commit to user 147
The finding number 1 refers to the research question number 1. The finding number 2, 3,4,5,6,7,8,9 refer to the research question number 2. Those 9
values can be classified into six main themes. They are; 1 the improvement in speaking ability; 2 the improvement on the students involvement in learning
teaching process; 3 The improvement on appreciation for diversity and develop tolerance for other viewpoints; 4 the raising on the motivation and interest; 5
the establishment on the psychological therapy; 6 The improvement on students’ ability to promote critical thinking.
1. The improvement in speaking ability
The students speaking ability more increased after the teacher applied Critical Debate Technique in speaking. It was recognized from improvement on
the students’ speaking aspects – content, organization, grammar, pronunciation and fluency. The researcher indentified it from the average score on those
aspects which can be seen in appendix …. Table 15: The Improvement of Speaking Aspects.
No Aspects
Average score Pre-Research
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
Cycle 3 1
Content 2.98
3.74 4.09
4.16 2
Organization 2.95
3.74 4.09
4.16 3
Grammar 2.59
2.75 3.32
3.45 4
Pronounciation 2.32
2.65 3.69
3.74 5
Fluency 2.5
2.51 3.19
3.29
commit to user 148
From the improvement on the speaking aspects, automatically the students speaking achievement improves. The improvement on the speaking achievement
can be seen in the table 6, and graphic 7 The improvement of students’ speaking achievement after applying the
Critical Debate Technique can be identified from the students’ speaking score from cycle to cycle. The improvement of students speaking achievement is
illustrated on graph 6.1. The graph showed that the speaking achievement was increased significantly from pre-test to post test or from cycle to cycle. The mean
scores in pre-test is 5.3, the mean of scores in cycle 1 is 6.3, the mean of scores in cycle 2 is 7.4 and the mean of scores in cycle 3 is 8.4. The description of students’
speaking achievement can also be identified through the mean score of pre-test, cycle 1, cycle 2 and cycle 3 as can be seen in Table 4.12 and Graph 1 below:
Table 16: Students’ Speaking Achievement from Pre-test to Cycle to Cycle
Pre Test Cycle 1
Cycle 2 Cycle 3
5.3 6.3
7.4 8.4
Graphic 17: Speaking Score
commit to user 149
The improvement in speaking ability proved that Critical Debate Technique was really effective to develop the students speaking ability. Slavin
1995: 2 states that there are many reasons that cooperative learning is entering the mainstream of educational practice. One is the extraordinary research base
supporting the use of cooperative learning to increase student achievement. As well as such other outcomes as improved intergroup relation, acceptance of
academically handicapped classmates, and increased self –esteem. Slavin 1995: 15 ads that cooperative learning has shown how these strategies can enhance
students achievement, however, this research also has indentified many of reason that cooperative learning enhance achievement and most importantly, the
elements of cooperative learning that must be place if it is to have a maximum effect on achievement. That statement shows that Critical Debate Technique is a
really good technique to be used to increase the students’ achievement.
commit to user 150
Dempsey and Sales 1993: 154 state that generally, cooperative effort result is higher achievement, more positive relationships, and greater
psychological health that do competitive or individualistic effort. The statement proves that Critical Debate Technique can effectively improve the students’
achievement that is speaking achievement.
2. The improvement on the students’ involvement in learning teaching
