Name of Institution: The Mico University College

Faculty: Humanities and Liberal Arts

Department: Language, Literacy, and Literature
Course Title: Argumentative Discourse I
Course Code: LADS2102
Year: 2
Duration: 45 Hours
No. of Credits: 3
Pre-Requisite: Essentials of Communication 2

Rationale
The ability to critically assess and evaluate information occurs through a multiplicity of
experiences. Exposure to critical skills development will complement student teachers’ academic
growth and development as they learn to analyse written and spoken argumentative discourse
It is these skills that are also necessary to enable them to succeed in their personal lives and the
workplace as they develop tolerance and respect for diversity, and learn to use evidence and
patterns of reasoning to logically express self.

Course Description
This course introduces student teachers to the principles of argumentation and advertising.
Students will be fully engaged in such activities as oral presentations, analysis, evaluation, and
construction of the basic forms of argument as well as advertisements. The course accommodates
independent and peer processes of learning as facilitators engage students in discovery-learning
tasks that support the grasp and development of critical thinking skills relevant to experiences
they encounter in the real world. The proof of skills gained will be evident through processes of
reasoning relevant to individual and group oral presentations as well as case studies. Through
engagement in the varying learning opportunities and from feedback received, the student
teachers will have opportunities leading to the evaluation of self and others, development of
cognitive abilities, ownership of new knowledge and improvement of communicative
capabilities.

Course Goals
Cognitive
Student teachers should be able to:

1. know the rudiments of critical thinking and how to become a critical thinker;
2. develop an awareness of the principles and techniques of argumentation;
3. develop an understanding of audience, purpose, and tone in oral and written work;
4. develop an awareness of fallacies in arguments; and
5. develop an awareness of the basic rules of the APA reference list format.

Performance

Prepared by: Karren Foster & Patricia Rodney Date developed: July 2008 Date updated: January 2017
Student teachers should be able to:
6. apply knowledge gained about argumentation to oral and written work;
7. respond logically and critically to oral and written discourses, and graphic materials;
8. persuade through a variety of channels; and
9. develop competence in the construction of a reference page.

Affective
Student teachers should be able to:
10. develop an understanding of their current level of critical thinking skills and development
needs;
11. develop a positive attitude towards communicating in written and spoken Standard
English;
12. maintain alertness and concentration during oral presentations;
13. appreciate controversy and divergent points of view; and
14. appreciate the value of participation in collaborative engagements.

Unit/ Theme 1: Thinking Critically (15 hours)

Learning Objectives
By the end of this unit, student teachers should be able to:

1. provide a personal definition of the concept of critical thinking;

2. identify characteristics of a critical thinker in given scenarios;
3. differentiate between facts and opinions appropriately in given texts;
4. communicate in Standard English, whether orally or in writing, as they comply with class
requirements;
5. respond respectfully yet analytically to peer presentations; and
6. apply concepts of critical thinking to their own experiences.

Summary of Content
● Critical thinking: The process; characteristics of a critical thinker
- Critical thinking: Definition and process
- Characteristics of a critical thinker
- Applying critical thinking skills in everyday life
- Understanding the point of view in written documents (first, second and third
person points of view)
● Audience and purpose in argumentation
- Audience analysis and adaptation
- tone
● Difference between facts and opinions

Prepared by: Karren Foster & Patricia Rodney Date developed: July 2008 Date updated: January 2017
Unit /Theme 2: Persuasive Appeals and Techniques (15 hours)

Learning Objectives
By the end of this unit, student teachers should be able to:
1. differentiate appropriately among the three rhetorical appeals;
2. match persuasive techniques with corresponding rhetorical appeals;
3. detect appropriately human desires and their correspondence with the construction of
advertisements;
4. evaluate proficiently newspaper, radio and television advertisements;
5. create effective advertisements for original goods and services;
6. critique the correctness of the language used in presentations;
7. integrate technology and graphics effectively in self-constructed advertisements;
8. use English language to effectively communicate persuasive skills; and
9. engage in discussions respectfully in response to one another’s work.

