ENGLISH DEBATING

“ KEY TO BETTER ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS“

By
Dwi Supriono, S.Pd
 What’s NSDC?
National Schools Debating
Championship is the
highest parliamentary
debating tournament for
high scholars which is
followed by the
representatives of all
provinces in Indonesia
Aim
• Promote critical and
analytical thinking ,
tolerance , problem
solving, and team work.
• Select 4 best debaters to
represent Indonesia in
World Schools Debating
Championship
 Legal Basis
• Undang – Undang Republik Indonesia No. 20 Tahun 2003
tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional
• Permendiknas No. 19 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar
Pengelolaan Pendidikan
• Permendiknas No. 23 Tahun 2006 tentang Standar
Kompetensi Lulusan
• Permendiknas No. 34 Tahun 2006 tentang Pembinaan Anak
Berprestasi
• Visi dan misi sekolah
 OSN vs NSDC ?

• Held by the Ministry of Education

• Regional to National level selection
• Finding the best students to compete in World level
 TEACHERS’ ROLE
• SELECTING
• COACHING
• MOTIVATING
WHY DEBATE?
• There is more information now
than ever
• The pace of social change
continues to increase
• The globe is one connected
whole more than ever
• Our mass media rains down on
us with “expert” discourse
• We are surrounded by weak
arguments promoted with
considerable resources
 Why Current Educational Methods Fall
Short?
• The old “banking”
model is insufficient.
• Students are too often
in a passive role.
• Skill development is
neglected.
• Students are taught to
“accept” and not to
“question.”
 Debating essential processes
• State your case
• Clash with a critique the arguments of the
other
• Defend your own arguments from the critique
of opponents
• Develop a perspective on all issues that
enables a decision about the question at hand
 Listening Skills in Debating
Understand a range of
spoken text, discussion
between two people, follow
persuasive arguments,
lectures, etc
SPEAKING SKILL
Speak accurately and
fluently at length to
explain, present opinions,
recount, describe and
summarise events and
plans, using a series of 6–8
clear, connected, utterances
 READING SKILL
Read and understand persuasive texts, news, discussion,
notes and summaries from a wide variety of sources
 WRITING SKILL
Write persuasive texts, in
the form of short essays,
letters or scripts for oral
presentation, arguing for or
against a particular view on
an issue of topical, or
personal interest
Quick Guide to English Debating
 What is a debate?
Debating is all about making
and proving a reason, then
defending it. And that
consequently means to
attack other contradictory
reasons. So it means that a
team will have a burden
and responsibility to prove
something. And the other
team should prove
otherwise.
What do we debate about?

The variety of issues

that will be debated
upon is not specified on
what your field of study
or interest is. But it
would be general issues
of Economics, Science
and Technology,
Domestic and
International Affairs,
Environment and etc
Motion
The issue will be packaged
into a statement. This
statement is the ‘something’
to be proven, or unproven.
The forum will be referred to
as ‘This House’. Meaning that
every motion will start by that
phrase.
e.g. This House would liberate
the non-liberal.
Or to simplify, “This House” is
used as “We”
 The typical layout of a debate

Chairperson
Opposition
Proposition
1st
1st
Speaking Area 2nd
2nd
3rd
3rd
Adjudicator

Audience
 A ‘zig-zag’ format

Debate in WSDC style run like this…

Proposition Opposition
1st Proposition 1st Opposition
2nd Proposition 2nd Opposition
3rd Proposition 3rd Opposition
Reply speaker Reply speaker
Roles of the speakers: The First Proposition

The First Proposition speaker must:

 Define the motion

 Outline his or her arguments and the arguments
of the Second Proposition
 Present arguments (e.g. two or three arguments)
 Roles of the speakers: The First Opposition

The First Opposition speaker must:

 Respond to the First Proposition (‘rebuttal’)

 Outline his or her arguments and the arguments of
the Second Opposition
 Present arguments (e.g. two or three arguments)
 Roles of the speakers:
The Second Proposition & Second Opposition

