T1 112007102 Full text

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 2

Introduction
Debate is the way somebody thinks, proves, defends and says what is
inside his or her mind. As debates need an involvement of critical thinking to
analyze a particular issue and to defend arguments, debates are linked to a higher
level of thinking. To debate means to have a good-content speech as a means of
transforming one‟s ideas into compatible and understandable ideas for others. In
other words, what a debater thinks and says should help the debater persuade
others to agree with him or her. In order to persuade others, debaters‟ speech
should involve logical thinking as well as evidences to support the arguments. The
evidences brought by debaters which are the products of sorting relevant
information from various sources should be reliable.
In university context, debates are often considered scary and burdening as
they seem to require an excellent command of language. Bearing this in mind,
debates are also often thought as something exclusive, i.e., debates are only for
certain people possessing outstanding speaking skills. This thought explains why
some students feel reluctant to join debate teams.
The common paradigm highlighted above is one of the reasons why debate
teams have problem in regeneration, a reality happening in Satya Wacana
Christian University. English Debating Society, an English debating club

belonging to Satya Wacana Christian University, is dominated by English
Department students.

This phenomenon

hampers the regeneration and

diversification of English Debating Society members as the club is basically not
established only for English Department (ED) students. My preliminary informal
interview with some non ED students, when approaching them to become

2

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 3

members of the club, found that there was a belief among Satya Wacana Chr istian
University students that English Debating Society should be for English
Department students. They assumed only English Department students can speak
English better than students from other faculties. The interview result also
revealed that students have not yet understood that English proficiency can be

improved through debate trainings. This indicates that most students do not know
that debaters are the products of rigorous debate trainings. These trainings include
not only debating skills but also language skills, in this case English.
The result of the preliminary interview makes me curious to investigate
whether or not debaters think that English debates contribute to their English
proficiency. It is an uninvestigated idea yet on how debates may contribute to
somebody‟s English proficiency. The previous studies upon debates, Wijaya
(2007) and Scott (2008) concerned more on the students‟ positive attitude toward
debates and the enhancement of critical thinking through debates for the students.
Another study by Chang (2009) investigated the students‟ motivation and study
efficacy in competitive English debates. This study found that competitive
English debates were needed in educational field because debates improved
English skills. These studies showed that studies on debaters‟ perception of
English debate contribution to their English proficiency are still not many.
Because of the above reason, this study was conducted to find out: “What
is debaters‟ perception of English debate contribution to their English
Proficiency?” The results of this study will serve as a reflection for English
Debating Society (EDS) members and coaches to improve EDS image in Satya

3

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 4

Wacana Christian University by changing non-ED students‟ mindset of English
Debating Society. Moreover, this study is expected to bring insights about good
promotion strategies for recruiting team members in order to have regeneration
and diversification of the team members. This study is expected to give a
pedagogical implication, i.e., debate is an alternative way to improve students‟
English proficiency.
Theoretical Frame work
This section covers two topics which discuss about what English debate is
and the benefits of debate practices.
Englis h Debate
Debates refer to orderly process of arguing controversial issues in order to
support or go against a stance. Freely and Steinberg (2008) states that debates
refer to the process of analyzing and supporting issue to arrive at a reasoned
conclusion, which makes individual able to think and therefore convince others‟
to agree with his or her arguments. The more logical the speech is, the more
convincing it is to others. This means debates involve reasoned arguments for and
against a given motion to achieved rational decision making (Freeley, 1993, as

cited in Saraswati, 2010).
In this study the term debates refer to the debates which use English as
medium of debating (Howe, 2005). Debates also refer to the activities in trainings,
practices, and competitions where two groups of people deliver speech to defend
their stance of a particular motion. The debates may use one of three popular
English debate systems such as Australasian Parliamentary, Asian Parliamentary,

4

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 5

and British Parliamentary. Those systems basically have the same rules and
process in the debates. What makes them different is the number of teams
involved and the use of interruption in the debates.
A debate is organized into four phases. The first phase is intended to
decide each team‟s position whether a team should support or go against a debate
topic. The second phase is called motion launch. A motion or a debate topic can
be either impromptu or prepared motion (Saraswati, 2010). An impromptu motion
is a motion which is given right before practices or competitions. On the other
hand, a prepared motion is a motion which is given several days before the debate

starts. The third phase is known as a motion case building. During a case building,
debaters are given some time to prepare their speech. The speech should include
many cogent arguments to support debaters‟ logical explanations of a stance
whether they are pro or against a particular motion. At this stage, debaters are
challenged to be able to think and produce their speeches in short notice
(Cunningham et.al, 2007). After the case building, the next phase, which is the
debate, is started. The composition of debaters‟ speech basically covers two main
parts, which are to deliver arguments and to rebut the opponent‟s case to defend
their stance. A debater‟s success is then assessed based on his or her ability to
convince judges of the debate to agree with his or her arguments.
Debate practices and their benefits
Debate trainings involve intensive debate practices, as well as preparation
and evaluation. Debate practices also involve all four stages mentioned earlier,
each of which is intensively enhanced in regular practices of debate teams.

