Exploring Parliamentary Debate as a Pedagogical Tool to Develop English Communication Skills in EFL/ESL Classrooms

Eunice M. Aclan, Noor Hashima Abd. Aziz

Abstract


To survive in the 21st century workplace, communication skills are extremely important. However, a mismatch between the industry requirement and the university graduates’ competencies in terms of effective communication skills exists. Rote learning and lack of opportunities to practice English communication skills inside and outside the classroom are common issues in EFL/ESL contexts. Thus, this qualitative study was conducted to explore how debate as a pedagogical tool with three stages - pre-debate, actual debate and post-debate - can develop communication skills. The data were gathered through semi-structured one-on-one interview with five debate experts across from ASEAN countries and focus group interview with six ASEAN debate students. The participants of this study  described  the use of the pre-debate stage for the research and brainstorming tasks  that engage the team members with each other, the actual debate for the arguments, POI and rebuttals that actively engage debaters with their opponents, and the post-debate stage that engage all the debaters with the adjudicators, their team-mates and their opponents. This pedagogical aspect focusing on the three stages of debate which has implications for SLA and language teaching was not substantially dealt with in previous studies on debate. 

 


Keywords


Pedagogical tool, English communication skills, All-Asians parliamentary debate

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akerman, R. & Neale, I. (2011). Debating the evidence: An international review of current situation and evidences. Retrieved April 30, 2013 from http://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/ESU_Report_debatingtheevidence_FINAL.pdf.

Bellon, J. (2000). A research-based justification for debate across the curriculum. Argumentation & Advocacy, Winter, 36 (3), 161–175.

Baxter, P. & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13 (4), 544-559. Retrieved on June 3, 2013 from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf.

Boeije, H. (2010). Analysis in qualitative research. USA: Sage.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. USA: Longman.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Principles of language learning and teaching. USA: Longman.

Clavel, T. (2014, January 19). China, South Korea face familiar woes in English quest. The Japan Times. Retrieved on March, 21, 2014 from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/01/19/issues/china-south-korea-face-familiar-woes-in-english-quest/#.U9rlRPmSySo

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. USA: Pearson.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. USA: Sage.

Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. USA: Sage Publications.

Cronin, M. (1990). Debating to learn across the curriculum: Implementation and assessment. Paper presented at the Southern States Communication Association Convention, Birmingham, Alabama.

Darby, M. (2007). Debate: A teaching-learning strategy for developing competence in communication and critical thinking. Journal of Dental Hygiene, Fall, 81 (4), 78.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (2000). The “what” and “why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry. 11 (4), 227-268.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln. S.Y. (2005). Qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publications.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001a). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001b). Teaching and researching motivation. Harrow, Essex: Pearson.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. UK: Oxford.

Freeley, A. & Steinberg, D. (2012). Argumentation and debate. USA: Wadsworth Cencage Learning.

Goodwin, J. (2003). Students’ perspectives on debate exercises in content area classes. Communication Education, 52 (2), 157-163. Retrieved on April 29, 2013 from www.goodwin.public.iastate.edu/pubs/goodwinstudents.pdf‎.

Hadley, A. O. (2000). Teaching language in contexts. USA: Cencage Publishing.

Hall, D. (2011). Debate innovative teaching to enhance critical thinking and communication skills in healthcare professionals. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice. Retrieved on May, 9, 2013 from: http://ijahsp.nova.edu/articles/Vol9Num3/pdf/Hall.pdf

Hancock, D. R. & Algozzine, B. (2006). Doing case study research. USA: Teachers College Press.

Hardman, J. (2008). Researching pedagogy: An activity theory approach. Journal of Education, 45, 65-95.

Inoue, N. & Nakano, M. (2004). The benefits and costs of participating in competitive debate activities: Differences between Japanese and American college students. Paper presented at Wake Forest University/International society for the study of argumentation, Venice argumentation conference, June 27–30.

Kennedy, R. (2009). The power of in-class debates. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10 (3), 225–236. Retrieved June 3, 2013 from alh.sagepub.com/content/10/3/225.full.pdf.

Krashen, S. (1987). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Krashen, S. (1993). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Englewood, Co.: Libraries Unlimited.

Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American journal of occupational therapy. March 1991, Volume 45(3), pp. 214-222. Retrieved on February 1, 2013 from http://portal.limkokwing.net/modulemat/rigor%20in%20qualitative%20research%20trustworthiness%20test(1).pdf.

Krueger, R.A. (2002). Designing and conducting focus group interviews. Retrieved March 16, 2013 from http://www.eiu.edu/~ihec/Krueger-FocusGroupInterviews.pdf.

Levine, L.N. & McCloskey, M. (2013). Teaching English language and content in mainstream classes: One class, many paths. Boston, MA, USA: Pearson.

Lieb, M. (2007). Teaching debate skills to intermediate and lower level EFL students. Retrieved May 15, 2013 from www.tht-japan.org/proceedings/2007/m_lieb73-84.pdf.

Littlefield, R. (2001). High school student perceptions of the efficacy of debate participation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 38 (2), 83–97.

Munzenmaier, C. (2013). Bloom’s taxonomy: What’s old is new again. The Learning Guild Research. Retrieved May 15, 2014 from http://www.lessonpaths.com/learn/i/information-literacy-issues/blooms-taxonomy-whats-old-is-new-again-2.

Musselman, E. (2004). Using structured debate to achieve autonomous student discussion. The History Teacher, 37 (3), 335–349.

Parcher, J. (1998). The value of debate: Adapted from the report of the Philodemic Debate Society, Georgetown University, Published April 1, 1999, 3-7. Retrieved May 4, 2013 from http://www.tmsdebate.org/main/forensics/snfl/debate_just2.htm.

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. (2002). A guide to using qualitative research methodology. Medecins Sans Frontiers. Retrieved February 14, 2014 from http://fieldresearch.msf.org/msf/bitstream/10144/84230/1/Qualitative%20research%20methodology.pdf.

Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. (2008). Moving beyond the plateau: From intermediate to advanced levels in language learning. USA: Cambridge University Press.

Rosero, E.V. (2012, March 3). Why many fresh college grads don't get hired, according to survey of managers. GMA News Online. Retrieved June 3, 2013 from: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/250239/economy/business/why-many-fresh-college-grads-don-t-get-hired-according-to-survey-of-managers.

Rudestam, K. E., & Newton, R. R. (2007). Surviving your dissertation. USA: Sage.

Ryan, J. (2009). The three fundamentals of effective leadership. Retrieved June 15, 2014 from http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/29/vision-communication-judgment-leadership-managing-ccl.html.

Scott, S. (2008). Perceptions of Students' Learning Critical Thinking through Debate in a Technology Classroom: A Case Study. Journal of Technology Studies, 34 (1), 39-44.

Shakir, R. (2009). Soft Skills at the Malaysian Institutes of Higher Learning. Asia Pacific Education Review Springer Vol.10 No. 3 pp309-315. Retrieved April 29, 2013 from www.eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ850588.

Snider, A. & Schnurer, M. (2006). Many Sides: Debate Across the Curriculum. USA: IDEBATE Press.

Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Qualitative research (3rded.). 433-466. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Most vocabulary is learned from context. In M. G. McKeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition, 89-105. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Sulaiman, Y., Fauziah H., Wan Amin & Nur Amiruddin (2008). Implementation of generic skills in the curriculum. Edith Cowan University Research Online.Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods.UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

The Nation. (2013, November 7). Thailand ranks near the bottom in English proficiency: survey. Retrieved January 13, 2014 from http://www.nationmultimedia.com/business/Thailand-ranks-near-bottom-in-English-proficiency--30218895.html.

Wilkins, D. (1987). Linguistics in language teaching. London: Edward Arnold.

Williams, D., McGee, B. and Worth, D. (2001). University student perceptions of the efficacy of debate participation:An empirical investigation. Argumentation and Advocacy. 37, 198–209.

Yang, C. H. & Rusli, E. (2012). Using debate as a pedagogical tool in enhancing pre-service teachers’ learning and critical thinking. Journal of International Education Research – Second Quarter 2012. The Clute Institute. Retrieved May 13, 2012 from eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ982692.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.2p.1

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.