Você está na página 1de 8

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

Course Specifications

The National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment

Course Specifications
English 104-Critical Thinking (English 1)

Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

Page 1

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

Course Specifications

Institution: Qassim University

Date of Report: April 5, 2011

College/Department : College of Architecture

A. Course Identification and General Information
1. Course title and code: English 104-Critical Thinking (English 1)
2. Credit hours: 2
3. Program(s) in which the course is offered.
(If general elective available in many programs indicate this rather than list programs)
Not applicable
4. Name of faculty member responsible for the course: Dr. Tomas U. Ganiron Jr
5. Level/year at which this course is offered: Level 1/1st Year
6. Pre-requisites for this course (if any) : Not applicable
7. Co-requisites for this course (if any): Not applicable
8. Location if not on main campus: Not applicable
9. Mode of Instruction (mark all that apply)
a. Traditional classroom

b. Blended (traditional and online)

What percentage?
What percentage?

c. e-learning

What percentage?

d. Correspondence

What percentage?

f. Other

What percentage?

Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012


Page 2

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

B Objectives
1. What is the main purpose for this course?

This course is designed to prepare college-bound seniors for the literacy demands of higher
education. Through a sequence of fifteen rigorous instructional modules, students in this
yearlong, rhetoric-based course develop advanced proficiency in expository, analytical, and
argumentative reading and writing. The cornerstone of the coursethe assignment template
presents a process for helping students read, comprehend, and respond to nonfiction and literary
texts. Modules also provide instruction in research methods and documentation conventions.
Students will be expected to increase their awareness of the rhetorical strategies employed by
authors and to apply those strategies in their own writing. They will read closely to examine the
relationship between an authors argument or theme and his or her audience and purpose to
analyze the impact of structural and rhetorical strategies and to examine the social, political,
and philosophical assumptions that underlie the text. By the end of the course, students will be
expected to use this process independently when reading unfamiliar texts and writing in
response to them. Course texts include contemporary essays, newspaper and magazine articles,
editorials, reports, biographies, memos, assorted public documents, and other nonfiction texts.
The course materials also include modules on two full- length works (one novel and one work
of nonfiction). Written assessments and holistic scoring guides conclude each unit.
2. Briefly describe any plans for developing and improving the course that are being implemented. (e.g.
increased use of IT or web based reference material, changes in content as a result of new research in
the field)
To meet NQF requirements and to improve learning outcomes particularly those concerning ethical and
disciplinary issues, body of knowledge, intellectual skills, interpersonal skills, and communication and
information technology skills.

C. Course Description (Note: General description in the form to be used for the Bulletin or
handbook should be attached)
1. Topics to be Covered
List of Topics

Orientation Lecture Series: Developing critical thinking skills).

Evaluating and analyzing the film through watching and listening.
Vague Sentences (too vague & ambiguous sentences), subjective &
objective claims, presciptive claims and value judgments and,
Good Argument: Good reason to believe, the conclusion follows from the
premises, the tests for an argument to be good , strong and valid

Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

No. of
Week 1

Contact Hours

Weeks 2

Week 4

Page 3

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

Repairing Arguments: Guide in repairing arguments, the principle of

rational discussion, the guide to repairing arguments, relevance and,
inferring and implying
Evaluating premises, criteria for accepting or rejecting claims, advertising
and the internet advertising the internet and common mistakes in
evaluating premises

Week 5

Week 7

Weeks 9
& 10

Compound claims: Consider the alternatives and conditionals

Counterarguments: Raising objections and refuting the arguments,
General claims and their contradictories, some valid and invalid at all and,
between and all.
Concealed claims, too much emotions and fallacies

14 & 15


2. Course components (total contact hours and credits per semester):










3. Additional private study/learning hours expected for students per week.

4. Course Learning Outcomes in NQF Domains of Learning and Alignment with Assessment Methods
and Teaching Strategy
Course Learning Outcomes, Assessment Methods, and Teaching Strategy work together and are aligned.
They are joined together as one, coherent, unity that collectively articulate a consistent agreement
between student learning, assessment, and teaching.
The National Qualification Framework provides five learning domains. Course learning outcomes are
required. Normally a course has should not exceed eight learning outcomes which align with one or more
of the five learning domains. Some courses have one or more program learning outcomes integrated into
the course learning outcomes to demonstrate program learning outcome alignment. The program learning
outcome matrix map identifies which program learning outcomes are incorporated into specific courses.
On the table below are the five NQF Learning Domains, numbered in the left column.
First, insert the suitable and measurable course learning outcomes required in the appropriate learning
domains (see suggestions below the table). Second, insert supporting teaching strategies that fit and align
with the assessment methods and intended learning outcomes. Third, insert appropriate assessment
Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

