COURSE PROPOSAL FORMAT
Title: Argumentation and Critical Thinking
Credit: 3
Department: CORE
Date Submitted:
Level of course: 100
Submitted by:
Department Chair’s Signature: ______________________________
(signifies approval by department faculty)
Division Chair’s Signature: _______________________________
(signifies approval by division faculty)
1.
Rationale for offering course:
In January, 1997, the faculty of Morningside College adopted the following skills as part
of the CORE Curriculum.
B5:
B6:
B7:
“An ability to acquire and manage information using traditional and contemporary
sources”
“An ability to think critically about one’s own work and ideas and that of others”
“Ability to communicate – in the context of presenting ideas to others, students
will develop skills of reading, writing, listening, speaking, presenting quantitative
information.”
As future leaders, students must be able to formulate logical arguments in both written
and oral contexts, and to analyze and evaluate written and oral arguments. The purpose
of offering a class in which critical thinking and argumentation is directly taught is based
on the premise that students will not automatically learn these skills without explicit
instruction. The task force developing this class realized that faculty frequently complain
that students are unable to formulate logical arguments or engage in oral discussion of
academic ideas. We believe that this course directly addresses such developmental
needs.
2.
Catalog Entry
CORE 140: Argumentation and Critical Thinking: This course is designed to
teach elements of critical thinking and argumentation and apply knowledge of
these elements in written and spoken contexts. Topics will vary among
instructors.
Required for all students as part of the CORE.
PREREQ: CORE 100 College Writing
3.
Course Objectives
A student who has successfully taken this course should attain skills in the
following areas:
a.
Identify and use components of critical thinking, such as in construction
arguments orally and in writing with consideration of audience and
context; using various types of arguments, such as factual, causal,
evaluative, persuasive; recognizing fallacious reasoning, such as faulty
generalization; and analyzing and synthesizing information.
b.
Examine arguments in written and spoken contexts, to test assumptions,
evaluate evidence and the sources of the evidence, formulate implications
of logical conclusions, and assess the total impact and relevance of the
argument.
c.
Use problem solving processes to identify and state problems, take into
consideration history and possible causes of problems, recognize a range
of solutions, and research some conclusion (even if this is a nebulous, not
fully formed conclusion).
d.
Generate and evaluate differing perspectives and reformulate thinking
based on examining one’s own and others’ viewpoints.
e.
Engage in evaluation of written and oral arguments of self and others.
f.
Do an oral presentation or debate in which several sides of an issue are
presented and a logical conclusion is reached. Students listen, organize,
and summarize accurately the content of a spoken conversation or
presentation.
4.
Abbreviated syllabus or course outline:
I.
Critical thinking and argumentation
A.
Definition
B.
Process of argumentation (formulating, supporting, and reviewing
arguments)
C.
Logical thinking
II.
Developing logical arguments
A.
Making and supporting claims
1.
Factual arguments
2.
Causal arguments
3.
Evaluative arguments
4.
Recommendations in arguments
III.
Putting it all together
A.
Using components of critical thinking to develop written and
spoken arguments.
B.
Applying critical thinking to written or oral contexts.
2
5.
Text: (EXAMPLE ONLY)
Mayberry, K. & Golden, R. (1996). For Argument’s Sake: A Guide to Writing
Effective Arguments. NY: Harper Collins.
Problem-based anthology, another book of readings, such as one from the
Opposing Viewpoints series, published by Greenhaven Press, San Diego. This
book would be used for identifying examples of critical thinking, as well as a
series of readings for students to develop their own arguments.
6.
Teaching-learning methods
The format of the class includes an interactive learning approach, with emphasis
placed on the student participation in small and large groups. Class periods
include lectures, directed teaching, application of topics to readings, and small
and large group instruction. Lectures and presentations will include visual aids,
such as overheads, videos, multimedia, presentation software. Videotaping of
students will be used in self-evaluation and goal-setting for oral presentation
skills. Following are some types of instructional modalities:
 Use of a variety of oral skill forms, including dialogue/interview, group
discussion (both in planning debates and other presentations, and in problem
solving exercises), forums (question-answer period following other
presentations to give students experiences in impromptu speaking skills), and
typical speaker/audience mode, which could include individual speeches and
debates of various types. These activities could be used with written
assignments, group projects, or a combination of both.
