The Art of Debating.
The Art of Debating
Ni LuhPutu Krisnawati¹, PutuAyuAstySenja Pratiwi²,
KomangSoemaryana Putra³
EnglsihDepartement, Faculty of Letter, Udayana University¹
EnglsihDepartement, Faculty of Letter, Udayana University²
EnglsihDepartement, Faculty of Letter, Udayana University³
inacrisna@gmail.com¹
senja.dananjaya@yahoo.com²
Abstract
English is used by many people in the world for different purposes. For examples, some
use English in relation to their job, profession, their study, and for their personal satisfaction. In
this respect, English becomes very important language to study. For example in Indonesia,
English is used as the secondary language to communicate to each other. The importance of
English has been realized not only by individuals, but also by government. For instance, in
Indonesia, English is thought as one of the subjects from primary school to university levels. At
the university level, for instance at Udayana University there is an English Department as one of
the departments of Faculty of Letters. In this department students can study various aspects of
English language. One of the subjects taught isDebating. This is a very important subject in the
sense that it helps students to realize that debating is a challenging and difficult job which
requires the student to speak active English and also at the same time with a limited amount of
time to be able to think critically and fast upon a certain motion. Besides, every year either in the
national or world level there is always a debating competition.
Considering the above background, teaching debating as one of the speaking skill in a fun
and attractive way is highly needed because there is various kind of system in debating. This
research focuses on two important aspects in debating; they are (1) the strategies in teaching
debating and (2) the approaches to construct a good argument because argument is the most
essential thing in debating.
Key words: English, speaking skill, debating.
Introduction
As one of the means in communication, English play an important role in our daily life.
English is used by many people all over the world for various purposes. For example, some use
English in relation to their job, profession, their study and for their personal satisfaction. In this
respect, English becomes very important language to study. For example in Indonesia, English is
used as the secondary language to communicate to each other. The importance of English has
been realized not only by individuals, but also by government. For instance, in Indonesia,
English is thought as one of the subjects from primary school to university levels. At the
university level, for instance at Udayana University there is an English Department as one of the
departments in Faculty of Letters. In this department students can study various aspects of
English language. One of the subjects taught isdebating.
According to Karl Popper debate is a formal contest of argumentation between two teams
or individual. Thus, many people believe that through debating people can deliver their thoughts
in a more democratic way, without insulting other people who oppose certain issues. In other
words, the purpose of debating are: (1) to convince other people that his or her opinion is better,
(2) to listen to what other people think of an issue, (3) to find which solution is the best for a
problem. However, in fulfilling those purposes, a debater must bear in mind that debating has
strict rules of conduct and quite sophisticated arguing techniques and often be in a position
where debaters will have to argue the opposite of what they believe in.
Currently, there are two famous systems that is applied by many people in conducting a
debate, either just for practice or for completion, those system are: (1) Asian Parliamentary
System and (2) British Parliamentary System. In Asian Parliamentary System, there will be two
teams debating upon a certain motion. One team will be the affirmative (government) team and
another team will be the negative (opposition) team. Affirmative team and negative team consist
of 3 speaker acting as the 1st speaker, 2nd speaker, 3rd speaker and replay speaker. Each speaker
has different role, in affirmative team (1) 1st speaker must set up the debate, define the motion,
present the and provide a brief summary, (2) 2nd speaker must rebut the 1st negative’s major
arguments, reinforce the argument delivered by the 1st speaker, deliver substantial argument and
recap the speech, (3) 3rd speaker rebuts the point raised by the first two negative speaker, rebuild
team case and summarize the issue of the debate. Meanwhile the role of speaker for negative
teams are (1) 1st speaker of negative must provide a response to the definition (either accept or
challenge the definition), rebuts 1st affirmative, present the negative’s theme line, outline the
negative’s team split, delivers substantial arguments, recap the speech (2) 2nd speaker must rebut
the 2nd affirmative’s argument (could also rebut first two affirmative), reinforce the argument
delivered by the 1st speaker, deliver substantial arguments and provide a brief summary (3) 3 rd
speaker must rebut the points raised by all three affirmative speakers, rebuild team’s case and
summarize the issues of the debate. The role of reply speaker for both affirmative team and
negative team is to give a recap of the debate and convincing biased adjudication.
