Cycle 3 The Implementation of The Research

commit to user 124 7 The students got new knowledge from both the teacher and the other students in team. b The weaknesses 1 The under average students felt too difficult to give argument and rebuttal. 2 The students could disturb the other class by making noise, when they conduct critical debate. 3 The fast learners’ students felt insufficient when they share opinion with their slow learners’ team. c Recommendation Based on the weakness happen in cycle 2, it is recommended to do following things in cycle 3: 1 The students’ should be train in delivering argument and rebuttal. 2 The students’ should not make a noise. 3 The fast learners ‘students should be shared opinion with a good team.

c. Cycle 3

Based on the reflection in the previous , the researcher still has some problems to be solved in implementing Critical Debate Technique in teaching speaking in cycle 3. They are1 the students should be drilled pronunciation; 2 the students should not make a noise; 3 The fast learners ‘students should be shared opinion with a good team. As the previous cycle, in cycle 3 the researcher in cycle 3 the researcher describes in details the process of teaching speaking using critical debate technique including the four steps done –planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. commit to user 125

1 Planning

Based on the recommendation in cycle 2, the researcher purposed a planning to solve the problems and accommodate the possible aspects enabling the development of the students speaking ability. To overcome the problems in cycle 2, the researcher did a planning consisting of some steps: 1 made lesson plans containing the learning teaching process in speaking using Critical Debate Technique in cycle 3; 2 discuss and cooperate with collaborator in order to succeed the learning teaching process using Critical Debate Technique and everything that would be done in cycle 3; 3 prepared the instruments consisting of speaking assessment using Critical Debate Technique and protocol interview. Relate with planning in cycle 3, the researcher planned: 1 The students’ should be train in delivering argument and rebuttal; 2 The students’ should not make a noise; 3 The fast learners ‘students should be shared opinion with a good team.

2 Acting

Acting was the implementation of these activities that have been made in the planning. The stage of acting included 3 meetings for different materials and the same motion as schedule below: commit to user 126 Table 13: Schedule of cycle 3 Meeting Day Date Materials 1 Monday, 4 April 2011 Expressing Agreement and Disagreement Opinion 1 Passive Modal 1 Cars 1 2 Wednesday, 6 April 2011 Expressing Agreement and Disagreement opinion 2 Passive Modal 2 Cars 2 3 Friday, 8 April 2011 Assessment on oral test ‘The cars should be banned in the city” a First Meeting The first meeting of cycle 3 was conducted on Monday, 4 April 2011. In this activity, the teacher did a set of activities namely opening the class, presentation, practice, production, and closure. As for the detail descriptions would be explained in the following parts: 1 Opening the Class Warming Up After greeting and reminding the session, then the teacher told the students that the topic was “ The cars” and the motion was “ the cars should be banned in the city” . Before the teacher explained what the students had to do, he asked them first whether the students often used telephone to communicate something to another people or not, randomly. It was aimed at knowing their understanding about the topic. Although actually he was sure that it was not strange for them to do. He also gave a chance to the students to express their difficulties dealing the topic. commit to user 127 When the teacher opened the class by giving greeting, the students responded him well. They could also answer the teachers questions correctly, acceptably. They had not seemed to be tense anymore. The students, who were asked some expressions in this case agreeing and disagreeing opinions by the teacher randomly, they could answer according to the hoped questions. It meant that they had better a progress than before. 2 Presentation Surviving the materials The teacher told that topic they were going to learn was ‘ The cars ” and the motion was “ the cars should be banned in the city” . In this part the teacher explained the advantages of the car should be banned in the city, and why car should be banned in the city. And closing, he explained related to the theme, they had also to pay attention to the environment. For example; air pollution, accident zoom. Then the last, he gave some useful expressions such as agreeing and disagreeing opinions related to the materials were given. Besides, he also gave the examples of dialogue expressing “ The car should be banned in the city ”. When the teacher explained the materials, they paid attention so much while sometimes they imitated the expressions as what the teacher said slowly. They took something nearby to be used as if it were a car then they kept it near their ears and said slowly according to what they wanted to speak likes real condition in the city. They also so excited when the teacher led them to pronounce, some useful expressions such as I am not surprised, that does not surprise me, yes, the sound like me, I knew it, I thought so, just what I have commit to user 128 always thought, absolutely, dealing with the topic. They imitated it loudly. Moreover, when the teacher asked them to repeat after him, they seemed to be excited. So that their pronunciation were very clear to hear. In this presentation, there were no problems for the students. They had understood the materials. They had also been asked to practice some useful expression before doing debate. 