Develop representative sample of materials

From WikiEducator
Jump to: navigation, search
OER Foundation logo-small.pngOERu-Logo-small.pngOERu 2012 / 2013 Prototype Design and Development Project
Home        OERu        Planning portal        Style guide        QA checklist




Course guide
http://wikieducator.org/File:Critical_Reasoning_Course_Guide.pdf

Topic 1
Introduction to critical reasoning
In this topic we explore what critical reasoning is and what it means to 'think for yourself'. This topic should take you about 10 hours to work through. By the end of the topic, you should be better able to:

  • Think for yourself
  • Think in an informed way
  • Practise critical self-reflection.

Resources Activity Time
Create a microblog account (you can choose one of three options):
  • Create a WikiEducator account to post WEnotes on WikiEducator, or
  • Create an identi.ca account, or
  • Create a Twitter account.
Introduce yourself and provide a short 100-word description of a situation you recently experienced which could have been avoided or simplified if the participants had reasoned more critically. Comment on the microblogs of two other course participants 30 - 60 minutes
  • In your journal, jot down your current working definition of critical reasoning
  • Now read the course and topic introduction and attempt Activity 1 in Reading 1 [1]
  • Now watch the youtube video "New Boy" "New Boy" . Jot down some advice to the teacher in this short video. Now ask two friends/colleagues to do the same. Compare your responses. In what ways were your responses similar or different? What does this activity suggest about the nature of critical reasoning in the field of human and social sciences? Update your working definition of critical reasoning.
  • Complete Reading 1 and visit the University of Michigan and University of Hong Kong websites making notes on the nature of critical reasoning in relation to questions formed from the topic objectives e.g. What does it mean to think for myself? How can I think in a more informed way? How can I practise critical self-reflection?
7.5 hours
Reflection
  • Now create your own set of guidelines for everyday more critical thinking. Post your guidelines in the form of a blog. Comment on the blogs of two other course participants.
1.5 hours

Topic 2
Identifying obstacles to clear thinking
In this topic we identify a number of common examples of faulty reasoning, what they are and why they should be avoided. We will also reflect on our own reasoning with respect to common stereotypes and biases. This topic should take you about 20 hours to work through. By the end of the topic, you should be better able to:

  • Recognise common obstacles to clear thinking
  • Avoid common fallacies, stereotypes and preconceived ideas.

Resources Activity Time
* Visit: https://www.google.co.za/search?q=CARTOON+FALLACIES&hl=en&rlz=1C1SKPL_enZA420&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=Nm68T4bmBImChQe5x-2iDw&ved=0CGUQsAQ&biw=1920&bih=1019 Warm up. Visit the cartoons at the link supplied. Choose three examples of faulty reasoning that you enjoyed. In your journal, jot down 3 example from your own experience which you believe illustrates the same faulty reasoning principle. 1 hour
  • Work through Reading 2. Record responses to activities in your journal. This will provide you with an overview of two common barriers to critical thinking: preconceptions and fallacies.
6 hours

OER resources
These resources can be used and remixed with acknowledgement:

Copyright reserved
These resources are, or are assumed to be, copyright reserved. You can look at them but if you wish to cite them or use the material in your presentation, you would need to write and ask for copyright permission first.

Providing definitions and examples of common logical fallacies

Providing contemporary examples of ways in which information, particularly statistical information, can be accidentally or wilfully misinterpreted

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. The site contains definitions and examples of a wide range of logical fallacies.

Stephen Downes' Guide to the Logical Fallacies. This site provides a useful summary of the characteristics of common logical fallacies.

A poster summarising common fallacies with examples.

  • Now that you have a broad sense of the issues, visit some of the websites we have identified to the left. Identify, and in your journal make a note of, examples of common preconceptions and fallacies that build on the introduction provided in Reading 2. Remember to create a bibliography of your sources. Spend about 6 hours on finding additional information and examples.
  • Now imagine that you need to teach a class of first year students about common obstacles to critical thinking.
  • Create a presentation based on your notes. (This could comprise a series of slides, with or without an audio narrative or something more complex, like some of the videos you will find on youTube if you search under fallacies, for example.)
  • Spend about 6 hours on developing your summary presentation (including any additional searches you might find necessary).
12 hours
Reflection
  • Post your summary presentation and invite feedback.
  • Find and comment on the examples from two other students.
1 hour

Topic 3
Identifying and analysing arguments
In this topic we deconstruct the components of an argument, discuss the nature of an argument and analyse simple and complex arguments. This topic should take you about 25 hours to work through. By the end of the topic, you should be better able to:

  • Identify arguments
  • Analyse simple and complex arguments,
Resources Activity Time
Warm up
  • In your journal, write down what you think is the nature and purpose of an argument.
  • Now visit the two websites at left. Skim through the sketch and then follow the link to the Simulation-Argument paper and skim through the paper.
  • In what ways, if at all, do these examples challenge your thinking about the nature of ‘arguments’?
1 hours
  • Work through Reading 3. Record responses to activities in your journal. This will provide you with an overview of how to identify and analyse arguments.
8 hours
  • Key OER resources

These resources can be used and remixed with acknowledgement:

and revisit

Optional

A useful audio-based introduction to the role and use of argument in the social sciences.