On the other hand, in conducting British Parliamentary System, there will be four team
debating, namely (1) 1st team is the opening government (prime minister and deputy prime
minister), (2) 2nd team is the opening opposition (leader of opposition and deputy leader of
opposition), (3) 3rd team is the closing government (member of government and government
whip), and (4) 4th is the closing opposition (member of opposition and opposition whip) , in
which each team consist of two speaker and each speaker have different speaker role. The
speaker role of each speaker are (1) the Prime Minister must define the motion, deliver own
substantive speech and flag the arguments to be delivered by the deputy prime minister, (2)
leader of opposition must rebut prime minister, deliver own substantive material and flag the
arguments to be delivered by the deputy leader of opposition, (3) deputy prime minister must
rebut the leader of opposition and deliver own substantive material as flagged by prime minister,
(4) deputy leader of opposition must rebut the prime minister and deputy prime minister and
deliver own substantive materials as flagged by leader of opposition, (5) member of government
must rebut the opening opposition, extend the case of government by delivering own substantive
material and explain the different between opening government and closing government, (6)
member of opposition must rebut the opening government and member of government, extend
the case of opposition by delivering own substantive material, and explain the different between
opening, and closing opposition, (7) government whip must deliver summaries and make
comparison, rebut all opposition and not allowed to deliver own material, (8) opposition whip
must deliver summaries and make comparisons, rebut all government and not allowed to deliver
any new material.
For the brief explanation above, it can be seen clearly that there are differences between
the both systems; however this research focus on the discussion of British Parliamentary System
only. With respect to the present study, the research problems can be formulated as follows:
1. What are the strategies in teaching debating?
2. What are the approaches to construct a good argument because argument is the most
essential thing in debating?
Research Method
The data for this study was descriptively described. This description is expected to give
an adequate explanation of the data being discussed. The data sources of this research are 50
students of the English Department who took the debating class. Currently the respondents are in
the 5th semester. The data collection is conducted using some method, they are:
1. Observation Method
The observation is conducted by a direct observation in class on how they understand the
current curriculum and now how to debate upon a certain topic.
2. Questioner Method
In this method, questioner is given to student who took the debating class in order to
know what they want for the curriculum of debating.
Then the obtained data is analyzed using the descriptive- narrative method by explaining
the fact in the field regarding the finding form the observation and questioners. Lastly, it will be
presented using the descriptive-qualitative method.
Finding and Analysis
The purpose of this part is to answer the aims being formulated: (1) what are the
strategies in teaching debating? And (2) what are the approaches to construct a good argument
because argument is the most essential thing in debating?
The strategies in teaching debating
In relation to the notion of debate, debating is a technique to deliver ones critical thinking
through a democratic way without any emotional appeals, tolerance to others point of view,
develop the ideals of reasoned arguments and personal bias. From the questioner it is found that
the previous curriculum only teaches the basic skill of debating that is to either propose or
oppose upon a certain topic. All 50 respondents answered that they were only given different
topic each meeting and the lecturer told them to discuss the topic and they can raise their hand if
they want to deliver their opinion. According to the respondent the scope of the topic is limited
only with regional issues (issues that are happening in Bali and Indonesia) and they do not know
how to debate or understand every single component in debating. 30 respondent says that even
though the topic is limited it is still useful to develop their critical thinking skill, 10 respondent
says that they want more than just a discussion in class regarding certain topic while the last 10
respondent says that they do not understand.
Based on the result, an observation is conducted in class. A motion regarding ‘That
political quota is not the answer for women’ is given in class. From the observation it is found
that what they have answered in the questioners matches the fact in class. They discuss only for 5
minutes and then raise their hands and deliver their point of view, it is just like a free debate
where there a no rule and student can debate and rebut other student.
Since debating is now one of the programs from the government and they usually held a
competition each year and choose the best debating team to represent Indonesia in the World
University Debating Championship, it is a need to develop teaching strategies for the debating
class in the English Department, Faculty of Letters, Udayana University. A syllabus in debating
is highly needed so the student of English Department Faculty of Letters in order to compete in
the debating competition. Nation and Maclister (2010:11) stated that a syllabus is made based on
the some step, namely: needs analysis, determination ofthe principles ofteaching, setting goals
andorderthe materials, designingthe form of teaching, includingthe assessment procedure,
andevaluate the teaching process.