5

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 6

Because of the debate practices, debates are believed to give several benefits for

the debaters. As mentioned by McGee and Worth (2001) as cited in Chang (2009,
p. 88) the top ten benefits of debate are “speaking/communication skills,
analytic/critical

skills,

social

life/meeting

people,

research

skills,

knowledge/education, self-esteem/confidence, argumentation skills, traveling,
learning about issues, organizational skills and thinking fast. ” These benefits
result from the thorough process of debate trainings.
One part of debate practices is speech preparation. In preparing a speech,

debaters will learn to prepare arguments, state their point of view and rebut
others‟ point of view in limited time. In learning constructing arguments, debaters
are required to always update their knowledge by reading books, newspapers, and
other good sources of controversial issues which happen around the world. As
“argumentation is the communicative process of advancing, supporting,
criticizing, and modifying claims so that appropriate decision makers may grant or
deny faithfulness” (Rieke & Silars, 1993, p. 1 ), this knowledge should include the
understanding of both views. This means “to be successful in debate, debaters
need to understand both sides of an issue and support their position with
evidence” (Rybold, 2006, p. 87). Moreover, updating also means to critically
analyze which information can be used as evidence to make debaters‟ arguments
reliable and logical. This suggests that debate trainings also train debaters to think
critically in order to be able to build logical explanation which involves quick
responses and deeper analysis. At this point, debaters are trained to be critical
thinkers who “solve a complex problem by raising vital questions, gathering

6

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 7

relevant information, determining findings, and communicating effectively” (Paul
and Elder 2006) as cited in (Scott, 2009, p. 40). This shows why critical thinking
is seen as the most salient benefits of debate generally (Broda-Bahm, et.al 2004)
Apart from those discussed above, case buildings in debates share the
same processes as writing. Debate and writing have the same processes in terms
of brainstorming, developing, and structuring ideas. Both in debate and writing,
people employ their systematic way of thinking as a means of producing either
well organized written texts or speeches (Parcher, 1998). To have a well
organized text and speech, both writers and debaters need to make outlines. In
debates, debaters usually write their arguments in form of outline to help them
understand and explain their viewpoint (Rybold, 2006). This suggests that debates
teach a debater to be not only an excellent speaker but also a better writer
Besides, in debates, debaters‟ critical thinking is not only used to sort
relevant information but also to develop debaters‟ outlines. This critical thinking
makes debaters able to make well- elaborated arguments. Moreover, debates
require debaters to give logical explanation of the arguments to adjudicators so
that debaters will create understandable explanation. This suggests that debate
process improves the student's ability to “write effectively, work in teams, and
analyze arguments, all of which can improve the ability to think critically”
(Dickson, 2004) as cited in (Scott, 2009, p. 41).

Apart from the benefit discussed above, debate practices also provide
opportunities to learn delivering speech fluently and persuasively as well as
criticizing others‟ arguments in front of others. These opportunities enable

7

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 8

debaters convey arguments and respond opposite team‟s arguments effectively.
Thus, in a debate, debaters will analyze a problem, by making use of the data they
have, and package their arguments in good persuasive speeches (Cunningham,
et.al, 2007). By often practicing debates, a debater can be a better speaker in all
situation-public and private (Rybold, 2006).
Besides fluency, debates also help debaters improve their communicatio n
strategies. Communication strategies are used to overcome the difficulties in
explaining ideas in debates. Communication strategies which are usually used are
paraphrasing and approximation. Paraphrasing refers to a means of presenting a
text, maintaining the same meaning, but using different terms and wording (The
Learning Centre, 2007), whereas approximation is to “substitute the desired
unknown target language item for a new one, which is assumed to share enough

semantic features with it to be correctly interpreted” (Dobao & Martinez, 2007,
p.89).
In addition to the above explanation, debaters often have difficulties in
explaining such as forgetting the English terms and having problem in elaborating
concepts. This means a debater has to learn to antic ipate the problems. Debates
provide opportunities to learn and practice overcoming those problems. Debaters
are forced to paraphrase when they should explain concepts in other words.
Debaters are also forced to find another word whose meaning is closest to the
word they forget. Moreover, debaters also learn through the feedbacks given by
the judges.

