8/31/2024 4:41:52 PM |
| Changed Course |
CATALOG INFORMATION
|
Discipline and Nbr:
COMM 9 | Title:
CRITICAL THINK & ARGMNT |
|
Full Title:
Critical Thinking and Argumentation |
Last Reviewed:4/9/2024 |
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 | 5 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 |
| Total Out of Class Hours: 105.00 | Total Student Learning Hours: 157.50 | |
Title 5 Category:
AA Degree Applicable
Grading:
Grade or P/NP
Repeatability:
00 - Two Repeats if Grade was D, F, NC, or NP
Also Listed As:
Formerly:
SPCH 9
Catalog Description:
Untitled document
Primary emphasis is on argumentation as the study of analysis, evidence, reasoning, refutation and rebuttal in oral and written communication. A significant component involves written argumentation with special attention to the essay form.
Prerequisites/Corequisites:
Completion of ENGL 1A (OR ESL 10) or higher
Recommended Preparation:
Limits on Enrollment:
Schedule of Classes Information
Description:
Untitled document
Primary emphasis is on argumentation as the study of analysis, evidence, reasoning, refutation and rebuttal in oral and written communication. A significant component involves written argumentation with special attention to the essay form.
(Grade or P/NP)
Prerequisites:Completion of ENGL 1A (OR ESL 10) or higher
Recommended:
Limits on Enrollment:
Transfer Credit:CSU;UC.
Repeatability:00 - Two Repeats if Grade was D, F, NC, or NP
ARTICULATION, MAJOR, and CERTIFICATION INFORMATION
Associate Degree: | Effective: | Fall 1994
| Inactive: | |
Area: | B
| Communication and Analytical Thinking
|
|
CSU GE: | Transfer Area | | Effective: | Inactive: |
| A3 | Critical Thinking | Fall 1995 | |
|
IGETC: | Transfer Area | | Effective: | Inactive: |
| 1B | Critical Thinking - English Composition | Fall 1995 | |
|
CSU Transfer: | Transferable | Effective: | Fall 1994 | Inactive: | |
|
UC Transfer: | Transferable | Effective: | Fall 1994 | Inactive: | |
|
C-ID: |
CID Descriptor: COMM 120 | Argumentation or Argumentation and Debate | SRJC Equivalent Course(s): COMM9 OR COMM3 |
Certificate/Major Applicable:
Both Certificate and Major Applicable
COURSE CONTENT
Student Learning Outcomes:
At the conclusion of this course, the student should be able to:
Untitled document
1. Compose argumentative essays that utilize sound reasoning, clear organization and
evidentiary support.
2. Engage in debates that demonstrate knowledge of current debate guidelines and strategies.
3. Analyze and evaluate written and oral arguments in order to identify the premises for each
conclusion, assess the quality of reasoning, and gauge the sufficiency of proof.
Objectives:
Untitled document
At the conclusion of this course, the student should be able to:
1. Develop arguments that support the traditional prima facie elements for propositions of fact,
value and policy.
2. Apply stock issues analysis when supporting or opposing a resolution.
3. List, explain and apply the techniques of refutation.
4. Identify and utilize the principles of effective and efficient research in preparing arguments to
support or oppose a debate resolution.
5. Compare and contrast the differences between inductive and deductive reasoning.
6. Compare and contrast different patterns of reasoning including example, analogy, causal and
sign reasoning.
7. Recognize and identify logical fallacies.
8. Demonstrate the use of outlining to construct cases that support or oppose a debate resolution.
9. Critique a debate, oral and/or written, providing reasons for a decision in accordance with
accepted evaluation standards.