3 Practice Main Activity In this part the teacher divided the students into small groups of three to act the critical debate by the motion “ The car should be banned in the city” . As he did before, there were lottery provided by the teacher, and then the students were asked to take one by one to determine who belongs to affirmative and negative team. After that the teacher distributed the materials to be learned in five minutes. Then, they were asked to practice it in front of the class. As for the media which was used in this activity was wireless that had been provided by the teacher, it was given to illustrate the real situation so that the students spoke as if they did it in real situation. In front of the class, there were two sides of portable telephones. The students had to use them to practice their spoken English orally using critical debate. The following was flow chart that the students had to practice in the class: When the students were given the motion with some useful expression, then they learned it in detail. They tried to understand, what they had to say according to the materials given. They needed ten to a quarter minutes to arrange their expressions. After that they tried to make a little conversation on their own commit to user 129 seat with their each pair. The class changed to be noisy, because the students did some exercises orally on their each own seats. After a few minutes later, the teacher pleased to first pair to come forward to practice as what they had learned according to their each role as the affirmative or rebuttal. They seemed to be excited to do this. If they got some difficulties, they were not afraid any more to ask their difficulties to their teacher. Their motivation also looked increased. It could be seen from their appearance to respond the materials enthusiastically. 4 Production This part, the researcher and collaborator asked the students did a debate freely. There are five aspects had to be met to the students namely: content, organization, grammar, pronunciation and fluency. They may get a maximum of 25 points on each of these five points and one hundred points in all. The teacher asked the students to make ten teams. Then teacher gave them the topic. The motion was “ the cars should be banned in the city” There are 2 teams debating, each consists of 3 three debaters who would be 1 st .2rd and 3 rd speakers of the team. One team shall be affirmative side- the side agreeing with the motion. The other team shall be the opposition negative side- the side disagreeing with the motion. Each speaker will deliver a substantial speech of 4 four minutes in duration, with the affirmative going first. Afterwards, either the 1 st or 2rd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches of 4 four minutes in duration, with the negative going first. commit to user 130 Each speaker will deliver a substantial speech of 4 four minutes in duration, with the affirmative going first. Afterwards, either the 1 st or 2 nd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches of 4 four minutes in duration, with the negative going first. When the students did a debate, the researcher as a teacher guided them in doing Critical Debate. The observation was done to gain or record data about aspects or events which is occurring during the implementation of the strategy. Meanwhile, the collaborator observed the researcher’s activities and the students’ attitudes during the implementation of Critical Debate. 5 Closure Closing the class Before closing the class, the teacher reminded them to study harder and prepared the practicing for the next meeting. The teacher told them that the following meeting they would practice the dialogue again with the same topic. Because of limited time, not all students got a chance to practice it. Therefore, they had to practice it again by using their really own words. So, they had to do it again in the following meeting. When the teacher wanted to end the class and reminded them to study harder, the students responded him well. As the writer said above that they mostly excited with critical debate technique in learning English speaking, especially English oral or spoken English. Then, when the teacher said leave taking, they responded well, too. They directly came to the teacher and shook their hand one by one while saying thank for his class. commit to user 131 After the class end , informally the teacher