|12/2/2023 6:02:45 PM||
|Discipline and Nbr:
|Units||Course Hours per Week|| ||Nbr of Weeks||Course Hours Total
|Maximum||3.00||Lecture Scheduled||3.00||17.5 max.||Lecture Scheduled||52.50
|Minimum||3.00||Lab Scheduled||0||6 min.||Lab Scheduled||0
| ||Contact DHR||0|| ||Contact DHR||0
| ||Contact Total||3.00|| ||Contact Total||52.50
| ||Non-contact DHR||0|| ||Non-contact DHR Total||0
Title 5 Category:
AA Degree Applicable
Grade or P/NP
00 - Two Repeats if Grade was D, F, NC, or NP
Also Listed As:
| ||Total Out of Class Hours: 105.00||Total Student Learning Hours: 157.50||
The application of the principles of critical thinking to the writing of argumentative essays. Critical reasoning skills are presented and practiced in the context of the construction and the critique of numerous written, extended arguments.
Course Completion of ENGL 1A
Limits on Enrollment:
Schedule of Classes Information
The application of the principles of critical thinking to the writing and analysis of extended, argumentative essays.
(Grade or P/NP)
Prerequisites:Course Completion of ENGL 1A
Limits on Enrollment:
Repeatability:00 - Two Repeats if Grade was D, F, NC, or NP
ARTICULATION, MAJOR, and CERTIFICATION INFORMATION
Major Applicable Course
Outcomes and Objectives:
At the conclusion of this course, the student should be able to:
|Associate Degree:||Effective:||Spring 1991||Inactive:||
| Area:||B||Communication and Analytical Thinking
|CSU GE:||Transfer Area|| ||Effective:||Inactive:
| ||A3||Critical Thinking||Fall 1991||
|IGETC:||Transfer Area|| ||Effective:||Inactive:
| ||1B||Critical Thinking - English Composition||Fall 1981||
|CSU Transfer:||Transferable||Effective:||Spring 1991||Inactive:||
|UC Transfer:||Transferable||Effective:||Spring 1991||Inactive:||
1. The students will read extended arguments (diversity of perspective
and culture will be reflected in the selection of these arguments) and
write clear, coherent and well organized critical essays analyzing
and evaluating those arguments. In those critical essays, successful
A. Identify and describe the main conclusion or thesis of the
argument being critiqued, and demonstrate an understanding
of its significance.
B. Identify and paraphrase the main supporting premises for the
conclusion and the arguments in support of those premises.
C. Identify vagueness, ambiguity, emotive language and other
rhetorical elements of the argument, as appropriate.
D. Make explicit any unstated premises and/or conclusions in the
argument, as appropriate.
E. Employ the correct techniques for evaluating the deductive
and/or inductive structures of the component arguments within
the larger argument.
F. Determine and discuss the relevance of premises to conclusions,
G. Detect and describe logical fallacies that may occur in the
H. Evaluate the acceptability of any unsupported statements of
fact or opinion in the argument, as appropriate.
I. Perform a summary evaluation of the overall argument.
2. Students will also construct several essays in which they formulate
and defend their own positions on topics of controversy. In these
essays, successful students will:
A. Select an appropriate topic.
B. Formulate a clear and defendable conclusion.
C. Conduct library research on the topic, as appropriate.
D. Develop strong arguments which are based upon sound
inferences from clear and acceptable premises. Arguments
should be free from invalidity, inductive errors, irrelevance
and logical fallacies.
E. Anticipate and critique the strongest counter-arguments.
F. Express their ideas clearly, precisely and unambiguously.
G. Organize their essays, paragraphs and sentences logically
H. Provide the appropriate documentation, as necessary.
Topics and Scope
Topics and sequences vary but a typical course involves the following:
1. Presentation of the concept of "argument" and its various
components (e.g. issue, conclusion, premise, assumption), and
discussion of methods of identifying these components; practice
in paraphrasing arguments.
2. Discussion of clarity in language use; how to recognize unclear
language and how to improve the clarity of one's own writing.
3. Description of rhetorical features of argument evaluation (e.g.
ambiguity, connotation, denotation, euphemism, slanting) and
practice identifying these features in essays.
4. Description of the various types of argument (e.g. deductive,
inductive, syllogism, generalization, analogy, causal argument)
and practice identifying them in essays.
5. Presentation and written application of methods for evaluating
arguments (e.g. validity, soundness, cogency, relevance, logical
6. Description and written application of methods for evaluating each
of the various types of argument.
7. Description and written application of methods for determining the
acceptability of claims of fact, value, opinion, etc.
8. Discussion and written application of methods for selecting
argumentative essay topics and conclusions.
9. Discussion and written application of methods for developing and
presenting relevant support for a conclusion.
10. Practice identifying and responding to the strongest objections to
11. Development of skills in organizing an argumentative essay clearly,
logically, and coherently by the appropriate use of essay components
(e.g. introduction, transitions, conclusions, summaries, logical
relationships between sentences in a paragraph, logical relationships
between paragraphs in the overall essay).
12. Development of appropriate library research and documentation skills.
13. Practice revising the essay to improve its clarity, coherence,
accuracy, cogency and logical progression.
Assignments vary, but students will write a minimum of 5000 words divided
into at least five essays.
Methods of Evaluation/Basis of Grade.
Representative Textbooks and Materials:
|Writing: Assessment tools that demonstrate writing skill and/or require students to select, organize and explain ideas in writing.||Writing
70 - 90%
|Problem solving: Assessment tools, other than exams, that demonstrate competence in computational or non-computational problem solving skills.||Problem Solving
5 - 20%
|Skill Demonstrations: All skill-based and physical demonstrations used for assessment purposes including skill performance exams.||Skill Demonstrations
0 - 0%
|Exams: All forms of formal testing, other than skill performance exams.||Exams
5 - 25%
|Other: Includes any assessment tools that do not logically fit into the above categories.||Other Category
0 - 0%
THE POWER TO PERSUADE: A RHETORIC AND READER FOR ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING,
by Sally DeWitt Spurgin, 3rd edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
CURRENT ISSUES AND ENDURING QUESTIONS: A GUIDE TO CRITICAL THINKING AND
ARGUMENT WITH READINGS, 4th edition, St. Martins Press, Boston, 1996.
CURRENT ISSUES AND ENDURING QUESTIONS by Sylvan Barnett and Hugo Bedau,
6th ed., Bedford/St. Martins 2002.