8

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 9

Debate practices also improve listening skill. This is because debate
practices also provide opportunities to listen to five until seven speakers who
deliver their arguments and responses. While listening, debaters should grab
main ideas of the opponent‟s arguments to be able to make rebuttals and tackle
down the opponent‟s case immediately (Rybold, 2006). This means the listening

activity forces debaters to actively analyze, criticize, or even question what is
being said by their opponents. This kind of listening activity is essential in
helping debaters to be critical listeners “to achieve the objective of refutation”
(Parcher,1998, p. 5).
Besides all those skills mentioned above, another significant benefit of
debate practices is confidence building. Confidence is needed because it helps
debaters to deliver their speech persuasively. “Persuasive speakers are believable
because they look, act and sound confidently in the presentation of their message”
(Howe, 2005, p. 29). This means when a debater loses his or her confidence, there
will be non- fluent speech. Non- fluent speech is “discernible in frequent pauses,
repetition, and self- correction” (Hedge, 1993) as cited in (Cribb, 2009, p. 24).
When this happens the debater will not be able to convince the judges. Debate
practices become the right place to build confidence as they provide opportunities
to practice speaking in front of others. These opportunities make debaters familiar
with the pressure and atmosphere of public speaking, which will help debaters
overcome their fears and develop debaters‟ oral English skills (Rybold, 2006).
The Study

9

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 10

This section discusses about the context of the study, the participants, the
instrument of data collection, and the data analysis.
Context of the study
The setting of this study was the 14T H IVED (Indonesian Varsities English
Debate) English debate competition, held on 19-24 January 2011 in Hassanudin
University in Makassar. This competition was the first 2011 English competition
in Indonesia which was attended by debaters all universities in Indonesia. This
competition was selected because its date was within my research time frame. In
this competition, English was actively used in oral communication by the debaters
both in debate matches and outside the matches.
This competition included a debate seminar which gave participants
general rules of the competition, debate matches, and debate‟s adjudication which
gave reasons why a debate team won or lost. As English was totally used as a
medium of communication and delivery, this competition became an English zone
which challenged debaters‟ English proficiency.
Participants
The participants of this research were carefully selected as to represent
debaters who had successfully fulfilled criteria of good debaters. There were three
criteria used to select participants. First, the participants were qualified debaters
which meant they were octofinalists of this national debate competition. Second,
the participants had enough experiences on English debates. This was confirmed
by their experiences in joining debate teams for a year or more. Third, as the study
was expected to highlight English debate contribution to English proficiency, the

10

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 11

participants were non English Department students. This was to suggest the
participants‟ English proficiency was not related to their educational background.
Employing these criteria, I selected six debaters to be the participants of this
research. The detail information of the participants‟ information was displayed in
Table 1.
Instruments of data collection
Single interview was chosen as the instrument of data collection so that the
participants and I could be more focused in communicating. Besides, this kind of
interview created relaxing atmosphere which led the participants to give in depth
information and free responses (Seliger & Shohamy, 1989). This single interview
was semi structured in nature. It means that there were main questions suc h as
questions about personal information and opinion about English debate
contribution toward their English proficiency. There were also additional
questions used to ask the participants to clarify or elaborate their answers to the
main questions.
Procedures of data collection
The data collection was begun with the single interview of each
participant. Six participants‟ interviews were videotaped to ease the recordings
transcription process.

Each of the interviews lasted around 10 minutes. The

participants were allowed to choose to use Indonesian or English during the
interview. Participant 1, 2, 3 and 6 were interviewed in English. Participant 4 and
5 were interviewed in Indonesian. After that, I transcribed the recording into clean
transcription. A clean transcription is transcription which transcribes main

11

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 12

information said by the participants excluding repetition of the same ideas,
“overlap and disfluencies” (Bauer & Gaskell, 2000, p. 194).
Data analysis
The data analysis was begun with reading carefully the clean transcription
and classifying the participants‟ ideas into several categories. I used contentanalysis to transfer the data gathered into several topics. This involved contentanalysis involved identifying and coding key topic of the data (McKay 2006).
After that, I interpreted the data classifications through descriptive written
explanation which involved classifications of students‟ perception (Lynch, 1996).
I divided the data gathered into two big topics which were the improvement in
language skills which were speaking, listening, writing, vocabulary and grammar
whereas non- language skills which were reading habit, critical thinking and
confidence.

12

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 13

Table 1
Specific information of the participants
No. Name
Detail information
1.
Participant Participant 1 is a male student from Diponegoro University who is
studying in Engineering faculty. He has been joining debate for three
1

2.

