CAD Center for Academic Development | Al Akhawayn University

SSK 1202 Home

Calendar

Critical Reading

Problem Solving

Concepts

Course Resources

SSK 1202 - Critical Reading and Problem Solving

Syllabus

Objectives
Attendance
Lateness
Grading
Exams
Student Contract
Peer Evaluation

Contact

Coordinator: Robert Burgess
Office of International Programs Bldg 2
Office hours: As posted
Phone: 2905
E-mail: R.Burgess@aui.ma

Instructor: Catherine Owens
Office: Room 106, Bldg 10
Office hours: As posted
Phone: 2422
E-mail: C.Owens@aui.ma

Instructor: Barbara Huff
Office: Room 103, Bldg 10
Office hours: As posted
Phone: 2999
E-mail: B.Huff@aui.ma

Purpose and Objectives of the Course

At the end of this course students should have the ability to:

think critically
read critically
synthesize from academic reading materials
evaluate academic reading materials
take notes from academic reading material
run a seminar based on academic reading materials
work effectively in study groups/teams/collaboratively/cooperatively
evaluate peer and personal academic work
analyze a problem solution topic
apply knowledge to new contexts

Attendance Policy

Your teacher is required by the university to enter every absence into the university database regardless of whether it is an excused or unexcused absence. Unexcused absences will have the following impact on your grades:

1 absence -    --
2 absences-   oral warning
3 absences-   written warning
4 absences-   withdrawal/failure

Lateness Policy

Students who are late will be marked “late” in the attendance register. This will have an impact on your teacher evaluation.

Makeups (exams and quizzes)
For students with excused absences, makeup tests will be scheduled at the convenience of the teacher and student. The student is responsible for scheduling this makeup. Students with unexcused absences will receive a score of 0 on the test or quiz. Classes will not be rescheduled for any reason. Students who miss a class for whatever reason are responsible for the material covered during that class.

Grading Overview

Scoring Criteria

10% - Teacher Assessment (Attendance/Participation/Behavior)
10% - Seminar Preparation
20% - Midterm exam
20% - Final exam
40% - Paper

20% Process (portfolio)
20% Final Paper

Grading Criteria

A = 90-100%
B = 80-89%
C = 70-79%
D = 60-69% (must repeat)
F = 0-59%

Seminar Leadership Grading Scheme

Students will be responsible for leading at least two reading seminars during the semester in groups. This scheme will be used to grade the students leading the seminar.

The Grade of A
A-level work demonstrates real achievement in grasping what critical reading and problem solving is, along with the clear development of a range of specific critical reading skills or abilities. The work at the end of the course is, on the whole, clear, precise, and well-reasoned, though with occasional lapses into weak reasoning. In A-level work, critical thinking terms and distinctions are used effectively. The work demonstrates a mind beginning to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. The A-level student often analyzes issues clearly and precisely, often formulates information clearly, usually distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, often recognizes key questionable assumptions, usually clarifies key concepts effectively, typically uses language in keeping with educated usage, frequently identifies relevant competing points of view, and shows a general tendency to reason carefully from clearly stated premises, as well as noticeable sensitivity to important implications and consequences. A-level work displays excellent reasoning and problem-solving skills. The A student's work is consistently at a high level of intellectual excellence.

The Grade of B
B-level work represents demonstrable achievement in grasping what critical reading and problem solving is, along with the clear demonstration of a range of specific critical reading skills or abilities. B-level work at the end of the course is, on the whole, clear, precise, and well-reasoned, though with occasional lapses into weak reasoning. On the whole, critical thinking terms and distinctions are used effectively. The work demonstrates a mind beginning to take charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. The student often analyzes issues clearly and precisely, often formulates information clearly, usually distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, often recognizes key questionable assumptions, usually clarifies key concepts effectively, typically uses language in keeping with educated usage, frequently identifies relevant competing points of view, and shows a general tendency to reason carefully from clearly stated premises, as well as noticeable sensitivity to important implications and consequences. B-level work displays good reasoning and problem-solving skills.

The Grade of C
C-level work illustrates some but inconsistent achievement in grasping what critical reading and problem solving is, along with the development of modest critical reading skills or abilities. C-level work at the end of the course, it is true, shows some emerging critical thinking skills, but also pronounced weaknesses as well. Though some assignments are reasonably well done, others are poorly done; or at best are mediocre. There are more than occasional lapses in reasoning. Though critical thinking terms and distinctions are sometimes used effectively, sometimes they are used quite ineffectively. Only on occasion does C-level work display a mind taking charge of its own ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. Only occasionally does C-level work display intellectual discipline and clarity. The C-level student only occasionally analyzes issues clearly and precisely, formulates information clearly, distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, recognizes key questionable assumptions, clarifies key concepts effectively, uses language in keeping with educated usage, identifies relevant competing points of view, and reasons carefully from clearly stated premises, or recognizes important implications and consequences. Sometimes the C-level student seems to be simply going through the motions of the assignment, carrying out the form without getting into the spirit of it. On the whole, C-level work shows only modest and inconsistent reasoning and problem-solving skills and sometimes displays weak reasoning and problem-solving skills.

The Grade of D
D level work shows only a minimal level of understanding of what critical reading and problem solving is, along with the development of some, but very little, critical thinking skills or abilities. D work at the end of the course, on the whole, shows only occasional critical thinking skills, but frequent uncritical thinking. Most assignments are poorly done. There is little evidence that the student is "reasoning" through the assignment. Often the student seems to be merely going through the motions of the assignment, carrying out the form without getting into the spirit of it. D work rarely shows any effort to take charge of ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. In general, D-level thinking lacks discipline and clarity. In D-level work, the student rarely analyzes issues clearly and precisely, almost never formulates information clearly, rarely distinguishes the relevant from the irrelevant, rarely recognizes key questionable assumptions, almost never clarifies key concepts effectively, frequently fails to use language in keeping with educated usage, only rarely identifies relevant competing points of view, and almost never reasons carefully from clearly stated premises, or recognizes important implications and consequences. D-level work does not show good reasoning and problem-solving skills and frequently displays poor reasoning and problem-solving skills.

The Grade of F
The student does not understand the basic nature of critical reading and problem solving, and in any case does not display the critical thinking skills and abilities which are at the heart of this course. The work at the end of the course is vague, imprecise, and unreasoned as it was in the beginning. There is little evidence that the student is genuinely engaged in the task of taking charge of his or her thinking. Many assignments appear to have been done pro forma, the student simply going through the motions without really putting any significant effort into thinking his or her way through them. Consequently, the student is not analysing issues clearly, not formulating information clearly, not accurately distinguishing the relevant from the irrelevant, not identifying key questionable assumptions, not clarifying key concepts, not identifying relevant competing points of view, not reasoning carefully from clearly stated premises, or tracing implications and consequences. The student’s work does not display discernable reasoning and problem-solving skills.