interviewed the students about the learning teaching process by asking:” Bagimana pendapat anda tentang proses pembelajaran speaking?.” Many students had similar answers about it. A students with the data source S 07 stated that the learning teaching process was more interesting and exciting than the previous meeting. She realized that the activities were enjoyable and effective. It was indentified from the statement gave. “Menurut saya proses pembelajaran hari ini sangat menarik bila dibandingkan degan minggu sebelumnya. Hari ini rasanya materinya sangat pas dengan lantar belakang ilmu pengetahuan yang saya miliki, kami merasa puas dan senang karna saya bisa bisa berbicara didepan teman team saya maupun team lawan, kali ini motion nya sangat menarik bagi kami, kami bisa berargumentasi dengan alasan-alasan yang logis yang bisa diterima oleh team lawan”. Monday, 4 April 2011. A students with the data sourse S 10 stated similar idea about the learning teaching process as follows: “Menurut saya hari ini topic nya sangat menarik, kami bersama team menyiapkan persiapan sebaik mungkin karna debate ini membutuhkan persiapan yang matang,.secara kebetualan di team kami mendapat bagian affirmative, di mana team kami mendukung motion yang diberikan. Kami merasa senang karena dengan cara ini kita dilatih menjadi orang berpikir kritis.terasa waktu diberikan untuk tampil kedepan sangat terbatas sehingga ada yang belum saya sampikan, pokoknya saya pribadi sangat tertarik dan sanang dengan teknik ini”. Monday, 4 April 2011. b Second Meeting The second meeting of cycle 3 was conducted on Wednesday, 6 April 2011. In this activity, the students only repeated the previous topic to practice again using critical debate. They had to practice their dialogue by using their own words that they had arranged before. They elaborated their expressions based on their understanding of the materials. commit to user 132 Besides, the teacher did a set of activities namely; opening the class warming up; presentation surviving the materials; practice students main activity; production checking the result; and closure ending the class. As for detail information would be explained in the following parts: 1 Opening the Class Warming Up As the first meeting, the teacher greeted and gave some questions about the previous lesson to the students randomly. The students responded and answered the questions well. After that, the teacher told them that they had some useful expressions. 2 Presentation Surviving the Materials In this part the teacher would like to give the useful expression, but he gave a chance for the students to ask their difficulties, either related to the new vocabularies, pronunciation, or other expressions. The useful expressions was disagreeing opinions such as you are joking, you must be joking, I don’t belief it , no definitely not , come on, I don’t think so, I don’t think so, I don’t think that’s very fair, are you pulling my leg, that news to me . The teacher confirmed that they would like to practice the expression above. 3 Practice Main Activity As he did before that the students had been divided into small group of three, then they had to practice their dialogue with some useful expressions that they had arranged by themselves at home based on the topic given by the teacher on the previous meeting. There were twice turns. The first turn was each student acted characters that heshe had to role at first turn affirmative side and then commit to user 133 secondly heshe had to change to another character interchangeably negative side. Then, the teacher pleased the first pair to come forward in front of the class to practice it. He asked the others to applaud them. When the first pair had finished the others students gave a applause happily. Then, it was continued to the second, third, fourth, and so forth interchangeably. After all students had finished the first turning, they continued to the second turning with the different character as the affirmative side and the negative side. They had to change the character to each other. It was done to have the same experience to act many kinds of characters, so that, heshe would be not confused if heshe had to apply it in the real communication. They had to use the useful expressions in their daily life communication. 4 Production This part, the researcher and collaborator asked the students did a debate freely. There are five aspects had to be met to the students namely: content, organization, grammar, pronunciation and fluency. They may get a maximum of 25 points on each of these five points and one hundred points in all. The teacher and collaborator asked the students to make ten teams. Then teacher gave them the topic. The motion was “ English is the most important tool in globalization era” . There are 2 teams debating, each consists of 3 three debaters who would be 1 st .2rd and 3 rd speakers of the team. One team shall be affirmative side- the side agreeing with the motion. The other team shall be the opposition negative side- the side disagreeing with the motion. Each speaker commit to user 134 will deliver