Participant
2

3.

Participant
3

4.

Participant
4

5.

Participant
5

6.

Participant
6

years. His achievements in English debate competitions are being listed
as one of 30 best adjudicators in JOVED and a s emi finalist IVED ITB.
His English learning is through reading books and watching Hollywood
movies.
Participant 2 is a female student from Seko lah Tinggi Akuntansi Negara
(STAN) in Jakarta. She has been joining debate for more than three years.
She learned English subject from elementary until senior high school. Her
achievements in English debate competitions are being 30 best
adjudicator of JOVED 2010 and an octofinalist of IVED 2011.
Participant 3 is a male student fro m Hassanuddin University Makassar
who is studying in Civil Engineering faculty. He has been joining debate
for two years. English is his second language at his home. His
achievements in English debate competitions are being the octofinalist
ALSA UI, the octofinalist of JOVED 2010 and the octofinalist of IVED
Participant 4 is a male student fro m Institute Managemen Teleko munikasi
(IM TELKOM) who is studying management business. He has been
joining debate for a year. He got English exposure through courses in his
university. His achievements in English debate competitions are the
winner of NUECD Kopertis and the octofinalist of IVED 2011.
Participant 5 is a male student from At majaya Catholic Un iversity Jakarta
who is studying engineering. He has been joining debate for two years.
He got English exposure through reading and watching Hollywood
movies. He does not take English courses. His achievements in English
debate competitions are being the octofinalist of JOVED, the octofinalist
IVED 2010, the quarterfinalist of NUEDC, the quarterfinalist of FEST
(Festival Economy STAN), the quarterfinalist of IVED 2011, the
quarterfinalist of PRIDE and the 14th best speaker of JA VA 2010.
Participant 6 is a female student from Gajah Mada University who is
studying psychology. She has been joining debate for more than three
years. She learned English subject from elementary until senior high
school. Her achievements in English debate competitions are being the
octofinalist of IVED 2011, the quarter finalist in Hongkong debate 2010,
one of 30 best adjudicators in JOVED and BIND, the champion of
PIMNAS 2009 , and the finalist of IVED 2009.

Findings and Discussions
Two categories of perception were developed in this study: language and
non- language skills. These categories supported several debates‟ benefits which
have been stated in the theoretical framework. The language skills included

13

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 14

speaking, listening, writing, vocabulary and grammar whereas the non- language
skills involved reading habit, critical thinking, and confidence.
Englis h debate contribution to the language skills
In this section, the participants‟ positive perception of English debate‟s
contribution to their language skills was discussed.
English debate contribution to speaking skills
All participants responded positively on the question about English debate
contribution to their English speaking skill. They mentioned several advantages in
speaking English such as in English fluency.
All participants added that English debates helped them improve their
speaking ability especially in their English fluency. Participant 2, 3, 4, and 5
stated that their English fluency improved especially in English debates and daily
conversation. These participants seemed to be accustomed to using English as
they were demanded to always use it in the debates.

“Debate is something which can increase your ability
especially in public speaking.” (Participant 2)
“When you are accustomed debating, you have to be
accustomed to use English. Precisely in speaking I
think through debating I can increase my daily
conversation and I can be accustomed to speak in
English.”(Participant 3)
“There is a significant improvement in speaking such as
the fluency, vocabulary, and the properness. It is
because in debate I was forced to speak which was
different from prepared speech. Moreover, when I had
conversation, it was more fluent.” (Participant 4)

14

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 15

“Speaking is the most significant benefit because in
debate, we speak in English.” (Participant 5)
“I was speaking in debate in seven minutes, and need to
order speak in details and clearly because I need to
explain order points actually, to make people
understand what I am talking so that I learn speaking
more clearly, I need to speak slowly but
understandable. (Participant 6)

The above finding showed that English debates contributed positively to
the participants‟ speaking fluency. Moreover, Participant 4 added that debate
was different from a prepared speech. In prepared speech, he could prepare his
speech and even could write everything he was going to say. However, in debate,
he could not do the same thing since debates required immediate responses. This
condition forced him to speak English.
Since debaters were required to speak English in debates, they had more
opportunities to practice speaking English. English debates then made debaters
have improvement in their speaking ability both in public such as debates and
private such as their daily conversation (Rybold, 2006). English debates
facilitated debaters to speak English more fluent through practicing regularly.
Besides the above improvement in speaking, Participant 1 could speak
more fluently by bridging the gap between the adjudicators and him. He used one
of communication strategies which was approximation in his speech.
“When you do not know what A in English you can
replace the word with other kinds of word.” (Participant
1)

15

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 16

One participant improved his communication strategy which was
approximation. Here, after he joined English debate club he got used to
compensate difficulties in explaining his arguments in debate. He usually replaced
a difficult word which he did not know with another word which shared a similar
meaning.
In debates, debaters would seek for strategies to maintain their speech. For
example, the speaker often substituted the desired an unknown target language
item for a new one, which was assumed to share enough semantic features with it
to be correctly interpreted (Dobao and Martinez, 2007). This strategy was used to
bridge the gaps between debaters and listeners in order to make the debaters‟
speech successfully understood.

