Collaborative Argumentation
Updated 2026-08-11
INTRODUCTION
English translation pending.
CORE DEFINITION
A pattern that organizes views as claim, reason, and evidence, then deepens them through iterative challenge and response. The aim is to construct warranted agreement from disagreement, not to defeat an opponent. Toulmin's model of argument supplies the underlying structure of claim, grounds, and warrant. Collaborative argumentation covenants and collaborative argumentation frameworks are the same concept.
SCAFFOLDING EFFECT
Reduce cognitive load
- Claim mapping: state the claim first, then attach the reasons and evidence that support it. - Challenge round: invite others to raise counterexamples and objections to each claim. - Consensus check: revise the claim until agreement rests on evidence rather than on status.
Anchor fast decisions
Organizing views as claim, reason, and evidence gives arguments a shared structure. Iterative challenge and response deepen each position, and the goal becomes constructing warranted consensus from disagreement instead of defeating an opponent.
MINIMUM ACTION
In progress 0/1Practice this model in one real situation:
account_treeGenealogyexpand_more
menu_bookReferencesexpand_more
Source support: Explicit
- eric.ed.govhttps://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ647609verified
PRIVATE NOTES · Only visible to you
SAVED Q&A
ENTRY Q&A · Private saving available
Ask with a clear boundary
thinkingmodels answers from published entry context only.
Your question is sent to thinkingmodels. The answer uses public entry context only.
RELATED MODELS