a substantial speech of 4 four minutes in duration, with the affirmative going first. Afterwards, either the 1 st or 2rd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches of 4 four minutes in duration, with the negative going first. Each speaker will deliver a substantial speech of 4 four minutes in duration, with the affirmative going first. Afterwards, either the 1 st or 2 nd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches of 4 four minutes in duration, with the negative going first. When the students did a debate, the researcher as a teacher guided them in doing Critical Debate. The observation was done to gain or record data about aspects or events which is occurring during the implementation of the strategy. Meanwhile, the collaborator observed the researcher’s activities and the students’ attitudes during the implementation of Critical Debate. 5 Closure Closing the class As he did before that before he said leave taking he always reminded the students to study harder and prepare for the next meeting. He confirmed that they would have an evaluation. The materials were taken from the same topic as they had just learned. That was “ The cars should be banned in the city” . Finally, the teacher closed the lesson by saying” thank you so much for joining the lesson and see you next week..” Then the students responded him and they came to the teacher and the collaborator who observed their activity on the back seat to shake their hands one by one. commit to user 135 After the class end, informally the teacher interviewed the students about the learning teaching process. A students with the data source S 11 stated; “Menurut saya pembelajaran hari ini adalah pembelajaran yang paling berkesan, mengapa saya mengatakan demikian, saya tidak mengira bahwa saya bisa tampil dengan tidak mengecewakan, saya bisa meyanggah sekaligus berargumentasi dengan menggunakan alasan alasan yang logis. Saya juga tidak tahu, ini adalah rahmat yang diberikan oleh allah sehingga saya bisa menyamai teman teman-teman yang bagus speakingnya.. saya merasa senang dan termotipasi dengan adanya tehnik ini”. Wednesday, 6 April 2011. Similar statement also stated by students with the data source S22 as follow: “Bagi saya pribadi cara ini sangat menantang, karna selama ini pembelajaran speaking di kelas hanya diberikan dialog saja, kemudian disuruh menghapal setelah itu disuruh memperagakan didepan kelas. Cara itu adalah cara lama yang perlu dibuang jauh-jauh, tidak menantang siswa untuk mengungkapkan idea yang sesuai dengan topic yang diberikan. Kritikal debat adalah tehnik yang apuh yang bisa membantu siswa untuk bisa berbicara lebih banyak, lebih lama sesui dengan motion yang diberikan, pokoknya okey, he…he…he… Wednesday, 6 April 2011. c Third Meeting The third meeting of cycle 3 was conducted on Friday, 8 April 2011. In this part, the teacher only gave an evaluation orally. Oral test was given to know their understanding about the material they had just learned before, their pronunciation, their vocabularies, their fluency and their grammar structure. He gave each student three up to four minutes to deliver their speech orally. As for teachers activity in this parts were only opening the class, giving evaluation main activity, and closure ending the class. The following were the detail information about the oral test. l Opening the Class commit to user 136 Before going on his activity, the teacher firstly greeted the students and tasked how they were that day. Then, he told them that they would have an evaluation test orally. So he hoped so much that they were ready to join it. 2. Main Activity In this activity, firstly the researcher gave the spoken test to the students. All students with their teams were ready with the topic. In doing debate the researcher and collaborator prepared assessment. There were five indicators: content, organization, grammar, fluency and pronunciation . They may get a maximum of twenty five points on each of these five points and one hundred points in all the analytical scoring rubric of oral language assessment Brown, 2004: 173. The teacher explained about the rules of the Critical Debate Technique. There were 2 debating teams consisting of 3 three debaters who would be 1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd speakers of the team. One team was as affirmative side- the side agreeing with the motion. The other team was as the opposition negative side- the side disagreeing with the motion. Each speaker delivered a substantial speech of four minutes in duration, with the affirmative going first. Afterwards, either he 1 st or 2rd speaker on both sides delivered the reply speeches of 4 four minutes in duration, with the negative going first. When the students did the debate process, the teacher and collaborator gave score to students, the score was individuals ‘score. After the assessment end, the teacher did reflection with the students about the teaching learning process done. commit to user 137 3 Closure As they did before, the teacher thanked to the students for their attendance and their participation