English debates contribution to listening skills
In debates, debaters should listen to the opponent‟s speeches. This
situation improved all participants‟ listening skill when they debated regularly.
The participants below believed that English debates contribute positively to their
English listening skills.
“I don‟t have severe problem with listening. I think that
there is a lot of progress in my listening.” (Participant
3)
“Listening is improved since in debate, debaters should
sensitive to the opponent team [speech]. In debate, not
only speaking but also listening should be good. ”
(Participant 4)
“Listening is improved. In debate, want it or not, we are
forced to listen to arguments.” (Participant 5)

16

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 17

“…and then listening[skills][improved] also because I
should listen what the case our opponent also what is
their rebuttal, so actually it really helps comprehensive
listening, so it is really improving.” (Participant 6)
The above responses highlighted that listening to English speeches and
critically analyzing what was being listened to, improved all participants‟
listening skills. This suggested that listening in debates was an active one as this
skill also required the participants to criticize, question, and challenge others‟
opinion.
Besides the above benefit, debates, moreover, improved TOEFL listening
score. It was shown from Participant 2‟s response below.
“The most important thing we learn to listen. I mean
like in the senior high, maybe my listening skill is just
so-so. After I encounter the debate, I take the TOEFL,
the listening skill will be increasing [increased].”
(Participant 2)
Participant 2 explained that through debating she succeeded to improve
her score in TOEFL listening test. She emphasized that English debates gave her
more opportunities to listen to more various English speeches. These data were in
line with the theory that states debates are the perfect listening practices (Parcher,
1998).
In addition to the positive perception above, the excerpt below illustrated
that Participant 1 improved his listening skill especially in listening to Indonesian
people who spoke English.
“Listening is improved much in term of listen … When
Indonesian people [deliver] speech it can be easily
understood even if it is bad in manner, like high
schooler.” (Participant 1)

17

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 18

The above response showed that English debate exposure made this
participant have wider knowledge that helped him understand and interpret others‟
speech.

In the case when he listened to his opponent‟s speech which had

grammatical errors, he could still infer the meaning of the speech. Clearness of
speech depended on wider context which could assist listeners to infer the
meaning (Esperantic Studies Foundation, 1992).

English debate contribution to writing skills
English debates contributed positively to two participants‟ writing skills.
Participant 2 and Participant 6 said that English debates gave some positive
impacts in their writing process.
“Although debating doesn‟t have many [benefits]
directly [to] writing but because you [get] used to case
build, you used to make the arguments then it [case
built] helps a lot when you make paragraph, you make
you know, just like story or something like that.”
(Participant 2)
“I think it is more on the language matter and also in
the technicalities, debating also helps constructing if I
need to create a paper for example. Because when we
are creating paper, we should manage to structurize, for
example what is the background, what is our subject.”
(Participant 6)
The excerpts above show that, as case buildings in English debates
involved finding concept, building coherence, and making conclusion, case
buildings helped debaters organize their thought in written form. Participant 2 and
6‟s explanation showed that case buildings facilitated them when they were

18

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 19

producing English composition such as paragraph, story, and paper. “Debate
teaches students a great deal more about organization and arrangement than
merely to have an introduction, body and conclusion” (Parcher, 1998, p. 3). This
suggested that debates also helped debaters to be good writers.
In contradiction to the positive perceptions above, the participant below
responded negatively to English debate contribution to his writing skills.
“Writing will not be good because we are forced to be
fast so that we will not care with the grammar. ”
(Participant 5)

The response above challenged Participant 2 and 6 perceptions of English
debate contribution to their writing skills. Participant 5 emphasized that English
debates gave no improvement in writing because of limited time in debates.
English debates, moreover, created negligence on his grammar which resulted
negatively to his writing. Furthermore, Participant 1, 3, and 4 did not give
explanation on writing skills.
English debate contribution to vocabulary
English debates contributed positively to Participant 2, 3, 5, 6‟s English
vocabulary enhancement. The excerpts below showed how these participants got
enhancement in English vocabulary because of English debates.
“Our manner is not usual at first we join the debate
maybe it‟s just a simple vocabulary but after joining
debate itself, we make like sophisticated vocabulary,
maybe only in debating world we used it.” (Participant
2)
“I mean the words, the words. I mean when I joining
debating we prefer to use sophisticated words rather