Based on that theory a new syllabus on debating is formulated as follows:
1. Week 1 and 2: Explaining everything related to British Parliamentary System. The
student is expected to know and understand: (1) what is BP debating system, (2) how to
win a BP debate, (3) rules in BP, (4) important terms in BP, (5) BP motion and its type
and (6) speaker roles and order of speeches.
2. Week 3 and 4: student can understand the important elements in defining a motion, they
are (1) what is a reasonable motion, (2) is there a clear issue to be debated and (3)
definition DONTS.
3. Week 5: student is able to understand the definition of parameter, models and criteria di
BP system, namely: (1) what is parameter for debate, (2) models and counter models and
(3) what is criteria.
4. Week 6: Students understandthe steps taken by the opposite team. (1) accept and debate,
(2) challenge the debate, (3) broaden the debate, (4) the ‘even if’ case.
5. Week 7: the student knows and understand how to construct a case, namely (1) what is
case, (2) what is argument, (3) what is examples and (4) what is restrictive case.
6. Week 8: is a review of the basic theory on BP system
7. Week 9: middle test for the basic theory of BP system.
8. Week 10 and 11: student know and understand everything about assessing a debate. They
understand (1) what is adjudicator, (2) what is the duty of adjudicator, (3) how to be a
good adjudcator, (4) what is range score, (5) what is victory point and (6) how to fill in
adjudicator sheet.
9. Week 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16: the student is practicing how to debate and become a debater
and adjudicator in a BP system.
When the student is acting as a debater, the student will be assed based on 3 criteria, namely:
(1) matter – how the set up the case and the material to support their point of view.
(2) manner – the way they deliver their debate, their body language, language used,
intonation, voice tone, eye contact, etc.
(3) method – how the construct their argument, the technique that they use to deliver their
argument, knows which argument is more important than other and need to be deliver firstly.
When acting as an adjudicator, the student a given a piece of paper which is called the
“adjudicator sheet” they need to fill in the range of score, decide the point for each matter,
manner and method and also write down the reason why they give the winning to chosen
team.
Approaches to construct a good argument
An argument is the idea to show that you agree or disagree towards a certain topic. In
composing an argument it must be made logical, brief and clear. Logical, brief and clear are
three important components that are really important in determining the quality of an argument.
It should be made logical to prevent any absurd arguments which are illogical, it should be brief
and clear to make the adjudicator understand what the debater is talking about, a brief
explanation is required.
In order to avoid unclear arguments, there is a simple structure to make a good argument.
According to Tim Sonnerch (2012) argument should consists of AREL (assertion, reasoning,
evidence and link-back). For example, when a student is given a motion “this house would create
nuclear generator in Indonesia”, they should make a logical, brief and clear argument using the
AREL method.
Assertion: We would create nuclear generator in Indonesia because the fossil fuels are running
out and an alternative is required to fulfill the demand of electricity in Indonesia.
Reasoning: Fossil fuels are non-renewable. It will someday run out because the source is
limited. The status quo also demands a high supply of electricity which our country could not
give. A renewable alternative such as nuclear is required to solve this problem.
Evidence:
1. Many black-outs and a 17.00-22.00 policy are facts that Indonesia is running out of
electricity source.
2. Coal mine in Kalimantan, if it’s still produced and used in this current state, could be
depleted in less than 10 years. Coal is the basic material to produce electricity in
Indonesia.
3. Besides that, nuclear is well known as a renewable source of electricity, small amount of
it could be reused over and over.
Link-Back: Through the creation of new nuclear generator, the problem of limited fossil fuels
can be solved. Since Indonesia will turn to nuclear. The problem of electricity will also be
solved.
Summary
The findings shows that even though debating is a new subject in English Department, an
improvement in the syllabus is needed in order to know and understand the right way in debating
and also the after applying the new syllabus in class it is expected to improve the skill especially
in speaking and critical thinking for the student remembering that at present they know and
understand how to construct a good argument using the AREL method.
References
Colm, Flynn. Debating Tutorial Handouts.Availabe at www.worlddebating.com
Deanne, Alexander. The debating Handbook. Available at www.worlddeabting.com
Nation, I.S.P. and Macalister, John. 2010. Language Curriculum Design. London: Routledge.
Sonnreich, Tim. 2012. Monash Association of Debater Guide. Australia.
Ray. D, Cruz. 2005. The Australia – Asia Debating Guide Second Edition. Australia: Australia
Debating Federation.
