Serial Arguments in Classrooms Dale Hample & Benjamin Krueger Serial arguing has mainly been studied in the context of close relationships. This study generalizes those theories and findings to the context of classrooms. Respondents (N ¼ 348) reported on serial arguments they had experienced either in college or in high school classes. High school serial arguments were more brutish than those in college. Resolvability was positively associated with classroom climate and arguers’ civility. Approach and avoidance motives predicted the degree to which a range of arguers’ goals come into play, and the goals predicted the tactics in use. The tactics, in turn, predicted the resolvability, climate, and civility of the serial arguments. Keywords: Classroom; Climate; Goals; Serial Argument; Tactics A serial argument is one that recurs because it is not settled in a single episode and at least one participant still wants to raise the issue. As teachers, many of us have seen such arguments develop in our classes. Sometimes we actually design a course around an argument intended to continue for a whole semester: For instance, ‘‘Should cul- tures be identified as nations or described by means of scores on instruments like individualism=collectivism?’’ These sorts of controversies are not the focus here because they are probably not identified as arguments by students, who typically understand ‘‘argument’’ to refer to nasty irrational exchanges (e.g., Hample & Benoit, 1999; Martin & Scheerhorn, 1985). Instead, what we have in mind are continuing complaints about grading or reading loads, personal disagreements between students, accusations against teachers or group members, or arguments from civic life that bleed into class. These have the potential to improve or damage the learning environment. Dale Hample is an Associate Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Maryland, College Park, MD. Benjamin Krueger is an Instructor in the Department of Communication Studies at Winona State University, Winona, MN. An earlier version of this article was presented to the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, November 2009, Chicago, IL. Correspondence to: Dale Hample, Depart- ment of Communication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, U.S.A. E-mail: dhample@umd.edu Communication Studies Vol. 62, No. 5, November–December 2011, pp. 581–601 ISSN 1051-0974 (print)/ISSN 1745-1035 (online) # 2011 Central States Communication Association DOI: 10.1080/10510974.2011.576746