• The Second Proposition and Second Opposition

speakers must:

 Respond to the preceding speaker (‘rebuttal’)

 Outline for his or her arguments
 Present arguments (e.g. two or three arguments)
 Roles of the speakers:
The Third Proposition and Third Opposition

The Third Proposition and Third Opposition speakers

must:

 Respond to arguments from all the speakers on

the other side team (‘rebuttal’)
 Relate the main issues of the debate back to his or
her own team’s case
 Roles of the speakers: Reply Speeches

A reply speaker must:

 Summarize the main issues of the debate

 What were the main issues?
 How did each team deal with those issues?

 Recap his or her own team’s arguments:

 First speaker’s arguments;
 Second speaker’s arguments.
 Definition
Definition is clarifying what the
motion means and what it wants.
Because it will contain words and
phrases which will need explanation

E.g. For a motion of This House approves AFTA. Giving a definition, is explaining
what is AFTA, and what approval are we talking about. Explaining what AFTA means
is not as simple as saying what it stands for (Asian Free Trade Area). But also
explaining what a free trade is, and emphasizing that the scoop is only within Asia
region. And approval is not a “Saying Yes”. But it should be explained in detail. Who
is approving, and in what form. What would be the common explanation will be
“Indonesia will approve, so that it will ratify and join AFTA”.
 
 Theme line and Stance
It is emphasizing what you want and why in one big
sentence. It is your theme. It is your ‘big word’

E.g. For a motion THW negotiate with terrorist. “We believe that
we would negotiate with terrorists in life threatening situation,
because every life matters, therefore at any cost we should
defend it”.
 Team Split
To make the adjudicators (judges) easy to understand
what you say and where you are leading to, you have
to tell them what you and your team mate will
explain about.

E.g. THBT green tax is never a good concept. The team split would probably
be “Me as the 1st speaker will explain how green tax will only justify
companies to pollute, and not encouraging them to decrease production
capacity or improve waste management system. And later on, my 2nd
speaker will extend my case by explaining how in the long run, the
drawbacks of green tax will only perpetuate harm to the society.”
 Proposal
Pay attention to the type of motions wording. Some motions will
ask you to believe in something. This is a philosophical debate.
Such as THBT prostitution is a human right to be defended. So it is
simply about right or wrong. Is it or is it not a human right? Or TH
likes RUU APP. It is only about whether it is good or bad, right or
wrong.

But some motions require you to do something. So delivering a

proposal, is all about explaining what you are going to do in
details. It is like proposing a program, and you have to explain
what the program is like.
E.g. in TH would legalize prostitution.
To define ‘legalization’, you must note
that it is an action. So you explain that
“what you mean with legalization, is
establishing prostitution localizations
where the sex workers are protected
by law (or may operate legally). These
localizations will be located far from
public housings. Then these sex
workers should be above 18 years old,
registered. The customers should also
be above 18 years old, and all sexual
activities must use condoms.”
 Arguments
These are reasons why you support or not support the motion.
E.g. TH would ban radical movements that protect the environment.
An argument would be “Because they violate human rights”.
But an argument should not be thrown as simple as that sentence.
It has to be explained, and contain four elements. They are
Assertion (must have a title), Reasoning (logical analysis behind),
Evidence (example), and Link (connection to the motion). We may
call this A-R-E-L.
 As an example, lets use the argument above.
• A: Radical movements, though protecting the
environment, violates human rights
• R: Their actions causes tangible damage to it’s
targets. Victims fall, and material losses are
suffered.
• E. Such as the Monkey Wrenches, who try to
protect the forests of Arizona from illegal
loggers. They plant pieces of metal inside trees.
So when the loggers come to cut them, their
chainsaws will accidentally clash with these
pieces of metal. It creates splinters that
seriously wound, or even kill, those loggers.
• L: A human right violation is a reason to ban an
organization, because governments have
responsibility to uphold human rights. Any
things against it should be eliminated.
 Rebuttals
These are also reasons, and very similar to an argument. In fact, it IS an
argument. But what we refer as “Rebuttal” has specific characteristics.
First, it is always proving that something is wrong. Well, a negative
team’s argument is also like this. But we have a second characteristic.
When an argument refers directly to the motion, a rebuttals refers to an
argument. So it is all about pointing out an opponent’s argument, and
explaining why it is wrong.