Ni LuhPutu Krisnawati¹, PutuAyuAstySenja Pratiwi²,
KomangSoemaryana Putra³
EnglsihDepartement, Faculty of Letter, Udayana University¹
EnglsihDepartement, Faculty of Letter, Udayana University²
EnglsihDepartement, Faculty of Letter, Udayana University³
inacrisna@gmail.com¹
senja.dananjaya@yahoo.com²
Abstract
English is used by many people in the world for different purposes. For examples, some
use English in relation to their job, profession, their study, and for their personal satisfaction. In
this respect, English becomes very important language to study. For example in Indonesia,
English is used as the secondary language to communicate to each other. The importance of
English has been realized not only by individuals, but also by government. For instance, in
Indonesia, English is thought as one of the subjects from primary school to university levels. At
the university level, for instance at Udayana University there is an English Department as one of
the departments of Faculty of Letters. In this department students can study various aspects of
English language. One of the subjects taught isDebating. This is a very important subject in the
sense that it helps students to realize that debating is a challenging and difficult job which
requires the student to speak active English and also at the same time with a limited amount of
time to be able to think critically and fast upon a certain motion. Besides, every year either in the
national or world level there is always a debating competition.
Considering the above background, teaching debating as one of the speaking skill in a fun
and attractive way is highly needed because there is various kind of system in debating. This
research focuses on two important aspects in debating; they are (1) the strategies in teaching
debating and (2) the approaches to construct a good argument because argument is the most
essential thing in debating.
Key words: English, speaking skill, debating.
Introduction
As one of the means in communication, English play an important role in our daily life.
English is used by many people all over the world for various purposes. For example, some use
English in relation to their job, profession, their study and for their personal satisfaction. In this
respect, English becomes very important language to study. For example in Indonesia, English is
used as the secondary language to communicate to each other. The importance of English has
been realized not only by individuals, but also by government. For instance, in Indonesia,
English is thought as one of the subjects from primary school to university levels. At the
university level, for instance at Udayana University there is an English Department as one of the
departments in Faculty of Letters. In this department students can study various aspects of
English language. One of the subjects taught isdebating.
According to Karl Popper debate is a formal contest of argumentation between two teams
or individual. Thus, many people believe that through debating people can deliver their thoughts
in a more democratic way, without insulting other people who oppose certain issues. In other
words, the purpose of debating are: (1) to convince other people that his or her opinion is better,
(2) to listen to what other people think of an issue, (3) to find which solution is the best for a
problem. However, in fulfilling those purposes, a debater must bear in mind that debating has
strict rules of conduct and quite sophisticated arguing techniques and often be in a position
where debaters will have to argue the opposite of what they believe in.
Currently, there are two famous systems that is applied by many people in conducting a
debate, either just for practice or for completion, those system are: (1) Asian Parliamentary
System and (2) British Parliamentary System. In Asian Parliamentary System, there will be two
teams debating upon a certain motion. One team will be the affirmative (government) team and
another team will be the negative (opposition) team. Affirmative team and negative team consist
of 3 speaker acting as the 1st speaker, 2nd speaker, 3rd speaker and replay speaker. Each speaker
has different role, in affirmative team (1) 1st speaker must set up the debate, define the motion,
present the and provide a brief summary, (2) 2nd speaker must rebut the 1st negative’s major
arguments, reinforce the argument delivered by the 1st speaker, deliver substantial argument and
recap the speech, (3) 3rd speaker rebuts the point raised by the first two negative speaker, rebuild
team case and summarize the issue of the debate. Meanwhile the role of speaker for negative
teams are (1) 1st speaker of negative must provide a response to the definition (either accept or
challenge the definition), rebuts 1st affirmative, present the negative’s theme line, outline the
negative’s team split, delivers substantial arguments, recap the speech (2) 2nd speaker must rebut
the 2nd affirmative’s argument (could also rebut first two affirmative), reinforce the argument
delivered by the 1st speaker, deliver substantial arguments and provide a brief summary (3) 3 rd
speaker must rebut the points raised by all three affirmative speakers, rebuild team’s case and
summarize the issues of the debate. The role of reply speaker for both affirmative team and
negative team is to give a recap of the debate and convincing biased adjudication.
