IMPROVING CRITICAL THINKING ABILITY OF

INTERMEDIATE STUDENTS OF ESADA COURSE WITH

AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE LEARNING

PROPOSAL THESIS

BY:

MUHAMMAD ALFARIZI

NIM: 2111221016

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND TEACHER TRAINING
KH. MUKHTAR SYAFAAT UNIVERSITY
BLOKAGUNG BANYUWANGI
2024
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Table of Contents.................................................................................................i
A. Research Background ....................................................................................1
B. Research Problem...........................................................................................2
C. Research Objective ........................................................................................2
D. Research Significances...................................................................................3
E. Research Scope and Limitation.......................................................................3
F. The Definition of Key Terms..........................................................................3
G. Review of Related Literature..........................................................................4
H. Previous Studies..............................................................................................9
I. Research Design..............................................................................................12
J. Research Subject.............................................................................................12
K. Data Sources...................................................................................................12
L. Procedure of Data Collection..........................................................................12
M. Data Analysis..................................................................................................13
N. Data Validity...................................................................................................13
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................14

i
A. Research Background

Nowadays English is exciting to learn which has four elements,

one of which is speaking. Speaking is a form of human oral
communication based on a combination of syntactic lexicon and names
taken from many vocabularies. Each spoken word comprises a phonetic
combination of a few language sounds(Khan & Ali, 2010).

(Golden, 2023) Critical thinking is an assessment that has goals

and rules for itself to produce an interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and
inference by containing an explanation of evidentiary, primatial,
methodological, or contextual considerations that become a fundamental
assessment. (Samaras et al., 2022) Critical thinking is an action that
questions assumptions, evaluates the available evidence, and logically tests
the proposed change. (Alsaleh, 2020) Critical thinking is an intellectual
discipline process that is active and full of strategies to increase the
possibilities that will be generated.

(Alsaleh, 2020) Critical Thinking (CT) has been recognized as one

of the most important thinking skills and one of the most important
indicators of student learning quality. In order to develop successful
critical thinkers, CT must be incorporated into the curriculum content and
teaching approaches and sequenced at all grade levels. This research
provides a systematic review of the extant literature on teaching CT skills.
The comprehensive review led to the building of a conceptual framework
that discusses the four main debates among the researchers engaged in the
field of teaching CT. One of these debates; can technology promote
students CT skills? Overall, the study of actual practices indicates that
teaching approaches tend to focus on subject content rather than CT
development. The results indicate a gap in teaching CT skills in terms of
innovative methods and particularly in the use of new technologies. They
also highlight the need for further research that investigates new
approaches for teaching CT skills.
 (Fuadah et al., 2020) Australian Parliamentary Debate (APD) is the
most suitable strategy that can be practiced by the students. It has grown in
popularity in recent years and may be an appropriate debate for
contemporary college students or Millennials. The Australian
Parliamentary Debate strategy is the kind of parliamentary debate under
the Australian Parliamentary rules. The characteristics of this debate are
the number of debaters and teams in the exhibition. There are two teams,
the government and the opponent. Each team consists of three members
who have a different job during the debate.

Finally, in improving critical thinking skills with the help of the

Australian parliamentary debate, intermediate students of the ESADA
course must know in more detail the Australian parliamentary debate
system itself, such as how to formulate arguments, how to collect data,
how to refute the opponent's opinion, and how to be smart about the
judgments made. was in the Australian parliamentary debate.

B. Research Problem
Based on the background, the research problems are:
1. Is critical thinking ability already kept and what does Intermediate
student of ESADA course need?
2. Is Australian Parliamentary Debate learning suitable for developing the
critical thinking skills of Intermediate student of ESADA course?

B. Research Objectives
Based on the research problems above, the objectives of this
research are:

1. To know how far of Intermediate student of ESADA course ‘ability in

critical thinking needed at class.
2. To know that Australian Parliamentary Debate learning is suitable for
Developing critical thinking ability of Intermediate Student of ESADA
course.