 Small group discussions using problem-solving skills, active and interactive
learning.
 Self-evaluation, involving oral and written activities.
 Evaluation of other students’ oral and written presentations.
 Use of visual aids, such as overheads, videos, multimedia, presentation
software.
7.
Evaluation for grading
Students will be graded on their development of critical thinking skills through
the following assignments:
 Short papers (written both in and out of class)
 Oral skill forms, including dialogue/interview, group discussion (both in
planning debates and other presentations, and in problem-solving exercises),
forums (question-answer period following other presentations to give students
experiences in impromptu speaking skills), and typical speaker/audience mode
which could include individual speeches and debates of various types of
presentations.
 Videotaping of oral presentations, resulting in written self-evaluations and
goal-setting.
 Peer review.
 Midterm and final.
3
8.
Prerequisites:
College Writing
9.
Co-requisites:
None
10.
Methods for Departmental Review and Evaluation
Standard institutional evaluations
Core review
Comparison of student presentations based on permanent products (i.e.,
videotapes of presentations)
11.
Anticipated Impact on:
a.
Library
1.
Books and video acquisitions: There are plenty of books in the
Morningside library related to the teaching of critical thinking at
the college level or some other aspect of critical thinking (e.g.,
rhetoric, critical thinking, thought and thinking, reasoning, logic.,
etc.). While not all of these books are for faculty (some are
education books, some are for students, some include categories
and topics listed above), many of them will provide faculty with
additional resources when teaching this course.
Additional funding may be needed to purchase videos (see 6
below).
2.
Periodical acquisitions: In addition to The Opposing Viewpoints
series to which Morningside’s library subscribes, and the on-line
Info-Trac from which students can get full text articles, the
following additions would be requested:
CQ Researcher, published 48 times per year and indexed in InfoTrac’s Expanded Academic Index.
Editorials on File (from the Facts on file company) at $360 per
year.
3.
Impact on interlibrary loan: No impact expected.
4.
Bibliographic Instruction: Some instruction will be needed to help
students gain skills in using the databases and bibliographic
references. It is possible that this will be minimal, especially if
they are enrolled in other classes requiring these skills.
5.
Impact on reserves: No impact expected.
4
6.
b.
Impact on media center: Additional videos may be needed to
provide instructors with examples of topics being discussed.
Staffing:
Because the class will be staffed by many difference departments and
divisions, no specific faculty will be assigned to the class. It is anticipated
that 4 sections will be needed during the Fall and 6 sections will be needed
during the Spring. Additional sections may be offered during May Interim
and both Summer Sessions. Faculty who are interested in teaching this
class will need room in their load to be able to teach it.
Each class will be developed around a specific topic, chosen by the
instructor.
c.
Department Budget/College Budget:
This class is not part of a department, but will be offered through many
divisions and departments. Therefore, monies required for this class
should come from the college budget. The following expenses are
strongly recommended:
Faculty development: Since this is a new course type at the college, it
would be helpful to have a faculty workshop of a week’s duration in the
summer of 1998, available for people teaching in the program in the 98/99
academic year, and any other persons who would like to take the training.
The style of instruction suggested in our model – with emphasis on openended questions and classroom debate – may be unfamiliar to some
faculty. There is also a quasi-technical vocabulary of “claims”,
“arguments”, “fallacies”, etc., around which faculty should probably
develop some common understanding. The faculty workshop will be
focused on both of these issues.
Faculty: Because of the emphasis on speaking, a speech instructor who
could provide developmental training to other faculty teaching the class
and teach 1 – 2 sections of the class per semester, would be an important
addition to the college.
12.
Beginning Term and Frequency: (please refer to rotation guide for evening
classes offered in your division).
Beginning in Spring 1999, and then every semester. Offerings also in May
Interim and Summer Sessions. It is anticipated that 4 sections will be needed in
Spring semesters and 6 sections in Fall semesters.
5
13.
How the course will be used: (elective credit, major/minor requirement?) If
used as a major/minor requirement, a curriculum change proposal must be
submitted.
Core requirement.
6