SPCH 240 - Argumentation and Discussion
Course Description:
This course provides students with expanded practice and theory in argumentation. Students further develop their argumentation knowledge and skills through debate participation, observation, and discussion. The course is particularly appropriate for students anticipating entering occupations that involve extensive argumentation and deliberation such as law, communication, negotiation, and any area where argumentation and debate occur frequently.

I. Cover

CC Discipline/Department: Communications and Languages
Planning Department: Speech
Course Number: SPCH 240
Course Title: Argumentation and Discussion
Units: 3.000 Units
Lecture: 54.000 Hours
Lab: 0.000
Discussion Hours: 0.000
Total Contact Hours: 54.000 Hours
Outside-of-Class Hours: 108.000 Hours
Total Student Learning Hours: 162.000 Hours
Prerequisite: SPCH 140
TOP Code: 1506.00 - Speech and Rhetorical Studies
CIP Code
SAM Code: Non-Occupational

II. Need/Justification/Goals

This course is a restricted elective for the AA-T in Communication Studies for Transfer degree.

III. Title 5 Requirements

A. Entering Skills (“Upon entering the course, students should be able to…”):
Demonstrate an understanding of the importance of critical thinking in a debate. (SPCH 140)
Identify and contrast rational debate from other communication forms. (SPCH 140)
Identify and analyze ethical issues in debate. (SPCH 140)
Identify and contrast the various settings and situations in which argumentation occurs. (SPCH 140)
Determine the key issues required for factual, value, and policy debate. (SPCH 140)
Distinguish among various forms of reasoning. (SPCH 140)
B. Exiting Skills (“Upon exiting the course, students should be able to”):
Understand the principles, conventions, strategies, and tactics of argumentation in general, and of debating in particular in the private, public, and technical spheres
Recognize, identify, and respond to fallacious and rhetorical reasonings
Demonstrate an ability to argue both sides of the issue with relevant pieces of evidence
Construct a coherent, logical, sequenced argument, free from fallacy, supported by evidence
Become a more careful and critical thinker and communicator, both as a speaker and as a listener
Understand and practice ethical communication
Analyze and critique sound arguments and fallacious arguments in the public sphere
Synthesize the quality of several arguments in the same oral or written speech to determine if a thesis or case was supported
Engage in effective argumentation and debate in various communication channels such as in-person communication and/or computer mediated communication
Construct and articulate clear argumentative points to individuals in the class (classroom debates) and out of the class (public debate)
Identify and analyze argumentation effectiveness as it occurs in political discourse
Identify and analyze sound reasoned arguments from fallaciously reasoned arguments in a series of developed arguments characterized in propaganda campaigns
C. Minimum Required for a “C”:
Completion of all required work with at least 70% of all possible points.
D. Grade Options:
  • Standard Letter

IV. Course Content

Lecture Outline:
  1. Apply foundational models of argumentation and debate
    1. Use an explanatory and/or predictive theory (model) as a basis for a debate case (e.g., use Jurgen Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action to advocate for or against globalization).
    2. Use an explanatory and/or predictive theory (model) as a basis for interpersonal debate (e.g., Elaboration Likelihood Model to understand a common interpersonal dispute.
    3. Use an explanatory and/or predictive theory (model) as a basis for analyzing a historic debate
  2. Observe and critique debate in context
    1. Observe and analyze a debate in context (e.g., a legal courtroom debate, a political debate, a debate as it occurs within an elected body).
    2. Apply argument spheres to a series of debates: participate in creating a personal sphere debate and attempting to move it to the public sphere (e.g., send an electronic message to a local or state   representative).
  3. Understanding the controversy
    1. Contrast Presumption, Status Quo, Burden of Proof, Topicality as it applies across varying settings(e.g., Courtroom debate and Intercollegiate debate)
    2. Effectively listen to a debate: Flowing a debate and explaining an adjudicated decision based on that written analysis (flow).
  4. Controversy analysis
    1. Use a philosophical paradigm (e.g., deconstructionism, existentialism, utilitarianism) as a criteria for a  value or fact oriented debate.
    2. Expanding and Narrowing the parameters of a controversy.
    3. Apply arguments for and against the proposed parameters.
  5. Reasoning
    1. Reasoning by use of: parallel case, generalization, causal, authority
    2. Identifying fallacious reasoning, such as, false parallel, hasty generalization, false cause, and fallacious appeals to authority.
  6. Evidence
    1. Using evidence in a debate
    2. Adapting evidence to novice and expert audience members
    3. Evaluating testimonial, quantitative, and qualitative evidence
  7. Argument construction and composition
    1. Writing and using a pre-constructed prima facie case
    2. Analysis of varying types of debate cases (e.g., a legal case versus a political candidate debate case)
    3. Audience analysis in argument construction
  8. Refutation
    1. Apply refutation, rebuttal, and cross examination
    2. The process of constructing refutation in varying debate contexts
  9. Debate formats
    1. Evaluating and constructing electronic debates and responses
    2. Creating Parliamentary Procedure motions in negotiations
    3. Cross-Cultural debate: determine varying criteria and standards
  10. Demonstrate competency in debate through oral participation
    1. Creating sustained sound oral arguments in the context of a debate
    2. Apply argumentation skills/theory in the context of a debate
    3. Applying argumentation skills/theory in the community/field setting
    4. Formulate a judging (adjudicating) personal philosophy for evaluating debates
  11. Delivery
    1. Verbal communication in a debate
    2. Nonverbal communication in a debate
    3. Evaluating rhetoric in a debate (e.g., kritics)
    4. Evaluate the communication in a historic debate
    5. Comprehensive and critical listening skills in debate