2
C. Research Significances
This research will give advantages in theoretical and practical,
1. Theoretical Significance
This study aims to help determine the critical thinking
ability of Intermediate students. Because in Australian
parliamentary debate, critical thinking ability are needed. This
research can provide insight for Intermediate students in measuring
growth and also develop the thinking skills of these students,
namely Intermediate Students in ESADA course
2. Practical Significance
This research aims to guide Intermediate students and also
become a correction material for teacher in course to develop
Intermediate students' thinking ability, more precisely Intermediate
students of ESADA course. This research can also help those who
feel they are still lacking in critical thinking ability.
D. Research Scope and Limitation
Based on the background above, researchers will focus on
measuring how well intermediate students have critical thinking abilities.
This research will be based on the basic theory of critical thinking
abilities. Researchers will focus on theories that include aspects of
critical thinking based on the Australian Parliamentary debate pattern and
the skills developed, debating techniques, and also teamwork in debate
based on (Fuadah et al., 2020)

E. The Definition of Key Terms

This section will define key terms used in this research which will
provide a more detailed description of the concept. The first based on the
American Philosophical Association, critical thinking is a purposeful and
self-organizing assessment that produces interpretation, analysis,
evaluation, and inference as well as an explanation of evidentiary
considerations, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual
basis for the assessment (Facione, 1990).

3
 Secondly, (Fuadah et al., 2020) Australian Parliamentary Debate
(APD) is the most suitable strategy that can be practiced by the students. It
has grown in popularity in recent years and may be an appropriate debate
for contemporary college students or Millennials. The Australian
Parliamentary Debate strategy is the kind of parliamentary debate under
the Australian Parliamentary rules. The characteristics of this debate are
the number of debaters and teams in the exhibition. There are two teams,
the government and the opponent. Each team consists of three members
who have a different job during the debate.

F. Review of Related Study

1. Understanding Thinking Ability
According to (Costa & Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, 1985) thinking skills are cognitive processes that allow us
to interpret information and have recreation with information. Thinking
skills include knowledge, position, and cognitive and metacognitive
operations.
If we look at the level of difficulty and complexity, skills
themselves are divided into 2, namely; basic skills and complex skills.
Basic thinking is a core process that only involves the student's ability to
receive and recite facts or memorize a statement using continuous
repetition. Meanwhile, complex thinking is a process where thinking
about anything requires students to manipulate information and ideas in
certain ways that give them new understanding and implications.
For example, when students combine ideas and facts in
generalizing, interpreting, analysing, and finally they come to a
conclusion. One of the thinking skills is critical thinking skills.
2. Understanding Critical Thinking Ability
There is one definition that is very often quoted, originating from a
1990 Delphi report, written by the American Philosophical Association,
that critical thinking is a purposeful and self-organizing assessment that
produces interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference as well as an

4
explanation of evidentiary considerations, conceptual, methodological,
criteriological, or contextual basis for the assessment (Facione, 1990).
(Seibert, 2021) defines critical thinking as "all or part of the
process of questioning, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, inference,
inductive and deductive reasoning, intuition, application, and creativity.
Critical thinking is an evaluative (judgmental) activity to produce a
conclusion and defines critical thinking as a complex process that
involves receiving and mastering data, analysing data, evaluating data by
considering qualitative and quantitative aspects, as well as making
selections or making decisions based on evaluation results ( Indrasari,
2016).
(Lovelace et al., 2016) says that critical thinking is an act of
analysing and evaluating situations and combining actions. (Baldwin et
al., 2011) explains the application of management knowledge from
critical thinking to identify problems, describe possible actions, evaluate
those actions, and apply selected indicators. According to (Fisher, 2011)
identified the similarity of various definitions that present critical
thinking-based activities that refer to skills that must meet intellectual
standards, including clarity, adequacy, relevance, and coherence, and
require translation, interpretation, and evaluation of observations
Based on these definitions of critical thinking skills, it can be
concluded that critical thinking skills are thinking skills that involve
cognitive processes and invite students to think reflectively about
problems. (Indrasari, 2016). Critical thinking skills (Ennis, 1996) were
developed into indicators of critical thinking skills which consist of 5
large groups, namely:
a) Provide a simple explanation
b) Building basic skills
c) Conclude
d) Provide further explanation
e) Set strategy and tactics

5
 Each of the critical thinking above is further described into critical
thinking sub-skills and their respective indicators in Table 2.1 below.