On the other hand, in conducting British Parliamentary System, there will be four team
debating, namely (1) 1st team is the opening government (prime minister and deputy prime
minister), (2) 2nd team is the opening opposition (leader of opposition and deputy leader of
opposition), (3) 3rd team is the closing government (member of government and government
whip), and (4) 4th is the closing opposition (member of opposition and opposition whip) , in
which each team consist of two speaker and each speaker have different speaker role. The
speaker role of each speaker are (1) the Prime Minister must define the motion, deliver own
substantive speech and flag the arguments to be delivered by the deputy prime minister, (2)
leader of opposition must rebut prime minister, deliver own substantive material and flag the
arguments to be delivered by the deputy leader of opposition, (3) deputy prime minister must
rebut the leader of opposition and deliver own substantive material as flagged by prime minister,
(4) deputy leader of opposition must rebut the prime minister and deputy prime minister and
deliver own substantive materials as flagged by leader of opposition, (5) member of government
must rebut the opening opposition, extend the case of government by delivering own substantive
material and explain the different between opening government and closing government, (6)
member of opposition must rebut the opening government and member of government, extend
the case of opposition by delivering own substantive material, and explain the different between
opening, and closing opposition, (7) government whip must deliver summaries and make
comparison, rebut all opposition and not allowed to deliver own material, (8) opposition whip
must deliver summaries and make comparisons, rebut all government and not allowed to deliver
any new material.
For the brief explanation above, it can be seen clearly that there are differences between
the both systems; however this research focus on the discussion of British Parliamentary System
only. With respect to the present study, the research problems can be formulated as follows:
1. What are the strategies in teaching debating?
2. What are the approaches to construct a good argument because argument is the most
essential thing in debating?
Research Method
The data for this study was descriptively described. This description is expected to give
an adequate explanation of the data being discussed. The data sources of this research are 50
students of the English Department who took the debating class. Currently the respondents are in
the 5th semester. The data collection is conducted using some method, they are:
1. Observation Method
The observation is conducted by a direct observation in class on how they understand the
current curriculum and now how to debate upon a certain topic.
2. Questioner Method
In this method, questioner is given to student who took the debating class in order to
know what they want for the curriculum of debating.
Then the obtained data is analyzed using the descriptive- narrative method by explaining
the fact in the field regarding the finding form the observation and questioners. Lastly, it will be
presented using the descriptive-qualitative method.
Finding and Analysis
The purpose of this part is to answer the aims being formulated: (1) what are the
strategies in teaching debating? And (2) what are the approaches to construct a good argument
because argument is the most essential thing in debating?
The strategies in teaching debating
In relation to the notion of debate, debating is a technique to deliver ones critical thinking
through a democratic way without any emotional appeals, tolerance to others point of view,
develop the ideals of reasoned arguments and personal bias. From the questioner it is found that
the previous curriculum only teaches the basic skill of debating that is to either propose or
oppose upon a certain topic. All 50 respondents answered that they were only given different
topic each meeting and the lecturer told them to discuss the topic and they can raise their hand if
they want to deliver their opinion. According to the respondent the scope of the topic is limited
only with regional issues (issues that are happening in Bali and Indonesia) and they do not know
how to debate or understand every single component in debating. 30 respondent says that even
though the topic is limited it is still useful to develop their critical thinking skill, 10 respondent
says that they want more than just a discussion in class regarding certain topic while the last 10
respondent says that they do not understand.
Based on the result, an observation is conducted in class. A motion regarding ‘That
political quota is not the answer for women’ is given in class. From the observation it is found
that what they have answered in the questioners matches the fact in class. They discuss only for 5
minutes and then raise their hands and deliver their point of view, it is just like a free debate
where there a no rule and student can debate and rebut other student.
Since debating is now one of the programs from the government and they usually held a
competition each year and choose the best debating team to represent Indonesia in the World
University Debating Championship, it is a need to develop teaching strategies for the debating
class in the English Department, Faculty of Letters, Udayana University. A syllabus in debating
is highly needed so the student of English Department Faculty of Letters in order to compete in
the debating competition. Nation and Maclister (2010:11) stated that a syllabus is made based on
the some step, namely: needs analysis, determination ofthe principles ofteaching, setting goals
andorderthe materials, designingthe form of teaching, includingthe assessment procedure,
andevaluate the teaching process.
