Undergraduate Course: Wicked problems: Reason and Rhetoric (EDUA08126)
Course Outline
| School | Moray House School of Education and Sport |
College | College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences |
| Credit level (Normal year taken) | SCQF Level 8 (Year 1 Undergraduate) |
Availability | Available to all students |
| SCQF Credits | 20 |
ECTS Credits | 10 |
| Summary | This course aims to help you develop the skills, understanding and confidence that you will need to support you as you engage with discussion on potentially difficult topics throughout your studies. Through this course you will be provided with models of ways of engaging with diverse positions which are respectful. You will have experience of working within these models. Alongside this experiential learning you will be introduced to a range of ideas which will help you understand the importance of identifying in debates where the core disagreements lie, and where there may be some common ground. In addition you will learn how to evaluate arguments and the evidence-base on which they stand. |
| Course description |
According to George Davie, writing in 1961, one of the purposes of Higher Education in Scotland was to foster active student debate about important social issues of the day. This was said to be best done from different perspectives via engagement with traditions of thinking that embody different perspectives and experiences. This will be a key feature of this interdisciplinary course.
The Principal, Peter Mathieson, has stated "facilitating an environment where students and staff can discuss and debate challenging topics is at the heart of our purpose as a university." The purpose of such academic discussion is not to try to reach agreement, but through reflection and dialogue to understand and evaluate the bases on which competing claims are made. This course is not about identifying 'the truth' on any position, but rather exploring the ways in which through reason rather than rhetoric we can advance our understanding. This involves, amongst other things, becoming aware of our own biases, adopting a critical and enquiring stance on all topics, reflecting on the assumptions that we all make, considering what counts as evidence. Key foci of the course are what makes for a sound argument, how well grounded individual arguments are in evidence and how to identify and respond to rhetorical devices.
This course is delivered through a combination of curated online material (including films) and in person seminars. Each week there will be background reading and online material to engage with. The seminars will feature a combination of discussion of the ideas in the readings and other materials for that week, along with the opportunity to try out some of the approaches that are introduced. These approaches will include, but are not limited to: Community of Philosophical Enquiry and Toulmin method of argumentation.
Topics which will be covered will include:
the purpose of the university,
the principles of community of philosophical inquiry,
critical thinking,
virtue ethics,
cross cultural differences on what constitutes appropriate discussion and debate,
different perspectives on what counts as knowledge,
disciplinary traditions and practices,
conceptual clarity - its importance but also limitations,
identifying rhetorical devices (including the use and misuse of statistics),
reflection on where our knowledge comes from,
identifying what makes a sound argument, and the extent to which arguments are grounded in evidence.
In exploring these issues we will draw on examples of 'difficult questions' or 'wicked problems'- these will be selected (and/or suggested) by the students, but may include:
Is assisted dying murder?
Vaccination - individual choice or social responsibility?
Decolonizing the curriculum - what is it and is it needed?
Does the World Bank's influence reinforce developed countries' control over global economic policies and development?
What are the causes of offending behaviour?
At what age should children be able to give consent for medical procedures?
What are the proper limits of state intervention in individual and family life?
Should the NHS limit what medical procedures it offers? And if so on what grounds?
Are refugees and asylum seekers a net asset or net liability to the UK. How ought this to be measured?
Are there limits to academic freedom and if so what are they and why?
What does fair taxation look like?
Is technology dividing society or bringing it together?
Should the use of Generative AI be permissible in a university?
The aim is not to teach any particular position on any topic. This course is about preparing you to be able to make the most of your time at university and to assist you both to argue cogently and with confidence and to evaluate arguments clearly and fairly. You will be asked to focus on one of these (or a similarly 'difficult' topic) for your assignments; the expectation is that you will engage with materials which cover a diverse range of views on the topic.
It is anticipated that during the seminars you will hear views with which you disagree, perhaps even find offensive. These seminars will set out to provide a safe space - that is one in which diverse viewpoints can all be articulated and engaged with respectfully and critically. The 'rules of engagement' in these seminars will be negotiated during the first meeting and seminars will be facilitated in a way which will support the development of trust.