Page 4

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

methods that accurately measure and evaluate the learning outcome. Each course learning outcomes,
assessment method, and teaching strategy ought to reasonably fit and flow together as an integrated
learning and teaching process. Fourth, if any program learning outcomes are included in the course
learning outcomes, place the @ symbol next to it.

Every course is not required to include learning outcomes from each domain.


NQF Learning Domains

And Course Learning Outcomes


Students develop full understanding of the

English language and related disciplines,
including reasoning.
1.2 Students are able to do further research to gain
extra knowledge effectively on their own.

Cognitive Skills


Students are able to compile, analyze and

synthesize knowledge from different sources
Students are able to apply the knowledge learnt to
their communication, analysis, criticism and
problem solving, and to accomplish their
assignments efficiently.
Interpersonal Skills & Responsibility




Course Teaching

Lectures, multi-media,
student presentation and
Argumentative essays and
comments and assigned
debate presentations
topics and personal choices
of topics

Case studies and analysis

Students are able to accomplish the assigned tasks

and appropriately fulfill their role in their team,
Pair work in research and
contribute to others work, and solve their team
script writing
Communication, Information Technology, Numerical
Students are able to communicate in English
effectively and properly in a given context.
Students are able to use different forms of IT tools
appropriately to assist learning and researching, and
to give presentations.

Course Assessment

Lectures and case study

Individual presentation

Content organization and


Final draft of script

and speech effective

Suggested Guidelines for Learning Outcome Verb, Assessment, and Teaching

NQF Learning Domains
Suggested Verbs

Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

Page 5

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

list, name, record, define, label, outline, state, describe, recall, memorize,
reproduce, recognize, record, tell, write


estimate, explain, summarize, write, compare, contrast, diagram,

subdivide, differentiate, criticize, calculate, analyze, compose, develop,
create, prepare, reconstruct, reorganize, summarize, explain, predict,
justify, rate, evaluate, plan, design, measure, judge, justify, interpret,

Cognitive Skills

Interpersonal Skills & Responsibility

demonstrate, judge, choose, illustrate, modify, show, use, appraise,

evaluate, justify, analyze, question, and write

Communication, Information
Technology, Numerical

demonstrate, calculate, illustrate, interpret, research, question, operate,

appraise, evaluate, assess, and criticize

demonstrate, show, illustrate, perform, dramatize, employ, manipulate,

operate, prepare, produce, draw, diagram, examine, construct, assemble,
experiment, and reconstruct
Suggested verbs not to use when writing measurable and assessable learning outcomes are as follows:








Some of these verbs can be used if tied to specific actions or quantification.

Suggested assessment methods and teaching strategies are:
According to research and best practices, multiple and continuous assessment methods are required to verify
student learning. Current trends incorporate a wide range of rubric assessment tools; including web-based student
performance systems that apply rubrics, benchmarks, KPIs, and analysis. Rubrics are especially helpful for
qualitative evaluation. Differentiated assessment strategies include: exams, portfolios, long and short essays, log
books, analytical reports, individual and group presentations, posters, journals, case studies, lab manuals, video
analysis, group reports, lab reports, debates, speeches, learning logs, peer evaluations, self-evaluations, videos,
graphs, dramatic performances, tables, demonstrations, graphic organizers, discussion forums, interviews, learning
contracts, antidotal notes, artwork, KWL charts, and concept mapping.
Differentiated teaching strategies should be selected to align with the curriculum taught, the needs of students, and
the intended learning outcomes. Teaching methods include: lecture, debate, small group work, whole group and
small group discussion, research activities, lab demonstrations, projects, debates, role playing, case studies, guest
speakers, memorization, humor, individual presentation, brainstorming, and a wide variety of hands-on student
learning activities.

5. Schedule of Assessment Tasks for Students During the Semester

Assessment task (e.g. essay, test, group project, examination, speech,
oral presentation, etc.)

