generally consistent, there was no developed resistance to antibiotics, which leads me to think that heavy metal may contribute to the resistance to antibiotics.
I know this was 3 months ago, but if it helps 3 months later then I'll tell you that I didn't find his explanation helpful in doing anything but confusing me. I got it right via this logic:
"Okay so with resistance to heavy metals, we see that they resist antibiotics. cool. How do I prove it?
Well if everything else is pretty much the same in the sludge, but no metals, they suddenly can't resist the metals OR the antibiotics?
So, with the heavy metals, all systems go, the whole chain flows. Without it, everything sucks. Cool, I definitely believe the resistance to heavy metals has an impact on the resistance to antibiotics."
See where I went wrong with B was in my head I thought of it as "If there is no heavy metal even present, how are we supposed to prove that the bacterias exposure to the HM promotes their resistance to antibiotics" when I should have looked at it as "No HM, no resistance" = if there is no heavy metal, then there can't be resistance which helps the argument
This is a trick I picked up from one of the comments that is a good stepping stone :
If anyone is struggling with strengthen/weaken questions ( I, too, did up until recently), it really helps me to focus on the fact that the answer choices are supposed to be added premises for strengthen, and for weaken, it’s like being in a debate with someone. So for strengthen, I read the stimulus, making sure to read the conclusion last, and then say “And this is true/likely true because [AC candidate]”, which saying out loud will help you ID that it really is strengthening the argument (or not if wrong choice). For weaken, same thing except I say, “But this likely isn’t true considering that [AC candidate]”. Hope that helps!
I am consistently getting these questions wrong (S and W both). Is it just me? I feel so dumb. I am watching the recorded videos on these topics to get a better idea to approach them but there is no improvement. This is so cruel.
it's so frustrating choosing the wrong answer bc when i review it and read the explanations, i go "ohhhh" and realize the question wasn't so hard at all
I am struggling with this whole WSE section, I have only got one question right so far in this section. Do you guys have any tips or tricks for what helped you understand this section?
If you are not able to see it right away then the process of elimination is the best plan. Look at each option and ask does this support the argument in the stimulus:
1. If it does support the question, eliminate it
2. If it is consistent but not harmful, eliminate it
3. If it does weaken the stim leave it.
Then follow these steps
A. Select the answer left
B. If you have more than one answer left select the one that most powerfully attacks a premise of the argument (not the concussion directly)
C. If you have no answers left reread the stim looking for something you missed. If you are still confident in your choices, return to answers that fit category 2(consistent but not directly harmful) and repeat steps A and B.
It might take quite a long time at first, but as you do it, you will become faster and faster. Or at least learn when you should skip and come back if you have time.
Forget about assumptions and you'll be fine. If you still don't get it, respond and I'll add more to help you.
Forget the conclusion too, you're adding to the premise.
Weaken
Introduces an alternative cause
Shows the effect happens without the proposed cause
Shows the effect happens without the cause at the same rate
Suggests reverse causation
Shows the experiment was flawed
Strengthen
Rules out alternative causes
Shows the effect happens when the cause is present
Shows the effect is less likely when the cause is absent
Shows the cause actually precedes the effect
Shows the experiment was well-designed
For this example, correct answer is B. Why?
Strengthen Strategy: Make the Argument More Like an Ideal Experiment
(B) is correct because it shows that when the heavy metals are absent, the bacteria do NOT develop antibiotic resistance.
This rules out alternative explanations (like something else in the sewage causing resistance) and makes it much more likely that heavy metals are the cause of antibiotic resistance.
Why (B) Strengthens the Argument:
The argument claims that heavy-metal exposure promotes antibiotic resistance.
(B) shows that when bacteria are in similar sewage without heavy metals, they don’t develop either resistance.
This makes it clear that something about heavy metals is driving the change, rather than some other factor in the sewage.
This is a classic Strengthen via an Ideal Experiment answer: it isolates the variable (heavy metals) and shows that when it’s absent, the effect doesn’t happen!
