INFORMATIC TECHNOLOGICAL COLLEGE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC.

Prk. 2A, Distic 1, Barangay 5(Pob.), San Francisco, Agusan del Sur

Course Code Psych.2

Course title Logic
No. of hours 54
Credit/Unit 3
Prerequisite Psych.1
Course Description This course is an introduction to the meaning and formation of terms, propositions and logical reasoning. It will acquaint the student
with the fundamental principles and methods of valid reasoning so as to equip him/her with the logical tools necessary for his/her
constant battles against fallacies and inconsistencies. This course is also an introduction to symbolic logic and other forms of logical
reasoning.
Vision Informatic Technological College of San Francisco, Inc. envisions to be a leading technical school in Region XIII, Committed to uphold
standards of quality affordable technical education in producing skilled man power with positive work values that will contribute to the
social, moral and economical development of Agusan del Sur and neighbouring provinces.
Mission Our mission is to provide affordable, relevant, efficient and high-quality technical education and produce highly skilled graduates
endowed with desirable work values and attitudes that will prepare them for gainful employment.
Core Values Innovation
Tenacity
Compassion
Goals 1. Implement a comprehensive quality management system to improve product/service quality and customer satisfaction.
2. Adopt cutting-edge technologies to improve productivity and competitiveness.
3. Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion within the workplace.
4. Ensure compliance with ethical standards and regulations in all aspects of operations.
5. Identify and establish strategic partnerships to expand market reach and create new business opportunities.
Objectives At the end of the course, students are expected to:
1. Reflect on their daily experiences from a holistic point of view
2. Express Ideas with clarity and precision
3. Acquire the skill of logical method of reasoning
4. Acquire Critical and Analytical Thinking skills
 5. Apply their critical and analytical thinking skills to the affairs of daily life
6. Formulate sound and valid arguments
7. Detect Formal and Material fallacies.

Course Content
Week Lesson/Topic Learning Objectives Strategy/ Student Output Evaluation of Learning/
Methodology/Activities Evaluation Tool
1 Demonstrate the expected Discussion on Meaning Submission of works that Pre-Discussion
concepts and ideas to be and the process of includes the summary of
discussed in this subject. Doing Philosophy. learnings acquired in this Individual Work
period.

The The Learner understands the

Meaning and the process of Logic.
Online Based Research
Work Quizzes to be submitted
after class at a certain
Deepening Activity

Peer Assessment

Nature The Learner understands the

connection between a concept
and a term
Hands-on Reading

Reporting
time

Student as a resource
Quizzes

of speaker/reporter assign a
student to talk on a
specific topic. Let the

Mathema student discuss the topic

by presenting the details
of the concepts. Let the

tics other students raise

questions.
Introduction to Logic

Abstraction

What is a Concept?

What is a Term?
2 What is a Definition? The Learner comprehends the Discussion Submission of works that Pre-Discussion
meaning of a “Definition” includes the summary of
What is Judgement? Reporting learnings acquired in this Individual Work
The Learner understands period.
Proposition judgment as the second division Hands-on Reading Deepening Activity
of Logic. Quizzes to be submitted
after class at a certain Peer Assessment
time
Quizzes
Student as a resource
speaker/reporter assign a
student to talk on a
specific topic. Let the
student discuss the topic
by presenting the details
of the concepts. Let the
other students raise
questions.
3 Logical Inference/ Reasoning The Learner understands the Discussion Submission of works that Pre-Discussion
meaning of a logical includes the summary of
The Oppositional Square of inference/reasoning. Group Activity learnings acquired in this Oral Recitation
Proposition period.
The Learner understands the role Video Presentation Deepening Activity
and function of the square of Quizzes to be submitted
opposition in the validity of an Reporting after class at a certain Peer Assessment
argument time
Quizzes
Student as a resource
speaker/reporter assign a
student to talk on a
specific topic. Let the
student discuss the topic
by presenting the details
 of the concepts. Let the
other students raise
questions.
4 What is a Syllogism? The learner understands the Discussion Submission of works that Pre-Discussion
meaning of a syllogism. includes the summary of
What is a Fallacy? Group Activity learnings acquired in this Oral Recitation
The learner understands the period.
Introduction to Symbolic Logic meaning of fallacy and its Hands-on Reading Deepening Activity
different kinds. Quizzes to be submitted
Online Based Research after class at a certain Peer Assessment
The learner understands the Work time
symbolic logic in its meaning and Quizzes
its kinds. Reporting Student as a resource
speaker/reporter assign a
student to talk on a
specific topic. Let the
student discuss the topic
by presenting the details
of the concepts. Let the
other students raise
questions.
Rubrics