Aspects of critical thinking skills according to Ennis

Critical Thinking Sub Description Critical Aspect
Skills Thinking
1. Provide a basic 1. Focusing the question a. Identify and
explanation formulate a
question.
b. Identify or
formulate possible
answer criteria
c. Keep your mind on
the situation at hand
2. Analyze the argument a. Identify conclusions
b. Identify the stated
reasons
c. Identify unstated
reasons
d. Look for similarities
and differences
e. Identify and address
irrelevance
f. Looking for the
structure of an
opinion/argument
g. Summarizing
3. Ask and answer clarifying a. Why?
questions and challenging b. What is the main
questions reason?
c. What do you mean
by?
d. What is an
example?
e. What is an
example?
f. How to apply this
case?
g. What makes the
difference?
h. What are the facts?
i. Is this what you
said?
j. What else are you
going to say about it
2. Build basic skills 1. Consider whether the a. Skill.

6
 source can be trusted or b. Reduce conflicts of
not. interest.
c. Agreement between
sources.
d. Reputation
e. Using existing
procedures.
f. Know the risks.
2. Observe and consider the a. Reduce guessing.
results of the observation b. Shorten the time
between
observations and
reports.
c. The report is carried
out by the observer
himself.
d. Note down things in
observations.
e. Strengthening.
f. Possible
reinforcement.
g. Good access
cognition.
h. Competence in
using technology.
i. Observer
satisfaction with
credibility.
3. Summing up 1. Deducing and considering a. Logic class.
deductions b. Conditioning logic.
c. Interpret questions.
2. Induce and consider the a. Generalize.
results of the induction b. Hypothesize.
3. Create and review the a. Background facts.
values resulting from b. Consequence.
consideration. c. Apply concepts
(principles, laws,
and principles).
d. Consider
alternatives.
e. Balance, Consider
and Decide.
4. make further 1. Define terms and consider There are 3 dimensions:
explanations definitions a. Forms: synonyms,
clarification, about,
the same expression,
operational,
examples, and non-

7
 examples.
b. Definition strategy.
c. Fill.
2. Identify assumptions a. Unstated reason.
b. Assumptions that
require
reconstruction of the
argument.
5. Strategy and 1. Decide on a course of a. Define the problem.
tactics action b. Select possible
criteria as a solution.
c. Decide what to do.
d. Reviewing.
e. Monitor
implementation.
2. Interact with other people 1. Label
2. Logical strategy
3. Rhetorical strategy
4. present a position,
either verbally or in
writing.

(Ennis, 1996)

3. Australian Parliamentary Debate

(Fuadah et al., 2020) Australian Parliamentary Debate (APD) is the
most suitable strategy that can be practiced by the students. It has grown in
popularity in recent years and may be an appropriate debate for
contemporary college students or Millennials. The Australian
Parliamentary Debate strategy is the kind of parliamentary debate under
the Australian Parliamentary rules. The characteristics of this debate are
the number of debaters and teams in the exhibition. There are two teams,
the government and the opponent. Each team consists of three members
who have a different job during the debate.

According to Quinn (2005) Australian parliamentary debate is a

debate in which there are two teams that oppose each other. The first
speaker in the government or positive team is the Prime Minister, the
second and the third speakers are the Deputy Prime Minister and the
Government Whip. Meanwhile, in the opposition or the negative team
there will be a Leader of Opposition in the first speaker, meanwhile the

8
 Deputy Opposition Leader and the Opposition whip are from the second
and third speakers of the negative or opposition team. Each speaker has
his own obligations to do in debating.
Australasian Parliamentary Debate has a positive impact on
students’ argumentative speaking ability. This is supported by the results
of the statistical calculation in this study. In this regard, the researchers
conclude that using Australasian. (Qomariah et al., 2020)

G. Previous Studies

In completing this research, the researcher considers several previous

studies to support this research:

First, a journal by (Qomariah et al., 2020) The goal of this research was
to investigate whether the use of the Australasian Parliamentary Debate
had an impact on students’ argumentative speaking ability. The method
was quantitative with a quasi-experimental design, and the participants of
this research were SMAN 29 Jakarta 10th grade social students in the
academic year 2017/2018. They were X IIS 2 as the experimental group
and X IIS 3 as the control group, consisting of 32 students for each group.
Convenience sampling was used to select the participants for this research,
and the data were collected using an oral test. The argumentative speaking
rubric was used to assess the students’ argumentative speaking ability in
the pre- and post-tests. The results of statistical hypothesis testing, using
independent sample t-test, found that the t-value was 2.23 on the
significance level of 5 percent (α = 0.05), whereas the t table was 1.99 or
tobserve > t table. H0 was therefore rejected and Ha was accepted. This
finding shows that the use of the Australasian Parliamentary Debate has a
positive effect on students’ ability to speak argumentatively.