to follow his lesson. He hoped so much that everything that they had learned together could give some advantages for their English, so that they could apply it in their real daily communication with others. Finally, he said leave taking by saying” good bye” . Then the students responded him, and came to close near him while shaking their hands and saying “ thanks so much for the lesson” . After the class end , informally the teacher interviewed the students about the oral test by asking:” Bagimana pendapat anda tentang oral tes tadi?.” Many students had similar answers about it. A students with the data source S 13 stated; “Menurut saya tes tadi tidak begitu sulit, saya tidak lagi takut untuk tampil didepan, sebab gurunya melatih terus kekurangan kita baik yang kelima aspek, walaupun ada sedikit kendala yaitu masih belum lancar bangat, namun tadi pak guru dan ibu guru manggut manggut, itu berarti saya okey dalam tes lisan, pokoknya saya mengharapkan jangan sampai pada saat ini saja pak guru dan ibu guru melakukan seperti ini, kalau bisa terus sampai tetesan darah penghabisan ha… ha… ha… Friday, 8 April 2011. Similar statement also stated by students with the data source S21 as follow: “Menurut saya oral tes tadi caranya sangat menantang,, kami bersama team memang sudah mempersiapkan jauh hari sebelunya, tidak ada yang saya ragukan karna ini merupakan tugas kelompok namun nilainya sendiri. Dengan cara ini saya bisa belajar dari team saya sehingga tidak ada kendala sama sekali, saya tidak takut salah, tidak grogi dan tampil beda. Tes kali ini adalah luar biasa bagi saya saya mendapat kan banyak pengalaman dan ilmu pegetahuan, mulai dari tidak bisa bicara menjadi bisa bicara, terima kasih bapak Guru dan ibu Guru”. Friday, 8 April 2011. commit to user 138 3 Observing The stage of Observing was carry out in order to find out the effect of the action in developing speaking ability using Critical Debate Technique. It was aimed to find out whether Critical Debate Technique can develop speaking ability of the second year students of SMAN 1 Sakra or not. Besides that, it was aimed to find out how far the teaching technique can make progress to learning process. The technique used in observing was observation and interview. The observation was carried out during the learning teaching process in speaking using Critical Debate Technique. It was done by collaborator and the teacher in each meeting. Since there were in cycle 3, the observation was done for three times- during the first meeting, second meeting and the third meeting. Out after each meeting finished and also after cycle 3 finished. The interview was carried out by researcher to the students. The interview was done he directly after the class end by interviewing some students about the learning teaching process. The interview was usually done for about 30 minutes. The researcher did the interview for three times because three meetings in cycle 3- three times interview after each meeting-exactly on Monday, 4 April 2011, Wednesday, 6 April 2011, and interview after the end of cycle 3. Based on the observation done it was found out some results of the research, as follows: a The improvement in speaking ability Based on the result of the speaking assessment carried out at the last meeting of cycle 3, it was found out that that the students’ speaking ability commit to user 139 improved. It was recognized from the score got by students in the assessment of cycle two. The students’ pronunciation improved. The average score of content was 4.16, the average score of organization was 4.16. The average score of grammar was 3.45. The average score of pronunciation was 3.74.The average score of fluency was 3.29.The complete score can be seen in appendix 203. Table 14: The Average Score before the Research and after Cycle 3. No Aspects Average score Percentage Pre- Research Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 1 Content 2.98 3.74 4.09 4.16 83 2 Organization 2.95 3.74 4.09 4.16 83 3 Grammar 2.59 2.75 3.32 3.45 69 4 Pronounciation 2.32 2.65 3.69 3.74 75 5 Fluency 2.5 2.51 3.19 3.29 66 Total 13.34 15.39 18.38 18.80 75 Table 15: Students Speaking Ability in Cycle 3 Number of students Percentages Level of Speaking ability Speaking score 25 80.64 High level Above 6.3 6 19.35 Average level 4 to 6 Low level Under 4 commit to user 140 From the table above it can be describe that the researcher found that there were only 25 students who got mark more than minimum standard 6.3 and there were 6 students who got under minimum standard. The average score is 84.26 the highest is 92 and the lowest one is 60. See appendix 204. b The progress on the students’ involvement in learning teaching process. Most of the students involved actively in the activities since they had much time to talk with their friends in team. They did much activity which was difference from the previous semester. Most of students took part actively in speaking in team. Many students realized that there were chances in their speaking habit. Of course, it was very good for speaking class. Most students practiced actively in speaking