Rubric for Reporting in Logic

Criteria Excellent (4) Good (3) Fair (2) Needs Improvement (1)
Understanding of Logic Demonstrates thorough Shows clear understanding of Shows basic understanding Demonstrates little
Concepts understanding of logical most logical concepts. of some logical concepts. understanding of logical
principles and their application. concepts.
Clarity and Organization Report is exceptionally clear, Information is mostly clear Some sections lack clarity or Report lacks coherence and
well-structured, and logically and well-organized. are poorly organized. structure.
organized.
Accuracy of Information All information presented is Information is mostly Some inaccuracies or Report contains significant
accurate, relevant, and accurate and relevant. irrelevant information inaccuracies or irrelevant
effectively supports arguments. present. information.
Depth of Analysis Provides insightful analysis with Offers adequate analysis with Analysis is superficial or Analysis is absent or illogical.
detailed explanations and logical logical reasoning. lacks sufficient reasoning.
reasoning.
Use of Examples and Rich use of relevant examples Uses examples and evidence Examples or evidence are Examples or evidence are
Evidence and evidence to support points to support points adequately. weak or irrelevant. absent or inappropriate.
effectively.
Critical Thinking Demonstrates strong critical Shows basic critical thinking Critical thinking skills are Little to no critical thinking
thinking skills in evaluating skills in evaluating underdeveloped. evident.
arguments and conclusions. arguments.
Language and Mechanics Language is sophisticated, clear, Language is mostly clear with Language is unclear with Language is confusing or
and free of errors. minor errors. frequent errors. inappropriate for academic
reporting.
 Formatting and Citations Follows specified formatting Mostly follows formatting Formatting guidelines are Does not follow formatting
guidelines accurately; citations guidelines; citations are partially followed; citations guidelines; citations are missing
are properly formatted and present but may have minor are inconsistent or or improperly used.
used. errors. incorrectly formatted.
Overall Impression Report is exemplary in Report effectively addresses Report addresses the topic Report does not effectively
addressing the topic with depth, the topic with clarity and adequately but lacks depth address the topic.
clarity, and coherence. coherence. or coherence.
Several grammatical and
Free from grammatical and Minor grammatical and Numerous grammatical and
Mechanics (Grammar, spelling errors; format
spelling errors; follows spelling errors; generally spelling errors; format
Spelling, Format) guidelines are partially
appropriate format guidelines. follows format guidelines. guidelines are not followed.
followed.

Grading System

Grades are determined by computing a student’s performance over the term for both lecture and laboratory. A failing grade may be given to a student who
does not meet attendance requirements.

The school adopts the following grading system with the corresponding equivalence
GRADE EQUIVALENCE DESCRIPTION
1.00 98-100% Excellent
1.25 95-97% Very Good
1.50 92-94%
1.75 89-91%
2.00 86-88% Satisfactory
2.25 83-85%
2.50 80-82%
2.75 77-79% Fair
3.00 75-76%
5.00 Below 75% Failed due to poor performance, absences or withdrawal
without notice
DRP Officially Dropped Dropped with approved dropping slip
 P Passed To be used only for courses specified as having non-numeric
F Failed grades.

The course grade is based on the percentage distribution for each periodical grade to be expressed in percentage from rounded to the nearest unit.

For CHED and TESDA courses, which are semestral-based, the percentage distribution is as follows:

PRELIMS 20 % Example 2.25

MIDTERMS 20 % 1.25
PRE-FINALS 20 % 2.00
FINALS 40 % 1.00
Course Grade is 1.50

For other TESDA courses offered in modular forms, the percentage grade distribution within a block is as prescribed in the syllabus.

In courses with a combination of lecturer and laboratory, the course grade is based on the proportion of lecture to laboratory units. Hence, the course
grade for a three (3) unit course with two (2) units of lecture and one (1) unit of laboratory shall be of ratio of 2:1, lecture: laboratory, and rounded off to
the nearest numeric grade.

Example: Final lecture grade is 1.50

Final laboratory grade is 1.75
Course grade is 1.58

PERIODICAL GRADE
Recommended periodical grade components for:

Lecture Units Laboratory Units

Class Participation 10% Laboratory Exercises 10%
Exercise and Seatwork 20% Case Studies and Projects 90%
Quizzes 30%
Periodical Examination 40%

Deviation from the recommended components may be decided or approved by the Dean upon the recommendation of the Department Chairman/Program
Coordinator and faculty to suit the program objectives and requirements.

Prepared by: Reviewed: Recommending Approval: Approved:

Marc Russel N. Padilla Alberto N. Condolon Leizl L. Jagape Marcelino C. Anino

Instructor School Administrator Vice President for Academics School President