Students can develop their critical thinking skills because they are
actively involved in study cases provided by teachers at the beginning of
the learning process. This solution requires several activities such as
analyzing, evaluating, and also creating.

9
 Second, a journal (Fuadah et al., 2020), Teaching English needs an
appropriate strategy to effectively enhance the students' communicative
competence, especially speaking competence. When the teaching process
does not use the appropriate strategy, the students will meet the barriers to
achieving the instructional goals. Based on the preliminary study
conducted to the second grade of Islamic Senior High School of Blitar, the
researcher found some students' speaking problems. Therefore, the
Australasian Parliamentary Debate was proposed as a strategy to overcome
those problems by conducting Classroom Action Research. After
implementing the strategy of Australasian Parliamentary Debate in
multimodal teaching-learning process, the study needed two cycles to
overcome the students' speaking problems and improve the students'
speaking skill.

The problems were time too short, students got difficulty to build
argumentations well and students were lack in vocabulary. For the
positiveness which they got were Australian Parliamentary Debate could
increase students’ critical thinking, increasing students’ oral
communication skill and students could respect the others in applying
Australian Parliamentary Debate.

Third, a journal by (Firdaus, n.d.) The aim of this research is to get

clear description of the implementation of Australian Parliamentary
Debate in the teaching of speaking, and to know the effects of the
implementation of Australian Parliamentary Debate in promoting high
school students’ critical thinking skill. The method which was applied in
this research was naturalistic study. It was conducted in SMA Trimurti
Surabaya, East Java Province from October – November 2012. The
subjects of the research were the teaching and learning of speaking of class
XII Science 2 in SMA Trimurti using Australian Parliamentary Debate.
The data of this thesis were taken from several techniques including
observation and interview. In analyzing the qualitative data, the researcher

10
conducted data reduction, data display, drawing conclusion and
verification. The finding shows the following results: (1) The
implementation of APD in SMA Trimurti Surabaya encourages students to
speak communicatively. (2), The implementation of APD can promote
critical thinking ability of students in SMA Trimurti Surabaya.

Fourth, a journal by (Indah, 2021) This study presents a description of

how the students were involved in an academic debate format for the
Critical and Analytical Speaking class. The nature of this study was
qualitative descriptive which used online questionnaires to the students
from batch 2016 to 2018. It was found that the students initially had some
anxiety for having to speak in English, let alone in the context of debate.
They stated that the debate in the speaking class was exciting and
challenging. Also, it was said that the class was able to enhance their
speaking skill because it encouraged them to think critically, to be open
minded, as they found and sorted ideas, knowledge and facts; an example
of this was when then expressed their convincing arguments to tackle
opponents’ standpoint. They admitted that they preferred to be in the
contra side that was generally against the norms, open for possibilities to
bend rules by questioning the law or contradicting society’s points of view.
Fifth, a journal by (Nizzam et al., n.d.) The parliamentary debate has
been a significant trend globally and is conducted to get well-arranged
arguments in many circumstances. The mushrooming debating contests
around the globe have shown that this activity positively impacts learners'
skills, i.e., critical thinking and communication skills. Geared qualitatively,
this article investigates how parliamentary debate can cultivate critical
thinking and communication skills. The data were collected via semi-
structured observation and interviews in an English debating club at a
private Islamic high school involving 6 participants and two coaches. The
findings revealed that debate offers several distinct features to improve
students' two skills, as mentioned above, significantly.
Yet, the review described is efficient but not comprehensive. Likewise,
in the research, there are questions about Australian Parliamentary Debate