E.g. a rebuttal to the previous argument.

“Those actions are not violating human rights, because it is proportional. These people
have rights to do it.
Why ? Because even though they harm the loggers, but the loggers also harm them by
destroying the forest where they live. And everyone has rights to defend themselves.”
 Points Of Information (POI).
A more common word for it is
‘Interruptions’. Within the time
allocated , you may interrupt the
speech of your opponent. The speaker
may accept or refuse.
To give a POI, you have to stand up,
raise your hand towards the speaker
and say “Interruption”, or “POI”, or
anything to let him know that you want
to interrupt. The speaker may refuse by
saying no or simply waving his hand
would be sufficient. Or they may accept
by saying ‘yes’ or even other styles.
When accepted, an interruption has to
last maximum 15 seconds.
 Adjudicating Criteria
Style
here are three criteria for
:The way that the speaker presents
Content :The material that the speaker presents
Strategy :The organization of a speech
 Curriculum Vitae
Name : Dwi Supriono, S.Pd
Address : Ds. Wonoketro, Jetis, Ponorogo
Phone : 0852 350 339 34 / 856 558 76 004
Email : papazaidan80@gmail.com
Activities : English Teacher & Debating Coach of SMAN 1 Ponorogo
Organization :
 Senior Advisor of Surabaya Debate Community ( Curriculum Affairs )
 Honorary member of Jogja Debating Forum
Coaching :
 SMAN 1 Ponorogo : 2007- now
 East Java Team : 2012 & 2013
Adjudicating :
 “ A “ accredited adjudicator of ALSA E-Comp 2010, Faculty of Law University of Indonesia
 Chair of Adjudicators of Ponorogo Ultimate Debate ( PROUD ) 2011 , SMAN 1 Ponorogo
 Deputy Chair of Adjudicators of National University English Debate Championship ( NUEDC ) 2011
& 2012, KOPERTIS VII Jawa Timur, Dirjen Pendidikan Tinggi, Kementrian Pendidikan Nasional
 Invited Adjudicator of National University English Debate Championship ( NUEDC ) 2012 ,
KOPERTIS V , DIY, Dirjen Pendidikan Tinggi, Kementrian Pendidikan Nasional
 Invited Adjudicator of National University English Debate Championship ( NUEDC ) 2012 , National
Round, Denpasar – Bali, Dirjen Pendidikan Tinggi, Kementrian Pendidikan Nasional
 Invited Adjudicator of National School Debating Championship ( NSDC ) 2011 & 2012 , East Java
Selection, Dinas Pendidikan Jawa Timur
 Invited Adjudicator of National School Debating Championship
( NSDC ) 2011, National Round, Kementrian Pendidikan Nasional
 Invited Adjudicator of East Java Varsity English Debate ( EJVED ) 2010 & 2012, UM Malang
 Invited Adjudicator of Surabaya Open Debate Event ( SODE ) 2011, Surabaya Community of
Debate
 Invited Adjudicator of English Parade 2011, Faculty of Administration, Brawijaya University
 Invited Adjudicator of Lomba Ketrampilan Siswa ( LKS ) SMK 2011& 2012 , Dinas Pendidikan Jawa
Timur
 Invited Adjudicator of English Debate Competition 2011& 2012 , UNESA
 Invited Adjudicator of National Medical Faculty Debate Competition 2012, UNAIR
 Invited Adjudicator of PIKTAR 2013 , Naval Academy ( AAL )