Summary of Content
● Rhetorical appeals: Pathos, logos, ethos

● Persuasive techniques in persuasion

- Types and connection to appeals
- Audience, purpose and effectiveness
● Advertisements
- Types
- Language techniques: words, phrases, names used in advertising
- Punctuation marks in advertisements
Understanding fallacies
- Types of fallacies: the author’s intention and style
- The reader and writer contact: interpreting fallacies

Unit/Theme 3: Critical Analysis (15 hours)

Learning Objectives
By the end of this unit, student teachers should be able to:
1. differentiate among deductive, inductive and analogical reasoning;
2. construct arguments effectively using deductive, inductive and analogical reasoning;
3. identify the main characteristics of and key concepts associated with argument;
4. evaluate appropriately the structure and content of arguments;
5. delineate problems for discussion when presented with scenarios;
6. critically review a scenario for the key concepts taught; and
7. respond with sensitivity to divergent views.

Summary of Content

Prepared by: Karren Foster & Patricia Rodney Date developed: July 2008 Date updated: January 2017
 ● Introduction to Argumentation
- The basic structure of an argument
- Characteristics of arguments
- Issue identification
● Types of reasoning: deductive, inductive and analogical reasoning

Assessment Framework
The assessment of this course is done by coursework only:

● Coursework 1: Video Recording and Presentation of an Original Advertisement,

Oral Analysis of Advertisement (group task) 30%
● Coursework 2: Critical Analysis 30%

● Coursework 3: Multiple Choice Test 30%

● Online Contribution/Participation 10%

Policy Statements

Class Attendance
Students who do not adhere to the attendance stipulations of the University College will not be
excused. Absenteeism should be authenticated with documentary evidence. The lecturer reserves
the right to bar students who are absent for a total of nine hours without such evidence from
completing the course. Absenteeism does not excuse the student from submitting assignments
on or before time, sit an in-class test, or make an oral presentation.

Academic Dishonesty
Plagiarising, replicating any portion of another student’s work, submitting the same assignment
for more than one course, or cheating in any form will result in failure. Students who are unsure
of whether they are plagiarising or cheating should consult their lecturer.
Academic Conduct
The class environment is one that promotes open discussion of issues, not people. Electronic
devices may be used for note-taking or lesson-related research, not for social engagements. Cell
phone calls are prohibited.

Late Assignments
1. Written course assignments submitted late, without arrangements made in advance, will
receive a mark no higher than the lowest passing grade even if it is an excellent piece of
work. Work submitted via e-mail without specific arrangements will not be accepted.
2. In the case of oral presentations, if a student is absent on the day of the presentation
without valid evidence, that student will not be accommodated on any other day.

Prepared by: Karren Foster & Patricia Rodney Date developed: July 2008 Date updated: January 2017
Recommended Learning Resources

Beebe, S., & Beebe, S. (2012). Public speaking: An audience-centred approach (8th ed.). Boston:
Pearson Education Inc.

Boss. J. (2010). Think: Critical thinking and logic skills for everyday life. New York: McGraw-
Hill Inc.

Foster, A. (2003). Purposeful expression: Understanding & using language effectively. Victoria:
Trafford.

Glenn, C., & Gray, L. (2016). The Hodges’ Harbrace handbook (19th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage
Learning.

Kuglish, D. (2014, June 9). The art of rhetoric: Persuasive techniques in advertising. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeCz5fy02JE

Jones McKenzie, C., & McDermott, H. (2014). Critical thinking, reading and writing:
Enhancing problem solving and decision making skills. J. Orogun (Ed.). (3rd. ed.).
Kingston, JA: University of Technology.

Moore, Brooke., & Parker, R. (2009). Critical thinking (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
Higher Education.

Odell, L., Vacca, R., & Hobbs, R. (2001). Elements of language (5th ed.). Austin: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2005). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. The
Foundation for Critical Thinking. Retrieved from
http://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_Tools.pdf

The Critical Thinking Community. (2015). Critical thinking in everyday life: 9 strategies.
Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-in-everyday-life-
9-strategies/512

University of Oxford. (Producer). (2010). The nature of arguments. Podcast retrieved from
https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/nature-arguments

Prepared by: Karren Foster & Patricia Rodney Date developed: July 2008 Date updated: January 2017
Wood, N. V. (2009). Perspectives on argument (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.

Prepared by: Karren Foster & Patricia Rodney Date developed: July 2008 Date updated: January 2017