Topics and Scope
Untitled document
I. Introduction to the Course
A. The relationship between argument and critical thinking
B. The role of critical thinking in life, politics, professions and education
C. Argumentation and epistemology in the Western rhetorical tradition
D. The roles and responsibilities of arguers
II. The Nature of Argumentation: From Arguing to Debating
A. The meaning of argumentation
B. The basic unit of rhetorical argument: the enthymeme
C. The relationship of debate to argumentation
D. The world of debate
III. The Reasonable Person Model: Addressing our Rational Selves
A. Defining the "reasonable person"
B. The parties to a debate
C. The role of debate in problem solving
D. The ethics of debate
IV. The Resolution: The Focus of a Debate
A. The burden of proof
B. Presumption
C. The standard of proof
D. The burden of refutation
V. The Requirements for a Properly Constructed Debate Resolution
A. One central idea
B. Controversy
C. Neutral terminology
D. The burden of proof properly placed
VI. The Importance of Definitions
A. Types of definitions
B. Standards for evaluating competing definitions
VII. Traditional Prima Facie Stock Issue Requirements
A. Resolutions of fact
B. Resolutions of value
C. Resolutions of policy
VIII. Affirmative Strategies in Debate
A. Needs analysis
B. Comparative advantage
C. Alternative justification
D. Goals/criterion
IX. Negative Strategies in Debate
A. Topicality
B. Defense of the status quo
C. Minor repair
D. Counter policies
E. Reliance on presumption
F. Disadvantages
X. Critical Thinking
A. The Toulmin Model
B. Fallacies of reasoning
C. Syllogisms
D. Inductive reasoning
E. Deductive reasoning
F. Determining valid and invalid arguments
XI. The Role of Research in Support of Claims
A. The need for evidence
B. The evaluation of evidence
C. The application of evidence
D. Conducting basic research
XII. Evaluating the Debate
A. The role of the critic
B. Judging paradigms
C. Providing constructive feedback
Assignments:
Untitled document
Assignments will include:
1. Reading 1-2 chapters per week
2. Writing assignments (minimum of 6,000 words) include:
a. sequential writing on opposing viewpoints
b. essays emphasizing analysis and evaluation of arguments from a critical viewpoint
c. formal argumentative term papers that advocate for or against a policy change on a
significant contemporary issue
3. Skills demonstration consisting of two or three oral debates (in the classroom or via
teleconferencing)
4. Attendance and class participation
5. Optional field work including critiques of live presentations
6. Exams (2-20):
a. midterm exam(s)
b. final exam
c. quizzes
Methods of Evaluation/Basis of Grade.
Writing: Assessment tools that demonstrate writing skill and/or require students to select, organize and explain ideas in writing. | Writing 50 - 60% |
Argumentative essays of varying lengths | |
Problem solving: Assessment tools, other than exams, that demonstrate competence in computational or non-computational problem solving skills. | Problem Solving 5 - 10% |
Include evaluating syllogisms, identifying fallacies and identifying the problem with (and fixing) incorrectly
phrased resolutions | |
Skill Demonstrations: All skill-based and physical demonstrations used for assessment purposes including skill performance exams. | Skill Demonstrations 15 - 25% |
Include oral presentations/debates, performance exams | |
Exams: All forms of formal testing, other than skill performance exams. | Exams 15 - 25% |
Multiple choice; True/False; Matching; Completions; Essays | |
Other: Includes any assessment tools that do not logically fit into the above categories. | Other Category 5 - 10% |
Class attendance and participation in discussions and group exercises | |
Representative Textbooks and Materials:
Untitled document
Critical Thinking, Reading and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument. 9th ed. Barnet, Sylvan and Bedau, Hugo and O'Hara, John. Bedford/St. Martins. 2016
Argumentation and Debate. 13th ed. Freeley, Austin and Steinberg. David. Wadsworth Publishing. 2013
Critical Thinking and Communication: The Use of Reason in Argument. 7th ed. Inch, Edward and Tudor, Kristen. Pearson. 2013
Critical Thinking Through Debate. 2nd ed. Nelson, Mark and Corcoran, Joseph. Kendall/Hunt. 2012 (classic)
Argument! 2nd ed. Gooch, John and Seyler, Dorothy. McGraw-Hill. 2012 (classic)
Argumentation and Critical Decision Making. 8th ed. Rieke, Richard and Sillars, Malcolm and Peterson, Tarla. Pearson. 2012 (classic)
Burden of Proof: An Introduction to Argument and Guide to Parliamentary Debate. 4th ed. Crossman, Mark. Thomson Custom Publishing. 2005 (classic)
Print PDF