�Diving Deeper into the Argument-Centered Instructional Strategy:�Structured Academic Controversy�

​

​

A SHORT WORKSHOP FOR THE

DCI SUMMER INSTITUTE

JULY, 2021

Epigraphs

Motivational theorists believe that conceptual conflict can create epistemic curiosity which motivates the search for new information and the reconceptualization of the knowledge one already has. . . . Cognitive psychologists propose that conceptual conflict may be necessary for insight and discovery. Educational psychologists indicate that conflict can increase achievement. . . . All drama hinges on conflict. When playwrights and scriptwriters want to gain and hold viewers’ attention, create viewer interest and emotional involvement, and excite and surprise viewers, they create a conflict. . . . Educators, on the other hand, often suppress students’ academic disagreements. Consequently teachers miss out on valuable opportunities to capture and emotionally involve their own audiences (i.e., students) and enhance learning.

David W. Johnson & Roger T. Johnson, University of Minnesota, Creative Controversy: Intellectual Challenge in the Classroom, 1987

​

Epigraphs

Conflict is the gadfly of thought. It stirs us to observation and memory. It instigates invention. It shocks us out of sheep-like passivity, and sets us at noting and contriving. . . . Conflict is a “sine qua non” of reflection and ingenuity.

John Dewey, Human Nature and Conduct, 1922

​

It is, perhaps, not too strong to say that the most crucial element in coalescent argumentation is empathy. Indeed, the greater the disagreement, the further apart the initial stances of the dispute partners, the more important (and the more difficult) is the requirement for empathy. . . . The quality of listening and observation required for the empathic comprehension of another’s position is no mean feat; it demands, at least temporarily, the suspension of the drive to persuade or convince, i.e., to win, in favor of the desire to agree. The third stage of coalescent argumentation, the attempt to find points of coalescence, requires empathy.

Michael A. Gilbert, professor of philosophy, York University, Coalescent Argumentation, 1997

​

​

What Is �Structured Academic Controversy?

• A cooperative learning strategy that has students delve into the arguments made for both (or all) positions on a controversial issue, with the ultimate aim of students discussing or deliberating toward their own conclusions
• Developed in the 1970s by Johnson & Johnson (David & Roger), education professors at the University of Minnesota who promoted intellectual conflict in education
• Written about extensively by The Political Classroom authors Diana Hess (U. of Wisconsin – Madison), Paula McAvoy (North Carolina State U.), and others in the civics education world especially
• Key features: students work in pairs then matched to quads, students present arguments on both sides (or two sides) of the issue, ends in personal position-taking

​

​

Argumentalizing �Structured Academic Controversy

CONVENTIONAL SAC

1) Topics are politically controversial issues, used in social science/studies classes

2) Small number of sources used; minimal argument preparation

3) Argument presentation not followed by counter-argument

4) No argument tracking

5) Deliberation free-flowing and open

​

ARGUMENTALIZED SAC

• 1) Topics can be any debatable question, used in any class
• 2) Source list size can vary, depending on the DQ; argument preparation is usually more thorough
• 3) Argument presentation followed by counter-argument
• 4) Argument tracking
• 5) Intention to attach deliberation to the argumentation presented

Additional Sources on �Structured Academic Controversy

https://teachinghistory.org/teaching-materials/teaching-guides/21731

SAC and teaching history

https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/sac/how.html

SAC and science education

https://www.edcircuit.com/benefits-of-implementing-a-structured-academic-controversy-in-the-classroom/

SAC and several ed-tech applications

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/app/uploads/2014/02/3_Structured-Academic-Controversy.pdf

SAC and PBS Learning Media

http://archive.wceruw.org/cl1/CL/doingcl/DCL1.asp

SAC as cooperative learning

A Video Overview of �Structured Academic Controversy

​

​

​

Structured Academic Controversy�Example: Political Art

Structured Academic Controversy�Example: Political Art

• Debatable Question: Can art itself make positive social or political change?
• We organized the project, which culminated in the SAC as summative assessment, using an Implementation Plan
• We curated a Media List to provide students with background information, argument ideas on both sides, and evidence to support claims
• We selected from the Media List to focus on a set of key sources on which we developed argument-based questions
• We created with the input of students a Possible Claims and Counter-Claims resource
• We used the standard argument builder, and developed argument models to use for modeling, scaffolding, and revising purposes

Structured Academic Controversy�Example: Political Art

We used a set of standard argumentalized SAC resources

• The Structured Academic Controversy Overview explains the process of preparing for and conducting a SAC
• The Structured Academic Controversy Speech Sequence is a student-facing document that outlines the format of the SAC and is a useful reminder for students on the day of
• A SAC Tracker enables all students to track all of the arguments made during a SAC and helps enforce refutation or responsiveness, and therefore criticality

Structured Academic Controversy�Example: Vaccine Hesitancy

Structured Academic Controversy�Example: Vaccine Hesitancy

Debatable Question: Can education and communication strategies overcome Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy and ensure that enough Americans get vaccinated to achieve herd immunity against, or neutralize the crisis effects of, the coronavirus?

​

We will divide into pairs. Each pair will be assigned to be an A-pair or a B-pair.

​

A-pairs will use the “A” argument models for this DQ. B-pairs will use the “B” argument models for this DQ.

“A” Argument Models

Affirmative and Negative

“B” Argument Models

Affirmative and Negative

​

We will now just launch into a SAC practice or two!!

Questions and Comments?!?

Contact for More Information �and Support

• Email:
• Info@argumentcenterededucation.com
• Phone:
• 312-848-2271
• Web:
• argumentcenterededucation.com