This course provides students with the foundational knowledge of argumentation and debate concepts and theories to successfully dissect and deliver arguments in distinct contexts and public speaking settings and to critically evaluate the arguments of others. The course emphasizes Aristotle’s ethos, pathos, and logos, audience analysis, ethics, critical listening, and effective verbal and nonverbal practices for effective argumentation. Lastly, the course includes analysis of strong evidence and the process of reasoning needed for effective arguing and presentation of arguments to live audiences. Central to this course is the learning of the foundational knowledge and practice of public speaking in a democratic society to communicate ideas through speaking in debate contexts such as to audience’s expected to refute or question the speaker’s central thesis and/or arguments.
I. Cover
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
II. Need/Justification/Goals
This is a degree appropriate course and a general education course at Rio Hondo and four-year institutions. This course is one of the core classes students need to major in Communication Studies 2.0 AA-T at Rio Hondo College.
Articulation to the Cal-GETC 1C Oral Communication area is appropriate given the rhetorical oral communication emphasis of the content of this course and the course's existing oral communication emphasis in informing and persuading audiences aligning with Cal-GETC 1C standards.
III. Title 5 Requirements
- Standard Letter
IV. Course Content
-
Definitions of communication, informative speaking, persuasive speaking, and arguments -
Audience analysis, including demographic differences, diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, and accessibility -
Fields of argument, such as public, interpersonal, legal, business, political -
Ethos, Pathos, and Logos -
Phrasing and analyzing propositions, such as factual, value, and policy propositions -
Research (primary and secondary) and credible evidence -
Phrasing, identifying, and analyzing arguments, such as the Toulmin Model and stock issue analysis -
Identification and avoidance of fallacies -
Presentation and debating skills, including verbal and nonverbal delivery, constructive arguments, refutation and cross-examination -
Well-prepared faculty-supervised and faculty-evaluated speeches to a live audience -
Review and provide constructive criticism for peer and other presentations -
Adhering to ethical communication practices when speaking and listening -
Canons of rhetoric (invention, disposition, style, memory, delivery) -
Managing communication apprehension
V. Course Objectives
VI. Methods of Instruction:
Analysis of written and oral public argument
VII. Assignments:
- Homework - Written reports
- Case Study (individual) - Analyze a written argument using the Toulmin Model, focusing on identifying the author’s claims, reasons, and evidence. Discuss what types of arguments are used and whether they are logical or fallacious. Test the sources and evidence for strengths and weaknesses.
- Term Paper - Write a research paper examining solid arguments for and against a political current event of domestic and/or international importance, utilizing credible sources
- Individual Oral Presentation - Participate in a debate, using several credible sources, as the proponent or opponent of a particular resolution
- Individual Oral Presentation - Prepare and deliver a speech that includes informative and persuasive elements, such as ethos, pathos and logos using evidence from credible sources to support arguments which support the thesis
- Group Oral Presentation - A faculty-supervised, faculty evaluated presentation to advocate or oppose a discussion point (e.g., a reply in a Robert's Rules meeting, an opposition speech to a speaker's proposition speech).
- Classroom Discussion - Advocate or refute an idea or speech through an oral speech message
- Other - quizzes and exams on argumentation concepts
VIII. Methods of Evaluation:
Faculty-supervised, faculty-evaluated presentations in front of an audience (one to many) such as informing about a proposed position or candidacy speech, and a negotiation or refutational-type opposition speech persuading an audience towards the opposition’s advocacy
IX. Student Learning Outcome
- When engaging in a critical discussion or debate, students should have the ability to argue in favor of a thesis with a supportive example and refute an opposing position with an accompanying example.
- When engaging in a critical discussion or debate, students should demonstrate critical thinking and understanding of a debate position, including the position's reasoning.
- When engaging in a critical discussion or debate, students should apply the principles of argumentation and debate theory.
- While participating in a debate or critical discussion, and in the process of evaluating the strength of an argument, students will distinguish between credible and non-credible evidence.
- While participating in a debate or critical discussion, students should learn to avoid the use of fallacious arguments.