19

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 20

than using the common words that we use.” (Participant
3)
“There is a significant improvement…vocabulary…”
(Participant 4)
“The vocabulary will be increased since we are
searching for matter and the words will be often used in
debate” (Participant 5)
“In vocabulary, I got lots of more words because you
know, when I join this, I do not understand the word
„justification‟, also several key words appear in debate.
If I do not join debate may I will not know the
meaning.” (Participant 6)
Participants 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 stated that they got a wider range of
vocabulary since they were forced to understand and use specific terms in their
speeches. The specific terms were technical jargons in debate and terms in
politics, economy, gender, education, and etc which were often not related to the
debaters‟ educational background. This specific term was helpful to make
debaters understand opponent‟s language (Meany & Shuster, 2003)
On the other hand, there was a negative perception on English debate
contribution to his English vocabulary.
“I do not think it [vocabulary] will improve much but I
believe that there is some improvements even if that is
small. In terms of searching for motion, I get the
motion that not familiar. Some kind of word can be a
unique word in gender equality. But it is not really
significant.” (Participant 1)
The excerpt above highlighted that English debate did not contribute a lot
to Participant 1‟s English vocabulary. Even if he got new vocabulary when he
was searching matter, the improvement was relatively small.
English debate contribution to grammar

20

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 21

English debates did not improve Participant 1, 3, 4, and 5‟s English
grammar. The excerpt below showed the negative these participants‟ negative
perceptions.
“In term of grammar I do not really can measure it.
Even now, I do not, I cannot recognize which one is
past tense, which one is past continuous, and staff like
that.” (Participant 1)
”Grammar is precisely how I structurize my words that
makes it more comprehensible.” (Participant 3)
”Grammar is impossible to improve. Debates will not
contribute significantly because conversation does not
need grammar.” (Participant 4)
”Writing will not be good because we are forced to be
fast so that we will not care with the grammar. ”
(Participant 5)
The explanations from four participants above showed that English
debates did not require them to speak in correct English grammar which then
improved nothing in debaters‟ grammar. Even if Participant 3 seemed to give
positive perception to his grammar but the grammar he meant here referred to the
structure of words only. Furthermore, two other participants did not give
explanation on the grammar aspect.
Englis h debate contribution to non-language area
Improvements in non- language area involved fostering reading habit,
improvement of critical thinking, and building confidence.
English debates contribution to reading habits
Reading habit of Participant 2 and 6 was improved by joining English
debates. This reading habit referred to habit in reading English text. It could be
seen from excerpts below.

21

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 22

“I mean like directly or not, we are also force to love to
read the matters itself.” (Participant 2)
“I need to search matters, I should always read
newspaper like Economist, Times and or the material in
internet and usually the most matter- full one is English.
I tend to read more and more.” (Participant 6)
Participant 2 and 6 explained that they were forced to read English texts
from various sources like newspaper and articles in internet. Participant 6
explained that she gave an example of newspaper titled Economist to show that
good sources were usually found in English. To be successful in debate, debaters
needed to understand both sides of an issue and supported their position with
evidence. Evidences could be found in both print and electronic sources (Rybold,
2006). Therefore, debaters should learn search for the information quickly. That
was why the participants were accustomed to reading more English sources.
However, Participant 1, 3, 4, and 5 did not relate reading habit to English debate
contribution. This meant that only two participants whic h felt this improvement in
reading habit.
English debates contribution to critical thinking
Four participants believe that their critical thinking was improved because
of English debates. They defined the critical thinking as thinking deeper of
knowledge. In other words, critical thinking could be defined as being critical in
certain topic or situation in order to be able to produce opinions about the issue.
The quotation below proved how debate‟s contribution to Participant 1, 3, 4‟s
critical thinking.
“You try to create arguments even if you do not believe
to this argument but you have to make some arguments
to
persuade people especially adjudicators.”
(Participant 1)

22

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 23

“Debate is important, precisely when it comes to the
situation. Having critical thinking in solving a problem”
(Participant 3)
“Debate is thinking critically about knowledge. It is
not a general knowledge but thinking deeper of that
knowledge.” (Participant 4)
The data showed that debates required participants to involve their critical
thinking skill in debates.

This meant by often debating, debaters had more

opportunities to criticize, analyze, and question arguments. Debaters also learned
to solve problem implied from motions. This condition made participants‟ critical
thinking improved.
In addition to the above critical thinking improvement, the excerpt of
Participant 2 below showed how English debate contributed to the content of her
daily conversation.