Based on that theory a new syllabus on debating is formulated as follows:
1. Week 1 and 2: Explaining everything related to British Parliamentary System. The
student is expected to know and understand: (1) what is BP debating system, (2) how to
win a BP debate, (3) rules in BP, (4) important terms in BP, (5) BP motion and its type
and (6) speaker roles and order of speeches.
2. Week 3 and 4: student can understand the important elements in defining a motion, they
are (1) what is a reasonable motion, (2) is there a clear issue to be debated and (3)
definition DONTS.
3. Week 5: student is able to understand the definition of parameter, models and criteria di
BP system, namely: (1) what is parameter for debate, (2) models and counter models and
(3) what is criteria.
4. Week 6: Students understandthe steps taken by the opposite team. (1) accept and debate,
(2) challenge the debate, (3) broaden the debate, (4) the ‘even if’ case.
5. Week 7: the student knows and understand how to construct a case, namely (1) what is
case, (2) what is argument, (3) what is examples and (4) what is restrictive case.
6. Week 8: is a review of the basic theory on BP system
7. Week 9: middle test for the basic theory of BP system.
8. Week 10 and 11: student know and understand everything about assessing a debate. They
understand (1) what is adjudicator, (2) what is the duty of adjudicator, (3) how to be a
good adjudcator, (4) what is range score, (5) what is victory point and (6) how to fill in
adjudicator sheet.
9. Week 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16: the student is practicing how to debate and become a debater
and adjudicator in a BP system.
When the student is acting as a debater, the student will be assed based on 3 criteria, namely:
(1) matter – how the set up the case and the material to support their point of view.
(2) manner – the way they deliver their debate, their body language, language used,
intonation, voice tone, eye contact, etc.
(3) method – how the construct their argument, the technique that they use to deliver their
argument, knows which argument is more important than other and need to be deliver firstly.
When acting as an adjudicator, the student a given a piece of paper which is called the
“adjudicator sheet” they need to fill in the range of score, decide the point for each matter,
manner and method and also write down the reason why they give the winning to chosen
team.
Approaches to construct a good argument
An argument is the idea to show that you agree or disagree towards a certain topic. In
composing an argument it must be made logical, brief and clear. Logical, brief and clear are
three important components that are really important in determining the quality of an argument.
It should be made logical to prevent any absurd arguments which are illogical, it should be brief
and clear to make the adjudicator understand what the debater is talking about, a brief
explanation is required.
In order to avoid unclear arguments, there is a simple structure to make a good argument.
According to Tim Sonnerch (2012) argument should consists of AREL (assertion, reasoning,
evidence and link-back). For example, when a student is given a motion “this house would create
nuclear generator in Indonesia”, they should make a logical, brief and clear argument using the
AREL method.
Assertion: We would create nuclear generator in Indonesia because the fossil fuels are running
out and an alternative is required to fulfill the demand of electricity in Indonesia.
Reasoning: Fossil fuels are non-renewable. It will someday run out because the source is
limited. The status quo also demands a high supply of electricity which our country could not
give. A renewable alternative such as nuclear is required to solve this problem.
Evidence:
1. Many black-outs and a 17.00-22.00 policy are facts that Indonesia is running out of
electricity source.
2. Coal mine in Kalimantan, if it’s still produced and used in this current state, could be
depleted in less than 10 years. Coal is the basic material to produce electricity in
Indonesia.
3. Besides that, nuclear is well known as a renewable source of electricity, small amount of
it could be reused over and over.
Link-Back: Through the creation of new nuclear generator, the problem of limited fossil fuels
can be solved. Since Indonesia will turn to nuclear. The problem of electricity will also be
solved.
Summary
The findings shows that even though debating is a new subject in English Department, an
improvement in the syllabus is needed in order to know and understand the right way in debating
and also the after applying the new syllabus in class it is expected to improve the skill especially
in speaking and critical thinking for the student remembering that at present they know and
understand how to construct a good argument using the AREL method.
References
Colm, Flynn. Debating Tutorial Handouts.Availabe at www.worlddebating.com
Deanne, Alexander. The debating Handbook. Available at www.worlddeabting.com
Nation, I.S.P. and Macalister, John. 2010. Language Curriculum Design. London: Routledge.
Sonnreich, Tim. 2012. Monash Association of Debater Guide. Australia.
Ray. D, Cruz. 2005. The Australia – Asia Debating Guide Second Edition. Australia: Australia
Debating Federation.