Candidates will be presented with two or more passages, totaling

around 900 words, and material presented in the form of
Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

Week Due

3rd week

Proportion of Total


Page 6

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

diagrams or images.
Candidates are required to analyses a simple argument
by responding to short-answer questions and partquestions
Candidates are required to produce an analysis of the
credibility of sources (individual characters and
organizations) within a scenario. Candidates will respond to
both short-answer questions and questions requiring more
discursive answers
Class presentations for argumentations and debates

Final Examination

6th week and

10th week


7th week
5th , 8th , 12th
and 15th weeks



D. Student Academic Counseling and Support

1. Arrangements for availability of faculty and teaching staff for individual student consultations and
academic advice. (include amount of time teaching staff are expected to be available each week)
3:00-5:00 (Sunday Thursday)- 10 hours/week

E. Learning Resources
1. List Required Textbooks

(a) M. Kallet, Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and DecisionMaking Skills, John Willey & Sons Publisher, New Jersey, 2014.
(b) S. Bareham, Think Well & Prosper Critical Thinking: A Staff Training Guide, Summa
Publishing, 1st Edition, 2013.
(c) S. Bareham, A Critical Thinking Guide, Summa Publishing, 1st Edition, 2013.
2. List Essential References Materials (Journals, Reports, etc.)
(a) B. R. Parker and B. Moore, Critical Thinking, Humanities & Social Science Publisher, New

Jersey, 10th Edition, 2011

(b) B. Schoenburg, Critical Thinking in Business, Heuristics Books, Missouri, 2010.
(c) J. Lavery, Critical Thinking: An Introduction to the Basic Skills, Broadview Press, 2009
3. List Recommended Textbooks and Reference Material (Journals, Reports, etc)
(a) Journals in Rhetoric and Composition, University of Illonois, USA
(b)International Journal of English Language Teaching, Sciedu Press, Toronto, ISSN 2329-7913.
(c) International Journal of Innovation in English Language Teaching and Research, Nova Science
Publishers, New York.
4. List Electronic Materials (eg. Web Sites, Social Media, Blackboard, etc.)
(a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpPKRFh-yCc
(b) https://www.youtube.com/user/mohammadliufaisal

Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

Page 7

National Commission for

Academic Accreditation & Assessment

F. Facilities Required
Indicate requirements for the course including size of classrooms and laboratories (i.e. number of seats in
classrooms and laboratories, extent of computer access etc.)
1. Accommodations: Lecture room (5x6 m) equipped with smart board, white board, data show,

and overhead projector.

G Course Evaluation and Improvement Processes
1 Strategies for Obtaining Student Feedback on Effectiveness of Teaching
Observing the students opinions recorded in the college student site
Appeal box
Carrying out extensive questioners by a sample of the distinguished students just after the
graduation from the college
2 Other Strategies for Evaluation of Teaching by the Program/Department Instructor
Periodical review of the teaching methods by both the department council and the education
affairs vice dean. Questionnaire
Observing the students opinions recorded in the college student site
Appeal box
3 Processes for Improvement of Teaching
Evaluation of the course outlines by external staff member from outside the university
Periodical contact with the different engineering authorities and industries for evaluating and
getting their feedback and suggestions concerning the course outlines
4. Processes for Verifying Standards of Student Achievement (e.g. check marking by an independent
member teaching staff of a sample of student work, periodic exchange and remarking of tests or a sample
of assignments with staff at another institution)
Check marking of a sample of student work by an independent faculty member.
Exchange periodically, and remark a sample of assignments with faculty members assigned in
other universities accredited by NCAAA.
5 Describe the planning arrangements for periodically reviewing course effectiveness and planning for
Assessment and evaluation of the level of achieving the course outcomes through a continuous
improvement process (part of a quality assurance system established by the university).
Consequently, actions are to be taken to improve the course delivery when necessary.
Review of the course objectives, outcomes and curriculum each 2 years
Faculty or Teaching Staff: Dr. Tomas U. Ganiron Jr
Signature: __________Tuganironjr_____________

Date Report Completed: April 5, 2012

Received by: _________almarwae____________

Signature: ___________almarwae____________

Form 5a_Course Specifications _SSRP_1 JULY 2012

Dean/Department Head : Dr. M. Almarwae

Date: April 5, 2012

Page 8