Course Name | Critical Thinking |
Code | Semester | Theory (hour/week) | Application/Lab (hour/week) | Local Credits | ECTS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NMC 103 | Fall | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
Prerequisites | None | |||||
Course Language | English | |||||
Course Type | Required | |||||
Course Level | First Cycle | |||||
Mode of Delivery | face to face | |||||
Teaching Methods and Techniques of the Course | DiscussionProblem SolvingQ&ALecture / Presentation | |||||
Course Coordinator | ||||||
Course Lecturer(s) | ||||||
Assistant(s) | - |
Course Objectives | This course aims to develop a skill set comprising the various abilities involved in identifying and evaluating argumentative uses of language. In doing so, the course aims to develop critical reasoning, reading and writing skills.The course will place particular emphasis on supporting its theoretical component with exercises designed to apply the techniques so acquired in relevant contexts. |
Learning Outcomes | The students who succeeded in this course;
|
Course Description | This course provides an introduction to critical thinking and informal reasoning. If language may be called the medium of all media in terms of which we make sense of our experience and act on others, this course covers the basic ways we may be said to succeed or fail in this attempt.Students will be expected to actively participate in discussions and debate, solve exercise questions and participate in in-class group projects. |
Related Sustainable Development Goals | |
| Core Courses | X |
Major Area Courses | ||
Supportive Courses | ||
Media and Managment Skills Courses | ||
Transferable Skill Courses |
Week | Subjects | Required Materials |
1 | Introduction | Reasoning and Language |
2 | Speech acts, performatives, conversational acts, conversational Implication | Ch 1 “Uses of Arguments; Ch 2 “The Web of Language” |
3 | Validity, Truth, Soundness; identification of premises and conclusions. | Ch 3 “The language of Arguments” |
4 | Evaluative language | Ch 4 “The Art of Close Analysis” |
5 | Deductive standards | Selected material from Ch 6 and Ch 7 |
6 | Deductive standards | |
7 | Inductive Standards (1) | Ch 9 “Inference to the best explanation and from analogy” |
8 | Inductive Standards (2) | Ch 10 “Causal Reasoning”; Ch 12 “Choices” |
9 | Fallacies of Vagueness | Ch 13 (Heaps and slippery slopes) |
10 | Midterm | |
11 | Fallacies of Ambiguity | Ch 14 (Equivocation and types of definitions) |
12 | Fallacies of Relevance | Ch 15 (Types of ad hominem arguments, genetic fallacy, appeals to authority, appeal to popular opinion, appeal to emotion) |
13 | Fallacies of Vacuity | Ch 16 (Circularity, begging the question, self-sealers) |
14 | Types of Refutation | Ch 17 (Counterexamples, reductio ad absurdum, straw men and false dichotomies, by parallel reasoning) |
15 | Overview | |
16 | Final Exam |
Course Notes/Textbooks | Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Robert J. Fogelin, Understanding Arguments: An Introduction to Informal Logic, 9 th ed., Cengage Learning (2013) ISBN-10: 1285197364 |
Suggested Readings/Materials |
Semester Activities | Number | Weigthing |
Participation | 1 | 10 |
Laboratory / Application | ||
Field Work | ||
Quizzes / Studio Critiques | ||
Portfolio | ||
Homework / Assignments | ||
Presentation / Jury | 1 | 25 |
Project | 1 | 30 |
Seminar / Workshop | ||
Oral Exam | ||
Midterm | 1 | 35 |
Final Exam | ||
Total |
Weighting of Semester Activities on the Final Grade | 4 | 100 |
Weighting of End-of-Semester Activities on the Final Grade | ||
Total |
Semester Activities | Number | Duration (Hours) | Workload |
---|---|---|---|
Course Hours (Including exam week: 16 x total hours) | 16 | 2 | 32 |
Laboratory / Application Hours (Including exam week: 16 x total hours) | 16 | 2 | |
Study Hours Out of Class | 14 | 2 | 28 |
Field Work | |||
Quizzes / Studio Critiques | |||
Portfolio | |||
Homework / Assignments | |||
Presentation / Jury | 1 | 19 | |
Project | 1 | 20 | |
Seminar / Workshop | |||
Oral Exam | |||
Midterms | 1 | 19 | |
Final Exams | |||
Total | 150 |
# | Program Competencies/Outcomes | * Contribution Level | ||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
1 | To be able to critically discuss and interpret the theories, concepts and ideas that form the basis of the discipline of new media and communication. | |||||
2 | To be able to critically interpret theoretical debates concerning the relations between the forms, agents, and factors that play a role in the field of new media and communication. | |||||
3 | To have the fundamental knowledge and ability to use the technical equipment and software programs required by the new media production processes. | |||||
4 | To be able to gather, scrutinize and scientifically investigate data in the processes of production and distribution. | |||||
5 | To be able to use the acquired theoretical knowledge in practice. | X | ||||
6 | To be able to take responsibility both individually and as a member of a group to develop solutions to problems encountered in the field of new media and communication. | |||||
7 | To be informed about national, regional, and global issues and problems; to be able to generate problem-solving methods depending on the quality of evidence and research, and to acquire the ability to report the conclusions of those methods to the public. | |||||
8 | To be able to critically discuss and draw on theories, concepts and ideas that form the basis of other disciplines complementing the field of new media and communication studies. | X | ||||
9 | To be able to develop and use knowledge and skills towards personal and social goals in a lifelong process. | X | ||||
10 | To be able to apply social, scientific and professional ethical values in the field of new media and communication. | |||||
11 | To be able to collect datain the areas of new media and communication and communicate with colleagues in a foreign language ("European Language Portfolio Global Scale", Level B1). | |||||
12 | To be able to speak a second foreign language at a medium level of fluency efficiently. | |||||
13 | To be able to relate the knowledge accumulated throughout the human history to their field of expertise. | X |
*1 Lowest, 2 Low, 3 Average, 4 High, 5 Highest