Catalog Description

Prerequisite: Eligibility for ENGL 1A
Hours: 54 lecture
Description: An exploration of argumentation and the influence of rhetoric on thought in theory and cultural practice. Includes critical evaluation of claims, how to conduct expertise-based research, share evidence, engage in reasoning and critical thinking, and recognize popular forms of communication fallacies. (C-ID COMM 120) (CSU, UC)

Course Student Learning Outcomes

  • CSLO #1: Advocate for ideas using ethical arguments based in sound reasoning and evidence.
  • CSLO #2: Articulate multiple perspectives of a controversy.
  • CSLO #3: Engage with others who hold different perspectives to work toward understanding and resolution.
  • CSLO #4: Analyze the implications of power and privilege in dialogue and debate.

Effective Term

Fall 2024

Course Type

Credit - Degree-applicable

Contact Hours

54

Outside of Class Hours

108

Total Student Learning Hours

162

Course Objectives

At the conclusion of this course, the student should be able to:
1. Critically think about, discuss, and evaluate reasoning, evidence, values and belief systems.
2. Develop an understanding of the reasoning process and skills in utilizing various methods of reasoning.
3. Analyze, advocate, and criticize ideas, using rhetorical theory and expertise-based research.
4. Recognize fallacies of reasoning and argue ethically.
5. Develop research skills.
6. Foster the use of critical thinking skills in oral/written communication to understand evolution and development of the idea that social progress requires communication.

General Education Information

  • Approved College Associate Degree GE Applicability
    • AA/AS - Comm & Analyt Thinking
    • AA/AS - Oral Comm Skills
  • CSU GE Applicability (Recommended-requires CSU approval)
    • CSUGE - A1 Oral Communication
    • CSUGE - A3 Critical Thinking
  • Cal-GETC Applicability (Recommended - Requires External Approval)
    • IGETC Applicability (Recommended-requires CSU/UC approval)
      • IGETC - 1C Oral Communication

    Articulation Information

    • CSU Transferable
    • UC Transferable

    Methods of Evaluation

    • Classroom Discussions
      • Example: Evaluated in a variety of disciplinary specific ways. For example, a mock debate where the class reports out their synthesis or reflexivity for discussion or in-class writing.
    • Essay Examinations
      • Example: Traditional essay, where students respond to a question(s) about topics like values and value hierarchies, ethical advocacy, and rhetorical/logic fallacies requiring both analysis, synthesis, reflection, and reflexivity of information.
    • Objective Examinations
      • Example: Short answer exam which may include fill-in-the blank, a one- paragraph response, word definitions, multiple choice, or true/false responses on such subjects as: Audience Analysis, Ethical Advocacy, Rhetorical Fallacies, Methods of Critical Inquiry and Reasoning, etc.
    • Problem Solving Examinations
      • Example: Provided with facts or a contextualized situation where credibility would be questioned, students use a process to reach supportable conclusions and/or make recommendations based on disciplinary research. Responses fully describe and utilize information from course work and situations provided to students. In simple terms, students show their logic and processing work.
    • Projects
      • Example: A body of work culminating in a tangible objective, e.g., publishable research, research paper, quantitative modeling, media portfolio, and/or conference presentation (for example, providing a modern interpretation of his writing on "Usefulness of Rhetoric" using his 4-form proof as a guide.
    • Reports
      • Example: Short essay/research papers offering two-to-six page synopsis requiring the use of appropriate (qualitative/quantitative) methodological approaches. Drawing from events witnessed by students, reading(s) which may include disciplinary articles, editorials or other informed-opinion pieces, short stories, bibliographic work for a larger project, etc. This work can be part of a larger body of scaffolded work or portfolio demonstrating understanding of argumentation and rhetoric.
    • Skill Demonstrations
      • Example: Demonstration by students engaging in participant observation of an argument or debate with disciplinary corrections by peers and instructor as needed.