|
Entry Requirements (not applicable to Visiting Students)
| Pre-requisites |
|
Co-requisites | |
| Prohibited Combinations | |
Other requirements | None |
Information for Visiting Students
| Pre-requisites | None |
| High Demand Course? |
Yes |
Course Delivery Information
|
| Academic year 2025/26, Available to all students (SV1)
|
Quota: None |
| Course Start |
Semester 2 |
Timetable |
Timetable |
| Learning and Teaching activities (Further Info) |
Total Hours:
200
(
Programme Level Learning and Teaching Hours 4,
Directed Learning and Independent Learning Hours
196 )
|
| Assessment (Further Info) |
Written Exam
0 %,
Coursework
100 %,
Practical Exam
0 %
|
| Additional Information (Assessment) |
Individual presentation (recorded) - 25%«br /»
Long essay - 2000 words - 75%«br /»
«br /»
The long essay will require the students to present both sides of an argument on a 'wicked problem' and discuss which argument they find most convincing and why. |
| Feedback |
This course will be characterised by ongoing and timely feedback from staff and peers throughout all the seminars.
A formative feedback opportunity will be offered on a 500 word draft outline for the individual presentation
Feedback on summative assessment tasks will focus on areas for development which can be taken forward into other courses. |
| No Exam Information |
Learning Outcomes
On completion of this course, the student will be able to:
- Reflect on their own thinking process to recognise cognitive biases and improve decision-making.
- Evaluate the credibility of information and evidence, recognising biases, assumptions, and logical fallacies.
- Construct well-reasoned arguments and engage in constructive debate.
- Engage in structured philosophical dialogue: students will participate in and contribute to a community of philosophical inquiry.
- Analyse diverse perspectives: students will demonstrate the ability to examine and reflect on different viewpoints , understanding the value of opposing arguments
|
Reading List
Indicative Reading List
Baggini, J. (2023) How to Think Like a Philosopher: Essential Principles for Clearer Thinking. London: Granta.
Ferner, A., & Chetty, D. (2019). How to Disagree: Negotiate difference in a divided world.: 20 thought-provoking lessons. White Lion Publishing.
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York Pantheon.
Kennedy, D. (2004). The role of a facilitator in a community of philosophical inquiry. Metaphilosophy, 35(5), 744-765.
Macallister, J. (2012). Virtue epistemology and the philosophy of education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46(2), 251-270.
Normile, I. (2024). Expanding Critical Thinking into 'Critical Being' Through Wonder and Wu-Wei. Educational Theory, 74(1), 41-65.
Pappas, Shannon. "Birds are not real: Exploring the Toulmin model of argumentation." Communication Teacher 38.2 (2024): 105-110.
Van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Johnson, R.H., Plantin, C., Willard, C.A.: Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Routledge, Milton Park (2013)
|
Additional Information
| Graduate Attributes and Skills |
Analytical thinking
analyse, synthesise, critically and methodically appraise thoughts to break down complex problems into manageable components.
On this course students will
- Approach complex problems with a structured, analytical mindset.
- Develop logical reasoning and critical thinking skills to evaluate arguments and evidence.
- Formulate, defend, and critique arguments based on clear, logical reasoning and evidence.
Handling complexity and ambiguity
have an understanding of contextually relevant ethics and values, self-awareness, mental flexibility and openness, resilience and a commitment to life-long learning
On this course students will
- Develop the ability to navigate and manage complexity and ambiguity in diverse situations.
- Cultivate self-awareness, enhancing their ability to recognise personal biases, strengths, and areas for growth.
- Practise mental flexibility and openness to new ideas, fostering innovative thinking.
- Commit to continuous self-improvement and life-long learning.
Critical thinking
capability to evaluate information thoroughly; identifying assumptions, detecting false logic or reasoning and defining terms accurately in order to make an informed judgement.
On this course students will
- Apply critical thinking skills to solve problems, make decisions, and navigate complex issues in real-world scenarios.
- Understand the core principles of critical thinking, including logic, argumentation, and reasoning.
- Engage in thoughtful dialogue on difficult topics, articulating their own views clearly while respecting differing perspectives, and demonstrating the ability to listen, ask questions, and respond with empathy and understanding.
Skilled Communication
verbal communication and presentation; cross-cultural communication; influencing and negotiating skills.
On this course students will
- Develop oral communication of complex ideas and arguments using a range of media
- Enhance verbal communication, including listening and questioning
- Communicate and persuade, both orally and in writing
- Articulate and effectively explain information
- Be sensitive to and understand the diversity in people and different situations
- Consider and develop your communication style for different people, situations and cultures
- Have the ability to negotiate or persuade and influence others |
| Keywords | disagreeing well,reason and argument,rhetoric,thinking critically |
Contacts
| Course organiser | Dr Gale MacLeod
Tel: (0131 6)51 6448
Email: gale.macleod@ed.ac.uk |
Course secretary | |
|
|
University Homepage