Forget about assumptions and you'll be fine. If you still don't get it, respond and I'll add more to help you.
166 comments
#feedback I don't find it helpful when the explanations talk about what the answer choices could have said to make them a good answer choice. The over analysis often leaves me confused and I feel it's information that's irrelevant to the question at hand. Additionally, it makes the explanations way too in depth with excess information.
I agree with this; it can be difficult to follow the lengthy explanations along and I have to rewind or rewatch certain portions to understand the main point of why an answer is wrong. I think if the explanations focused on breaking down the answers to their main points and narrowed in on small things that prove a question wrong, it'd be more helpful. I noticed that there's a lot of small linguistic stuff that points you in the right or wrong direction that is often missed in our explanations.
Hey there,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! We're always looking to improve, so I've passed this on to our team. Feel free to let us know if you have any further feedback.
I agree with this, keeping up with all the info about why each answer is wrong is taking too much brainpower.
Tell me why A, C, D, and E and wrong in one sentence for each of those, and why B is right in a single explanation.
Yea i am completely confused on strengthen and weaken questions. Most def the toughest out of the bunch!
I am, too! Sometimes I get them right, but I can't explain with full confidence why that's the case. I don't think they're that difficult, but something clearly isn't clicking.
hate when he starts the video with "hopefully you got it right" because i indeed, did not get it right
@jansenbienmbelarmino It's rather pointless for them to say that for sure, haha.
anyone else find the strengthen questions harder than weaken??
yes!! most of the ones i've gotten wrong in this section were strengthen questions. idk why and it's so frustrating
Is anyone else just completely lost rn
These questions are so humbling. I have no idea what I'm doing now
FML I did my undergrad thesis on antimicrobial resistance and got this wrong.
Lol, yes, that's an especially bitter pill.
these are whooping my a$$
HMMM OFFICIALLY GOING TO QUIT I THOUGHT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT ANTIBIOTICS THAT DOCTORS GIVE YOU...... wow this test will make you feel as if you have a rock as a brain
they are. Bacteria develop resistance to the antibiotics which is why things like mrsa are such a problem.
sobbing in the library rn wbu
@Premiseprincess same
@Premiseprincess Have these gotten any better for you? I'm still going thru the CC but this is taking me outttt
@Premiseprincess sameeeee
Have not gotten 1 question right since starting this module lol. This is so discouraging. I just don't get the logic behind the choices here. None of them seem to make sense for what the question stem is asking.
Hi! I am sorry to hear that. My brain oddly had a challenging time with MC questions so I feel you....
For this question, the goal is to find a piece of support that, within the case of bacteria in sewage sludge, heavy metal → resistance to antibiotics (the actual statement is not must be true/valid, but this is how my brain thinks about it).
B is correct because in this scenario, the bacteria that live in sewage sludge /heavy metal and /resistance to antibiotics. This supports the argument because in the absence of heavy metal, given the conditions were generally consistent, there was no developed resistance to antibiotics, which leads me to think that heavy metal may contribute to the resistance to antibiotics.
Ugh I quit
I need help with these question types. I am not understanding it at all. #help
I know this was 3 months ago, but if it helps 3 months later then I'll tell you that I didn't find his explanation helpful in doing anything but confusing me. I got it right via this logic:
"Okay so with resistance to heavy metals, we see that they resist antibiotics. cool. How do I prove it?
Well if everything else is pretty much the same in the sludge, but no metals, they suddenly can't resist the metals OR the antibiotics?
So, with the heavy metals, all systems go, the whole chain flows. Without it, everything sucks. Cool, I definitely believe the resistance to heavy metals has an impact on the resistance to antibiotics."
these questions love to humble me
I'm so frustrated at this point.
I always go for the opposite option (I chose D lol)
I feel like my mind just goes blank on these causal weaken/strengthen questions. I have to practice these...
Same! So frustrating.