  • Now that you have a broad sense of the issues, you can begin to engage with a wider range of examples. We suggest you begin by visiting Marianne Talbot’s course at the University of Oxford. The course can be accessed directly through the OU website or via the jorum website (a portal also to other OER). You will see that the Oxford course comprises documents, audio and video options. The documents are much smaller files. We suggest you work through these first. There are related audio and video files that explain the slides in the documents. However, some of these files are very large and you may be able to access them only if you have very good bandwidth.
  • Also revisit the HKU website and add to your examples.
  • You might also like to visit the UKOU audio resource on the role of argument in the social sciences.
  • When you are ready, work though the quiz attached.
14 hours
Reflection
  • Post your suggested quiz answers online and invite feedback.
  • Find and comment on the responses from two other students. Initiate a dialogue to clarify any questions for which you have different responses.
2 hours

Topic 4
Evaluating arguments
In this topic we practise evaluating different kinds of arguments. This topic should take you about 25 hours to work through. By the end of the topic, you should be better able to:

  • Distinguish between different types of arguments
  • Distinguish between good arguments and bad arguments
  • Evaluate simple and complex arguments.

Resources Activity Time

Warm up.

  • Visit the website at left and try to solve the problem.
  • Were you able to solve the problem quickly? With the help of a hint only? Not at all?
  • Try one or two other problems.
  • Now reflect on your thinking process.
  • Make a list of steps that you typically follow in tackling these kinds of logic problems.
30 minutes

Revisit key OER resources
These resources can be used and remixed with acknowledgement:

Also look at:
Argument mapping tools:

And also:
Copyright reserved online resources

Critical Reasoning: A User’s Manual, Version 3.0 by Chris Swoyer.
The first two chapters of this text deal with basic concepts of critical reasoning and the nature of reasons and arguments which overlap with the current course. Subsequent chapters then extend the thinking. Note that the text is copyright to Chris Swoyer so if you wanted to adapt or download and share this resource, you would need to seek permission first.
Resources on argument mapping, include:

  • Work through Reading 4. Record responses to activities in your journal. This will provide you with an overview of how to evaluate arguments.
  • In order to complete the activities in Reading 4, you will need to revisit our key OER resources, as well as visiting some new recommended sites AND you may need to conduct some of your own additional searches.
  • You need to be able to explain and give examples of:
  • Empirical arguments
  • Value arguments
  • Deductive arguments
  • Inductive arguments (based on statistics, analogy, cause and effect)
  • Valid vs sound arguments
  • Valid vs invalid arguments
  • Definitions (and their role in arguments)
  • Counter examples
  • Counter arguments
  • Evaluating good and bad arguments
  • Analysing and mapping arguments.
21.5 hours
Reflection
  • Evaluate two of the examples from Activity 4, Reading 4.
  • Also find a similar example of your own and evaluate it.
  • Post your three examples and evaluations online for comment.
  • Find and comment on the responses from two other students. Initiate a dialogue to clarify any differences of interpretation. You might need to agree to disagree!
3 hours

Topic 5
Constructing and reflecting on arguments in different kinds of writing'
In this topic we practise constructing arguments within sound critical essays and reflect on our own critical reasoning development. This topic should take you about 10 hours to work through. By the end of the topic, you should be better able to:

  • Distinguish between different kinds of writing
  • Understand and construct sound arguments in argumentative essays
  • Understand that a critical evaluation of the ideas and beliefs of other people requires a critical attitude of self-reflection and critical evaluation of our own biases, misconceptions and preconceived ideas.

Resources Activity Time
Warm up.
  • Brainstorm to see how many different kinds of writing you can think of and provide a brief description of the purpose and nature of each type.
  • Visit the website at left. Did you come up with similar types? Were your descriptions similar? What different ideas did you have?
  • Now reflect on your typical writing process.
  • Make a list of steps that you follow in tackling a formal written task.


1 hour

OER

Copyright reserved

  • Work through Reading 5.
  • Record responses to activities in your journal. This will provide you with an overview of types of writing suited for different purposes and some insight into writing argumentatively in particular.
  • Summarise what you think are the main things to consider when writing a formal argumentative essay for academic purposes.
  • Compare your summary with the UNC and TAMU guidelines in the references to the left (the video is optional; it lasts about 10 mins). What is similar or different? Update your own guidelines accordingly.


6 hours
Consolidation and reflection
  • Complete Quiz 2 to consolidate your understanding. If you are unsure about any of the responses, post a request for help online.
  • During this course we have asked you frequently to engage with postings of other students. We now want you to identify three other students to work with. Assign yourselves the numbers 1, 2 and 3. Each of you must start an argumentative essay on a topic of your choice – providing an introduction and the initial thesis or main argument. Post it on google docs and invite your fellow students to the site.
  • The next step is to develop the argument of the two essays you did not initiate. Add the most likely counter-argument or example and refute it and add at least one additional idea to support the main thesis – regardless of whether or not you agree with it.
  • Now write a suitable conclusion for the essay that you did initiate and which your fellow students have helped to develop.
  • Reflect on what you have learned from the exercise, update the guidelines you developed earlier, share with your fellow students and try to reach agreement on a common set of criteria.
  • Now write an argumentative essay on a topic of your choice that you consider meets these criteria and avoids the kind of thinking weaknesses that we have discussed in this course.
  • Share your essay with your fellow students. Ask them to provide feedback to you, and you provide feedback to them, using the guidelines you have agreed.
  • Finally, in your journal, write a short account of what you have learned from this exercise.
  • 1 hour
  • 2 hours
  • 3 hours
  • 1 hour
  • 1 hour
  • 3 hours
  • 1 hour
  • 1 hour

Topic 6
Guidelines for accreditation with Unisa
This topic is optional. It provides guidelines applicable only to students interested to enrol for further study with Unisa and requiring recognition for the work already done.

Resources Activity Time
Reading 6: http://wikieducator.org/File:Critical_Reasoning_Reading_6.pdf Open Reading 6 and work through the suggested activities. 20 hours