11
 design that are not clear. It can be said that the results assessed or the
methods used are not appropriate, and the absence of evidence should not
be interpreted as evidence of no impact.
H. Research Design
The method that will be used to complement this research is
qualitative method. According to (Abdussamad, 2021) qualitative methods
are methods used in the orientation of natural phenomena. Therefore, this
method is commonly called naturalistic investigation. Qualitative methods
rely on text and image data, have unique steps in data analysis, and utilize
diverse designs (Creswell & Creswell, 2018)
Moreover, this research will use qualitative descriptive methods,
which aim to provide a detailed picture of a phenomenon, event, or
situation that is happening. Qualitative research is used to gain an
understanding of behavior, perception, motivation, action, and other
aspects of the research subject holistically. Research results are usually
presented in the form of words and sentences. The purpose of descriptive
qualitative research, as defined is to systematically collect detailed
information and description of the object of study (Creswell, 2012).
Therefore, based on the definition above, using descriptive
qualitative is a relevant method. Here researchers will use descriptive
qualitative research on Australian parliamentary debate learning as a
strategy for developing critical thinking in students.
I. Research Subject
The research subject is an Intermediate Students of English Student
Association of Darussalam (ESADA Course)
J. Data Source
The data source refers to where the data comes from. In this
research, the data research is the results of Intermediate Students of
ESADA group work test in critical thinking Ability by Australian
Parliamentary Debate.
K. Procedure of Data Collection

12
 As stated in the research design, the researcher will conduct this
research using a qualitative description. The Procedure of data collection
are:
1. Intermediate Student of ESADA is divided into two groups
(affirmative and opposite).
2. Then they were given a problem/Motion
3. Collect and analyze data results from group work.
4. Concluding.
L. Data analysis
In this study, data is taken from the test results of Intermediate
students of ESADA course, then the data will be processed into a
description that discusses the test results based on critical thinking Ability
based on Australian Parliamentary Debate. Thus, the data will provide a
clear picture of the research to be carried out by the researcher and will
make it easier for him to analyze the next data.

M. Data Validity
The theory that will be used in this study is the theory of thinking
criticism (Ennis, 1996) and Australian Parliamentary Debate (Fuadah et
al., 2020)

13
 REFERENCES

Abdussamad, Z. (2021). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif.pdf. CV. syakir Media

Press.

Alsaleh, N. J. (2020). Teaching Critical Thinking Skills: Literature Review. The

Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1).

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed). Pearson.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative,

Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Fifth). Sage Publication.

Ennis, R. (1996). Critical Thinking. Argumentation, 14, 48–51.

https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007850227823

Facione, P. A. (1990). A STATEMENT OF EXPERT CONSENSUS FOR

PURPOSES OF EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT AND INSTRUCTION.

Firdaus, M. H. (n.d.). THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AUSTRALIAN

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE TO TEACH SPEAKING.

Fisher, A. (2011). Critical Thinking: An Introduction. Cambridge University

Press.

Fuadah, U., Rachmajanti, S., & Ivone, F. M. (2020). Australasian Parliamentary

Debate Strategy to Foster Students’ Speaking Competence. Jurnal

Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, Dan Pengembangan, 5(4), 427.

https://doi.org/10.17977/jptpp.v5i4.13327

Golden, B. (2023). Enabling critical thinking development in higher education

through the use of a structured planning tool. Irish Educational Studies,

42(4), 949–969. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2023.2258497

14
Indah, D. R. (2021). STUDENTS’ STANDPOINT: USING DEBATE IN A

CRITICAL AND ANALYTICAL SPEAKING CLASS. 49(1).

Indrasari, S. Z. (2016). PENINGKATAN KETERAMPILAN BERPIKIR KRITIS

MELALUI PENERAPAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN CREATIVE

PROBLEM SOLVING PESERTA DIDIK KELAS XI IPA1 SMA NEGERI 2

MASAMBA.

Khan, N., & Ali, A. (2010). Improving the speaking ability in English: The

students’ perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2),

3575–3579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.554

Lovelace, K. J., Eggers, F., & Dyck, L. R. (2016). I Do and I Understand:

Assessing the Utility of Web-Based Management Simulations to Develop

Critical Thinking Skills. Academy of Management Learning & Education,

15(1), 100–121. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2013.0203

Nizzam, M., Huda, M. M., Anggraini, D., & Kholidah, U. (n.d.). Debate to

Cultivate Critical Thinking and Communication Skills.

Qomariah, I., Syauki, S., & Anasy, Z. (2020). The Effect of the Australasian

Parliamentary Debate Technique on Students’ Argumentative Speaking

Ability. IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 7(1), 48–62.

https://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v7i1.16973

Samaras, S. A., Adkins, C. L., & White, C. D. (2022). Developing critical

thinking skills: Simulations vs. cases. Journal of Education for Business,

97(4), 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2021.1932703

15