instead of keeping silent as they did during this time. This situation much influenced the speaking ability they had. By having much practice in the team with many friends are more relax interesting situation, the students could participate in speaking activity. They could speak English without being forced by other people. It was recognized by students’ intensity in joining the activities in team. It was admitted by the student with the data source S013, as follows: “Menurut saya pribadi, dengan menggunakan technique ini speaking saya semakin lancar, tidak ada lagi kendala dalam mengungkapkan pendapat,. Saya bisa bertukar pendapat demgan team, sehingga saya bisa tampil dengan bagus tanpa paksaan dari team lain, teknnik ini sangat menyenangkan dan daya pikirhsaya semakin kritis”. Saturday 9 th April 2011. This statement above proved that Critical Debate Technique was interesting and exciting for students because Critical Debate Technique can increase the students’ motivation and make them more confidence to speak. commit to user 141 Besides that there was progress, students’ involvement in speaking. They were more active, more confident ,more relax and they could speak English without being force by other people. c To increase the students’ motivation. Most of students had high motivation to speak since they had many friends in team. They were more motivated to speak in speaking class when they have friends to talk. Besides that, it could make them relax to speak. By having many friends in the team, the students were able to explore the idea and knowledge they had in speaking. Besides that they felt that there was a competition in their team that made students felt challenged to practice. It was recognize by the statement stated by student with the data source S19, as follows: “Menurut saya dengan menggunakan technique critical debate motivasi saya lebih meningkat bila dibandingkan dengan sebelumnya, sebab dengan kritikal debate saya bisa mengungkap pendapat secara leluasa dengan mengaju kepada topic, secara kebetulan topiknya sangat menatang, sehingga saya merasa percaya diri tampil didepan team saya maupun team lawan, kemudian saya langsung membrikan argumentasi dan sanggahan kepada pihak lawan. Speaking saya semakin lancar dan membuat saya semakin termotivasi.” Saturday 9 th April 2011 . d The decrease on the students’ Psychological Problem. Critical Debate Technique could degrease the student’s psychological problems, such as feeling of shy. In Critical Debate class the students did not feel shy anymore since they had many friends in team. They made a mistake in speaking; they ignored it because the other students also made mistakes. It was admitted by students with the data source S 05 as follows: commit to user 142 “Dengan menggunakan tehnik debat dalam pengajaran speaking, saya tidak malu lagi mengunkapkan ide ide,pokoknya jangan takut salah, kalau takut salah akan mengalami kesulitan. Salah itu wajar tidak ada didunia ini yang sampurna, yang namanya belajar harus babak belur ibarat naik sepeda motor. Saya tidak takut lagi,apalagi guru saya menerima apa adanya”. Saturday 9 th April 2011. e The improvement on appreciation for diversity and develop tolerance for other viewpoints. The students were able to make friends in Critical Debate Technique classroom because they could interact in their team discussion. Besides that, they could build relationship with their friends in team or other teams, the evidence was admitted by student with data source S10 as follows: “Dengan menggunakan teknik debat, kami bisa bergaul dengan tim kami, saling kenal mengenal satu sama lain terutama karakter masing-masing. Saya juga bisa belajar kepada tim saya, karna di tiap tim ada siswa yang agak pandai, sehinnga saya bisa belajar dari dia,,sekaligus saya bisa bersosialisasi dengan teman tim yang lain. ” Saturday 9 th April 2011. f The improvement on the students’ bravery. Critical Debate Technique was really effective to improve the students bravery. They felt that the team work was interesting for them because they could be braver to speak and express their idea and opinion. So that, the students were brave to speak. It was indentified from statement given by the student with the data source S11, as follows: “Denagan menggunakan tehnik debat, saya tidak lagi takut salah, keberanian adalah merupakan kunci kesuksesan seseorang, kalau tidak berani tapil didepan, jangan harap bisa ngomong dalam bahasa inggris. Orang pintar berani mengambil resiko apapun yang terjadi yang penting berani ngomong. Pak guru tidak akan memarahi kita walupun ngomongnya salah,, ini namanya sedang berlatih. .” Saturday 9 th April 2011. g The improvement on the students’ self-confidence The students self- confidence improve when the teacher applied Critical Debate Technique in teaching speaking. It was admitted by the student with the data source S 12 as follows: commit to user 143 “Saya merasa lebih percaya diri dengan menggunakan tiknik berdebat ini, karna saya bersama tim kami berlatih terus bagaimana cara berargumentasi yang baik, dengan menggunakan kata-kata yang paling