“...before I joined debate maybe I just speak English
like usual. I mean like ordinary things that I talked but
after joining debate, it more have content, such as the
knowledge itself and how to link one argument with
another, not empty as before.”(Participant 2)
Participant 2 learned to seek for appropriate arguments and knowledge that
could be used in her conversation. This happened because debater‟s job was “to
solve a complex problem by raising vital questions, gathering relevant
information, determining findings, and communicating effectively” (Paul and
Elder 2006 as cited in Scott, 2009, p. 40). This showed that debaters needed
relevant information to give evidences in their speech. This process made debaters
get more knowledge and information which later on might be used in their

23

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 24

conversation to others. Unfortunately, the critical thinking improvement was not
responded by Participant 5 and six which I assumed this improvement was not
really significant for them.

English debate contribution to confidence
The last data analysis was on how English debates contributed to
participants‟ confidence to speak in public. Participant 1, 5, and 6 responded
positively on English debate contribution to their confidence.
“It will improve our confidence. If you happened to
speak something sophisticated why you cannot say
something simple like daily conversation and explain
your activity.“ (Participant 1)
“The most significant benefit is confident in speaking
English.” (Participant 5)
“Before join debate I was less confident to talk to
people especially in front of people then after join
debate I have confidence more.” (Participant 6)
Debates required the participants to speak persuasively and confidently to
deliver their arguments to the adjudicators. By joining debates, debaters could
make use chances to speak in front of others to impro ve their confidence. In
debates, debaters would be familiar with pressure of public speaking. Debates
facilitated confidence and eliminated the communication apprehension which
made debaters‟ speeches successfully understood (Parcher, 1998).

This

improvement, unfortunately, was not added by Participant 2, 3, 4 whether their
confidence was influenced or not by their joining English debates.
CONCLUSION

24

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 25

This study investigated the debaters‟ perception on English debate
contribution to their English proficiency. This study challenged the common belief
that English debate was burdening and was also intended to English Department
students only. This study mostly proved that debates improve English language
skills, which were speaking, listening, and writing since the participants should
organize their thought, speak persuasively, and listen to opponent‟s arguments.
Moreover, debates required debaters to read more English texts which foster
debaters‟ reading habit as well as debaters‟ understanding of many specific terms
in politics, economy, education and etc.
This study also found that debates improved critical thinking and building
confidence. Debates forced the participants to critically analyze and solve
problems implied from the motions. Besides, as debates were conducted in front of
others, debates trained the participants to be accustomed to speaking in front of
others which made more fluent and familiar with the pressure of public speaking.
These explained how the participants improved their critical think ing and built
their confidence in speaking English.
However, the finding of this study also suggested, grammar, which is one
aspect of English proficiency, was not considered improving since four
participants highlighted grammar aspect did not improve. Further studies can be
conducted to investigate why grammar cannot be improved.
The findings above concluded that there are many ways to improve several
English skills, one of them is debate. This means English language skills can
always be improved not only through formal learning but also through activities

25

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 26

particularly those encouraging students to use English. Debates are good ways to
accommodate English language skills. This study shares the same conclusion that
English debates can be seen as important activities in educational field regarding
its benefit in improving English skills (Chang, 2009).
There are two suggestions proposed in this study. First, teachers can add
more debate activities in classroom such as Academic reading class or others. It
can be done by modifying group discussions. Instead of merely asking students to
discuss a problem, teachers can divide the class into two teams, each of which is
asked to support or go against a topic. The more important thing here is students
learn to construct, deliver, and defend arguments. Further studies can be
conducted in this area to investigate whether or not debates can improve English
skills.
Second suggestion is intended for those involve in debates, especially
English Debating Society members to promote English debating society for all
students in all faculties in Satya Wacana Christian University. Instead of holding
debate exhibition or debate seminars, debate team members can hold sharing
activity to show the benefits of debates. In this activity, debate team members can
invite good debaters who are not English Department students to share their
experience which highlights debates contribute to their English fluency.
In conclusion, debates contribute positively to debaters‟ English
proficiency regardless debaters‟ educational background. However, because this
study only involves one competition, it is yet unknown that there would be

26

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 27

different findings in the setting and the participants are enlarged. Nevertheless, as
the study shows positive result, the suggestions proposed above can be tried.