V. Course Objectives

The Student Will Be Able To:
Understand the principles, conventions, strategies, and tactics of argumentation in general, and of debating in particular in the private, public, and technical spheres
Recognize, identify, and respond to fallacious and rhetorical reasonings
Demonstrate an ability to argue both sides of the issue with relevant pieces of evidence
Construct a coherent, logical, sequenced argument, free from fallacy, supported by evidence
Become a more careful and critical thinker and communicator, both as a speaker and as a listener
Understand and practice ethical communication
Analyze and critique sound arguments and fallacious arguments in the public sphere
Synthesize the quality of several arguments in the same oral or written speech to determine if a thesis or case was supported
Engage in effective argumentation and debate in various communication channels such as in-person communication and/or computer mediated communication
Construct and articulate clear argumentative points to individuals in the class (classroom debates) and out of the class (public debate)
Identify and analyze argumentation effectiveness as it occurs in political discourse
Identify and analyze sound reasoned arguments from fallaciously reasoned arguments in a series of developed arguments characterized in propaganda campaigns

VI. Methods of Instruction:

Activity (individual)
Activity (group)
Case Studies
Cooperative Work Experience
Evaluation (peer)
Lecture

VII. Assignments:

  1. Participation in in-class debates (e.g., Lincoln-Douglas style, paired team debate, or group debate)
  2. Individual and group projects (e.g., analysis of debate issues in negotiations, parliamentary procedures)
  3. Individual and group presentations (e.g., participation in nontraditional debates, such as negotiations, parliamentary procedures, political debates, electronic debates)
  4. Written reports on debate(s)
  5. Participation in class discussions and exercises
  6. Reading text and other assigned debate materials
  7. Viewing and responding to mass media (e.g., film analysis, popular culture artifacts) relating to argumentation and debate
  8. Student analysis of communication as it applies in a debate (e.g., debate conversational analysis, language implications)

VIII. Methods of Evaluation:

Measure understanding of course material through objective exams and quizzes containing multiple choice, true-false and/or short answer questions.
Assess discussions for course specific content and understanding.
Evaluate individual presentations for evidence of individual work, organization, clarity and accuracy.
Measure understanding of conceptual relationships among course ideas for accuracy and relevant content.
Assess skill development for evidence of improvement, understanding, and consistency.
Assess performance skills in regards to student ability to remember and perform actions appropriately.

IX. Student Learning Outcome

  1. In a research paper students will consider and incorporate multiple viewpoints on the topic.
  2. When engaging in a critical discussion, students will apply the principles of discussion theory (i.e., social exchange, critical race, banking method).
  3. When engaging in a critical discussion, students will argue in favor of a thesis with credible and relevant supportive examples.

X. Texts/Instructional Materials:

Textbooks:
Sylvan Barnet, Hugo Bedau and John O'Hara, Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings - 11th edition, Bedford Books, (ISBN: 9781319035471) (2017) or most recent version
Inch, E.S. and Tudor, K. H. , Critical Thinking and Communication: The use of reason in argument (7th ed.), Boston, MA: Pearson, (ISBN: 978-0205925773) (2014) or most recent version
Salcido, Denise, Argumentative Research Essay, OER Commons. Institute for the Study of Knowledge Management in Education, (ISBN: ) (2018) https://www.oercommons.org/authoring/23735-argumentative-research-essay