    Repeatable

    No

    Methods of Instruction

    • Lecture/Discussion
    • Distance Learning

    Lecture:

    1. Instructor-centered classroom discussion where the professor is, primarily, the active voice. For example, guiding students through an application of Toulmin's Model of Argument; students participation during a lecture session is facilitated by the instructor or another student.
    2. Directed work in a prescribed, hands-on course of study in a social-laboratory environment, or various classroom activities such as learning scenarios. For example, after guiding students through an application of Toulmin's Model of Argument, students participate in an activity during a course session facilitated by the instructor or another student.

    Distance Learning

    1. Instructor organizes students into small groups to create an argument on an assigned issue. Students work together via a small group discussion board to research information to build an argument, provide documented support and refute the opposition. Students submit a webpage where they have written their completed argument.
    2. The instructor creates multiple discussion boards and shares links to each small group's webpage argument. On each discussion board, students read through the small group's argument, evaluate their argument, and provide critique all within the discussion board.

    Typical Out of Class Assignments

    Reading Assignments

    1. After doing reading on the scientific approach of Aristotle, students will provide a modern interpretation of his writing on "Usefulness of Rhetoric" using his 4-form proof as a guide. 2. After reading about "meaning-centered theory," students will locate a visual-based argument and discuss its effectiveness on shifting public opinion.

    Writing, Problem Solving or Performance

    1. Assignment: Analysis of an editorial. Using a recent newspaper or periodical, students will select an editorial and address the following questions in an essay: What is the argument (claim) the author is making? Who is the target audience for the argument? What is the structure of the argument (statement and proof)? How is the evidence presented? What type of reasoning is used to connect the evidence to the claim? What types of appeals (logical, emotional, psychological) is the author using to persuade his target audience? How does the author establish his or her credibility? Finally, diagram the argument using Toulmin's Model of Argument. 2. Assignment: Deliberation brief. After determining the debate proposition, each student will select and research one viewpoint of the issue and write a deliberation brief. Debate components will be covered including a fact, value or policy proposition, designation of the central issues, delineation of commonplaces shared with opponents, and definition of key terms. The brief will also contain all the claims the student plans to advance in the debate as well as relevant support and evidence, and an outline of all underlying values and assumptions. Finally, each student will assess the standpoint, power and perspective for each advocate involved in the debate. After each student has a brief prepared, students will enter into a deliberation over the issue. When the deliberation is complete, students will write an analysis of the issue including both, or all, viewpoints. In the analysis, students will evaluate their performance and describe any alterations or significant changes they may have made in their perspective of the issue as a result of the deliberation.

    Other (Term projects, research papers, portfolios, etc.)

    Required Materials

    • Advocacy and Opposition: An Introduction to Argumentation
      • Author: Rybacki, D. & Rybacki, K.
      • Publisher: Pearson
      • Publication Date: 2021
      • Text Edition: 7th
      • Classic Textbook?: No
      • OER Link:
      • OER:
    • Everything's an Argument
      • Author: Lunsford, A. and Ruszkiewicz, J.
      • Publisher: Bedford/St. Martins
      • Publication Date: 2021
      • Text Edition: 9th
      • Classic Textbook?: No
      • OER Link:
      • OER:
    • Arguing Using Critical Thinking
      • Author: Martenay, J.
      • Publisher: LibreTexts
      • Publication Date:
      • Text Edition:
      • Classic Textbook?: No
      • OER Link:
      • OER: Yes
    • How Arguments Work- A Guide to Writing and Analyzing Texts in College
      • Author: Mills, A.
      • Publisher: LibreTexts
      • Publication Date:
      • Text Edition:
      • Classic Textbook?: No
      • OER Link:
      • OER: Yes
    • The Practice of Argumentation: Effective Reasoning in Communication
      • Author: Zarefsky, D.
      • Publisher: Cambridge University Press
      • Publication Date: 2019
      • Text Edition:
      • Classic Textbook?: No
      • OER Link:
      • OER:

    Other materials and-or supplies required of students that contribute to the cost of the course.