See where I went wrong with B was in my head I thought of it as "If there is no heavy metal even present, how are we supposed to prove that the bacterias exposure to the HM promotes their resistance to antibiotics" when I should have looked at it as "No HM, no resistance" = if there is no heavy metal, then there can't be resistance which helps the argument
@iloveironman This is exactly how I thought! Which is why I didn't choose B. This is sooo frustrating and confusing.
I've gotten nothing right so far in this section.
I'm so fucked.
This section is super shitty I agree.
This is a trick I picked up from one of the comments that is a good stepping stone :
If anyone is struggling with strengthen/weaken questions ( I, too, did up until recently), it really helps me to focus on the fact that the answer choices are supposed to be added premises for strengthen, and for weaken, it’s like being in a debate with someone. So for strengthen, I read the stimulus, making sure to read the conclusion last, and then say “And this is true/likely true because [AC candidate]”, which saying out loud will help you ID that it really is strengthening the argument (or not if wrong choice). For weaken, same thing except I say, “But this likely isn’t true considering that [AC candidate]”. Hope that helps!
I am consistently getting these questions wrong (S and W both). Is it just me? I feel so dumb. I am watching the recorded videos on these topics to get a better idea to approach them but there is no improvement. This is so cruel.
Anytime I'm between 2 answers, I ALWAYS pick the wrong one!!!! Has happened 3 times in a row....
i got this right super quickly and then started over thinking to the point where i gaslit myself into the wrong answer lol
This is so confusing!
this one got me good
it's so frustrating choosing the wrong answer bc when i review it and read the explanations, i go "ohhhh" and realize the question wasn't so hard at all
I am struggling with this whole WSE section, I have only got one question right so far in this section. Do you guys have any tips or tricks for what helped you understand this section?
If you are not able to see it right away then the process of elimination is the best plan. Look at each option and ask does this support the argument in the stimulus:
1. If it does support the question, eliminate it
2. If it is consistent but not harmful, eliminate it
3. If it does weaken the stim leave it.
Then follow these steps
A. Select the answer left
B. If you have more than one answer left select the one that most powerfully attacks a premise of the argument (not the concussion directly)
C. If you have no answers left reread the stim looking for something you missed. If you are still confident in your choices, return to answers that fit category 2(consistent but not directly harmful) and repeat steps A and B.
It might take quite a long time at first, but as you do it, you will become faster and faster. Or at least learn when you should skip and come back if you have time.
This advice is for weakening questions. Ask if is supports the stim and if so eliminate it. That should leave you with only weakening answers.
This can be used for strengthening questions too though with a few modifications.
Forget about assumptions and you'll be fine. If you still don't get it, respond and I'll add more to help you.
Forget the conclusion too, you're adding to the premise.
Weaken
Introduces an alternative cause
Shows the effect happens without the proposed cause
Shows the effect happens without the cause at the same rate
Suggests reverse causation
Shows the experiment was flawed
Strengthen
Rules out alternative causes
Shows the effect happens when the cause is present
Shows the effect is less likely when the cause is absent
Shows the cause actually precedes the effect
Shows the experiment was well-designed
For this example, correct answer is B. Why?
Strengthen Strategy: Make the Argument More Like an Ideal Experiment
(B) is correct because it shows that when the heavy metals are absent, the bacteria do NOT develop antibiotic resistance.
This rules out alternative explanations (like something else in the sewage causing resistance) and makes it much more likely that heavy metals are the cause of antibiotic resistance.
Why (B) Strengthens the Argument:
The argument claims that heavy-metal exposure promotes antibiotic resistance.
(B) shows that when bacteria are in similar sewage without heavy metals, they don’t develop either resistance.
This makes it clear that something about heavy metals is driving the change, rather than some other factor in the sewage.
This is a classic Strengthen via an Ideal Experiment answer: it isolates the variable (heavy metals) and shows that when it’s absent, the effect doesn’t happen!
Forget about assumptions and you'll be fine. If you still don't get it, respond and I'll add more to help you.
Thank you!! Do you have any suggestions for weakening questions?