Argumentation in the Invitational Communication Climate
Debating ideas is a key activity in the Collaborative Research Model, but how can you combine two ideas—invitation and argumentation—that seem to be at odds with one another?
In an invitational communication climate, competitive argumentation takes a back seat to cooperative argumentation, as shown below.
Competitive argumentation focuses on winning something—the judge’s vote, or your spouse’s submission to your opinion, the election, your teacher’s favor, or admiration of others.
In academic settings, competitive argumentation often takes the form of persuading others (classmates and the teacher) that your opinion is the right opinion, therefore winning the argument.
Sometimes, competitive argumentation in collaborative inquiry can discourage reasoned decision-making because the motivation to win is stronger than the motivation to consider various perspectives.
Competitive argumentation can also provide a motivation for participants to hide important information and evidence—because the desire to win the argument can be stronger than the desire to seek a reasonable and just outcome.
Cooperative argumentation focuses on a shared goal—finding the best answer or making the best decision.1
In academic settings, cooperative argumentation is more fully defined as “a process of reasoned interaction on a controversial topic intended to help participants and audiences make the best assessments or decisions in any given situation.”
Learning to be an effective participant in cooperative argumentation supports our students in social goals (as citizens taking part in democratic decision-making), and in professional and personal goals (in terms of their ability to take part in collaborative and personal decision-making).
1 Josina M. Makau. Reasoning and Communication: Thinking Critically About Arguments. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1990, 48.