sederhana agar tim lawan kita mengerti apa yang disampaikan. Di samping itu pula saya mendapatkan banyak ilmu peangetahuan baik itu dari guru maupun dari teman-teman, sehingga kami merasa lebih percaya diri. .” Saturday 9 th April 2011. h The improvement on the students’ ability in solving the problem. The students were given some problems in this case motion or topic to be discussed and solved in the team. Such kind of activities hard could train the students to think tried to get the solution from problem given. The students had to be able to find the best solution. It was recognized from student with the data source S03 admitted that: “Dengan menggunakan tehnik berdebat, kami merasa yakin karna di tehnik debat ini, guru memberikan,topic, dengan topic ini saya dengan teman-teman tim bisa berlatih memecahkan masalah dengan menggunakan alasan-alasan yang masuk akal, dan alasan- alasan itu harus dibuktikan, bukan hanya bisa ngomong, tapi dilatih untuk bisa memecahkan masalah. pokok dalam tehnik debate ini, siswa dituntut lebih banyak membaca sehingga wawasannya lebih luas. .” Saturday 9 th April 2011. i The improvement on students’ ability to promote critical thinking. By applying Critical Debate Technique, the students were trained to be a good in critical thinking; they have some reasons in giving a good argumentation and rebuttal. The students had to be able to find the best solution in delivering a speech and argumentation. It was recognized from the student with the data source S 01 admitted that: “Denagan menggunakan tehnik berdebat, saya dilatih untuk bisa berpikir lebih kritis, sehingga saya bisa mengungkapkan pendapat dengan menggunakan alasan yang masuk akal, dan mempertajam daya ingatan saya.” Saturday 9 th April 2011.

4 Reflecting

This stage was aimed at examining the strength and the weaknesses of the first cycle. The weaknesses then were used as the basis for making the recommendation which would be used to make planning for cycle two. The commit to user 144 organization of report in this reflection included: a the strengths of developing speaking ability using Critical Debate Technique.; b the weaknesses of developing speaking ability using Critical Debate Technique; and c Recommendation. a The strengths Based on the reflecting done in cycle 2, it was found out many strengths of the research. They were: 1 Using Critical Debate Technique could stimulate the students to speak. The students ‘score increased in all aspects of speaking. 2 The relationship between the students and the teacher become closer as they often talked and discussed about the learning teaching process, either during the lesson was done or after the lesson end. However it could create good motivation to study and attend the speaking class. 3 The support from collaborator was very good. The researcher always discussed everything concerning with the learning teaching process, not only before the research was carried out, but also after the research was done. 4 The atmosphere in the class was very good because the students got something new. The students had to study in so different ways that had never been got before that made them felt interested in it. That’s why the students enjoyed the lesson. 5 The students were more motivated to speak since they had many friends to speak. commit to user 145 6 The students were more active in speaking class. When the teacher applied Critical Debate Technique in speaking class. 7 The students got new knowledge from both the teacher and the other students in team. b The Weaknesses 1 The under average students were still poor grade in fluency and pronunciation. 2 The under average students could not deliver their argument and rebuttal. 3 The under average students felt the time was too limited. 4 The class sometimes was so noise. c Recommendation Based on the weakness happen in cycle 3, it is recommended to do following things in cycle 3: 1 The students’ should be drilled in pronunciation. 2 The students’ should train in delivering speech and rebuttal. 3 The students’ should give sufficiency time. 4 The students’ should not make a noise. In fact, the students’ pronunciation, grammar, content, organization and fluency had improvement in every cycle. However, the problems in speaking cannot be solved only English teacher, but it must be encouraged by the other English teacher, such as: organization, content, grammar and so on. Those English teachers should be taught and learned together because they influence the students’ speaking ability. commit to user 146 This research shows good result and it will be much better if there is follow up after cycle 3. The researcher is sure if the research is continued to cycle 4, the result will much better and speaking ability will be better. In conclusion the research was successful because Critical Debate Technique can develop the speaking ability of the second year students of SMAN 1 Sakra. However, considering the limited time, the finance, the situation and the condition mentioned by the researcher, it is needed to do the research concerning with this problem.

B. Discussion