Using conversation analysis as a methodological and analytical framework, this study presents a sequential analysis of disagreement episodes in small group interactions in an advanced academic writing class. Closer scrutiny of the sequences reveals that in order to bring disagreements to a close, participants make use of an array of interactional resources to defend and establish their positions as well as to challenge other members' stances. From a collection of 48 disagreement episodes, I identify five different disagreement exit patterns and explain one of them--conceding--in detail. Analysis of pre-conceding activities in the disagreement episodes shows that participants deploy three major practices before they close the sequence: "making an understanding claim," "building a peer alliance" and "proposing an alternative position." They take cautious steps when they give in to the opponent's stance. The findings expand our understanding of the intricate manoeuvres involved in group work tasks in a writing class.