27

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 28

References
Bauer, M. W. & Gaskell, G. (2000). Qualitative researching with text, image,
and sound. London: SAGE publications. Retrieved November 20,
2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=UQewQ4FzHowC&printsec=fr
ontcover&hl=id&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage
&q&f=false
Broda-Bahm, K. T., Kempf, K., & Driscoll, W. J. (2004). Argument and
audience: presenting debates in public settings. New York: The
International Debate Education Association. Retrieved May 8,
2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=CkiLXLYlZAAC&printsec=fr
ontcover&hl=id&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage
&q&f=false
Chang, S. (2009). Taiwanese high school students‟ participation in
competitive English debate: A motivation and efficacy study.
English Teaching & Learning.Retrieved March 29, 2011 from
http://ir.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/retrieve/58596/ntnulib_ja_B0201_3304_08
5.pdf
Cribb, M. (2009). Discourse and the non-native English speaker. Amherst,
NY: Cambria Press. Retrieved May 29, 2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=UiqbSvxPZ_gC&printsec=fron
tcover&hl=id&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q
&f=false
Cunningham, et. all. (2007). Limited Preparation Debate At Idea Forum
2007: How to use your thirty minutes most effectively. Idea Forum
2007
Dobao, A. M. F., & Martinez, I. M. F. (2007). Negotiating meaning in
interaction between English and Spanish speakers via
communicative strategies. Atlantis Journal. Vol 29.1(87-105.
Retrieved November 19, 2011 from
http://www.atlantisjournal.org/ARCHIVE/29.1/2007FernandezDob
ao_PalaciosMartinez.pdf
Esperantic Studies Foundation. (1992). Esperanto and education:
toward a research agenda. Esperanto Studies and Interlinguistics.
Retrieved June 8,2011from http://dok.esperantic.org/fr2.htm#onetwo

28

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 29

Freeley, A. J., & Steinberg, D. L. (2008). Argumentation and debate: Critical
thinking for reasoned decision making, 12th ed. United States:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Retrieved June 4, 2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=ZR6RxPGlOgQC&printsec=fr
ontcover&dq=argumentation+and+debates+:+critical+thinking+for
+reasoned+decision+making&h
Howe, B. M. (2005). An introduction English language debate in Asia. Seoul,
Korea: Ehwa Womans University Press. Retrieved May 8, 2011
from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=71bqd5SsLBQC&printsec=fro
ntcover&hl=id&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&
q&f=false
Lynch, B. K. (1996). Language program evaluation: theory and practice.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Meany, J. & Shuster, K. (2003). On that point: An introduction to
parliamentary debate. New York, NY: International Debate
Education Association. Retrieved September 19, 2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=pNIXmpxoSskC&printsec=fr
ontcover&hl=id&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepag
e&q&f=false
McKay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. Mahwah,
NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Retrieved May 11, 2011
from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=vTL9tk6FxkYC&printsec=fron
tcover&dq=Researching+second+language+classrooms.&hl=id&ei
=_ZIJT6mbIsvJrAeLicC4Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=bookthumbnail&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6wEwAA#v=onepage&q=Res
earching%20second%20language%20classrooms.&f=false
Parcher, J. (1998). The Value of Debate: Adapted from the Report of the
Philodemic Debate Society. Georgetown: Georgetown University.
Retrieved June 20, 2011 from
http://www.debateleaders.org/The%20Value%20of%20Debate.htm
Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (1993). Argumentation and Critical Decision
Making, 3rd ed. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Rybold, G. (2006). Speaking, Listening, and Understanding: Debate for nonnative English speakers. IDEBATE PRESS: Southport, United
Kingdom. Retrieved March 3, 2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=J_rWosO0XgcC&printsec=fro
ntcover&hl=id&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&
q&f=false

29

DEBATERS‟ PERCEPTION OF ENGLISH DEBATE CONTRIBUTION 30

Saraswati, S. (2010). Difficulties in constructing arguments in debating: a
case study. Salatiga: Universitas Kriten Satya Wacana
Scott, S. (2008). Perceptions of students‟ learning critical thinking through
debate in a technology classroom: A case study. The Journal of
Technology Studies.(39-44). Retrieved May 10,2011 from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JOTS/v34/v34n1/pdf/scott.pdf
Sliger, H.W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research methods.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved March 30, 2011 from
http://books.google.co.id/books/about/Second_language_research_
methods.html?id=zhDeTQthwb0C&redir_esc=y
The Learning Center. (2007). Paraphrasing, summarizing, and quoting.
South Wales: University of South Wales. Retrieved May 3, 2011
from http://www.lc.unsw.edu.au/onlib/pdf/paraquo.pdf
Wallace, J. M. (2006). Action research for language teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wijaya, H. (2007). The attitude of students from the faculty of language and
literature Satya Wacana Christian University toward debate
activity in speaking 4. Salatiga: Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana

30