The diagrams in Question #3 and Question #6 are different.
The passage in Question #3 is diagrammed as: P: O -> not WA C: WA -> not O The premise and conclusion here are contrapositives of each other, so they have the same meaning. Therefore, this is an example of circular reasoning.
The passage in Question #6 is diagrammed as: P: SS -> not P C: not P -> SS Notice that the premise and conclusion here are not contrapositives of each other like in Question #3. Instead, Question #6 is merely reversing and not negating the S->N statement. Therefore, the two statements here are saying different things and are not an example of circular reasoning. In other words, the conclusion is not saying the same thing as the premise but is misapplying it.
Does that make sense? Hope it helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions!
