Copyright © 2020 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 8, Number 1, June 2020 pp. 1 – 12 Nasriandi & Masruddin Your Article Title Cambria, 11pt IDEAS, Vol. 6, No. 1, June 2020 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) THE USE OF BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE STYLE IN TEACHING SPEAKING SKILL AT THE SECOND AND FOURTH SEMESTER OF ENGLISH STUDY PROGRAM IAIN PALOPO Nasriandi1, Masruddin2 nasriandi@umpalopo.ac.id 1 Faculty of Teaching and Education, Muhammadiyah Palopo University, Palopo, Indonesia 2 Faculty, University, City, Country 3 Faculty, University, City, Country Abstract This research attempts to discover the Efficiency of using British parliamentary debate style in teaching speaking skill. The problem statement of this research is: is the British Parliamentary debate style effective in teaching Speaking skill at the second and fourth Semester Students of English Study Program IAIN Palopo?, The population of this research is the Second and fourth semester students of English Department of IAIN Palopo who joined the IPEDS( IAIN Palopo English Debate Society).The sample Was taken by using purposive sampling, Based on the students’ interest and allocated time for this research. The number of sample were 15 students. This research used pre-experimental method with pretest and posttest design. The pretest given to know the basic ability of the students in speaking skill and the posttest given to know the students’ improvement in speaking skill after given the treatment, and the researcher used British parliamentary debate style. The result of this research shows that there are significant improvements on students’ speaking skill after conducting the treatments. The result of data analysis shows that ttest (7,829) was higher than ttable (2.093). It indicated that British parliamentary debate style is effective to improve students’ speaking skill at the second and forth Semester of English Study Program IAIN Palopo. Keywords: British Parliamentary debate style, Speaking skill Introduction Speaking is a key to communicate each other. It becomes important language skill that the students should mastered, especially by English students. Speaking defines as a part of communication since it is regarded as representing what the speaker wants to say. In teaching learning process, the students must be able to speak, state the statements, ideas, or feeling. Furthermore, During the observation at IAIN Palopo, especially for the English study program students. There are many problems related to learn English in speaking. First, the students had limited time to speak English in the classroom due to the big number of the students. As a consequence of that, the teachers got problem in managing the class and tended to dominate the teaching and learning activities. Therefore, the students only attended the teaching learning process in the classroom. According to Yulan and Haki, the students of English Study Program of IAIN Palopo, speaking is the most difficult part in learning English, even when we have a good pronunciation in English but the most important thing is we have to be able to build an argument in order to become a good English speaker. The improvement of the students’ speaking skill should be supported by the teacher through creating an interesting activity in the classroom which involve students’ knowledge and it has possibility to make the students more active to speak by giving an interesting topic that can be spoken by the students and the students can do the activity through debating. 1 Debating is an activity to present a constructive argument, regardless of personal opinion, either for or against on topical issues: moral, legal or political. Teams have fifteen minutes to prepare the speeches. Consequently, in order to succeed, debaters must be able to think and work well with the partners. Debating also develops the ability to speak with confidence in front of the large audiences. So when students join a debate activity they can learn not only to talk and talk but also they learn how to build a good argument in speaking English. In addition, an English teacher Maria Cecilia Ferraro from Argentina opened an internet forum discussion about the effectiveness of using debate technique to improve students’ speaking skill and the result found that four hundred forty four respondents from all over countries give good respond about that topic. The aim point from debating is to get an acknowledgement and honor to talk. Automatically the students have more skill to practice their English speaking skill through debating activity, the researcher choose this title is because now we see the fact that there are so many students can speak English fluently but they can’t build their argument, they can’t express their ideas so when they talk people can barely understand of what they are talking but through debate, based on the previous study above, the students can learn not only to talk but also how to build a good argument in speaking English. Method This research applied pre experiment method (Subana and Sudrajad, 2001). It is used to discover whether British parliamentary debate style can be used in teaching speaking skill at the of English study program at IAIN Palopo. Population Based on the scope of problem, the population will be from the students of the English study program. The total population is 253 students. in this research, the researcher used purposive sampling according to the students Interest and based on the allocated time that the researcher needed to finish this research, which were the students who joined the IPEDS ( IAIN Palopo English debate society), they are from different semester, . And also the writer gave forms to the students who wants to join the debate forum of IAIN Palopo. The researcher used some interesting topics as the speaking test in debating activity and also the researcher used some instrument to collect all the information and data as long as the research is held. The instrument is: Test, in this case the researcher use oral rest to make sure and to find out students’ speaking ability in the pre test and post test. Table 1 The debate motions in treatments 2nd meeting THBT school uniform should be banned 3rd Meeting THW require Real name For FB Users 4th Meeting THBT Mobile phone forbidden for students 5th Meeting THBT Studying grammar is more important than practicing conversation skills 6th meeting THBT Corruptor Should be Sentence to Death 7th meeting TH should give independence to Papua The students were be given the same activity in the pre-test after the treatment in post-test. The realization of their speaking ability were identified, classified, tabulated and analyzed. To analyze of data, the writer used the following steps: There are three criteria that reside in speaking skill. These all evaluated the following marking scheme in Heaton, 1990. Determining the mean score, percentage, standard deviation, test of significance was used SPSS program version 20. Results The finding of the research show the result of the data that have been analyzed statistically and the tabulating of data. It compares of the students’ score in pre-test and post-test, classification percentage of students score in pre test and post test, the mean score and standard deviation of the students’ pre-test and post-test. The analysis students` speaking score in pre test and post test. Pre-test In this section, the researcher shows the complete score of students in speaking ability (accuracy, fluency, and comprehensibility) in pre-test, the standard deviation of students, and the rate percentage of students’ speaking score in pre-test. The researcher presents the data in the tables and calculates the score by using SPSS 20 program. Then, the researcher shows the students’ complete score of speaking ability of accuracy, Fluency, and Comprehensibility in pre-test. The tabulation of students’ score in the pre test can be seen in table 2 Table 2 The Scores of Students` Speaking Skill in the Pre-test Respondent Dimension   Accuracy Fluency Comprehensibility Total Total score R1 1 1 1 3 16.66 R2 1 2 1 4 22.22 R3 1 1 1 3 16.66 R4 2 2 2 6 33.33 R5 2 2 1 5 27.77 R6 2 2 1 5 27.77 R7 2 1 2 5 27.77 R8 4 3 4 11 61.11 R9 1 1 2 4 22.22 R10 3 3 3 9 50.00 R11 3 3 3 9 50.00 R12 2 2 2 6 33.33 R13 2 2 1 5 27.77 R14 2 1 2 5 27.77 R15 4 2 3 9 50.00           Table 2 shows that The lowest score was 16.66 it was the score of students number 1 and 3, and the highest score was 61.11 it was the score of students number 8. Furthermore, speaking skill consists of three aspects; they are accuracy, fluency and Comprehensibility. 1) Accuracy The students’ score of accuracy before giving treatment by using British Parliamentary debate style and it presents through the table rate percentage scores. It can be seen in table 3: Table 3 The Percentages Score of the Students` Accuracy in Pre-test Classification Score Frequency Percentage Excellent 6 - 0% Very good 5 - 0% Good 4 2 13.33% Average 3 2 13.33% Poor 2 7 46.67% Very Poor 1 4 26.67% Total 15 100% The table 3 indicates that students` score in the frequency of pre-test. It shows that there was none of the students (0%) who got excellent and very good. The other showed that there were 2 students (13.33%) who got good, 2 students (13.33%) who got average. And there were 7 students (46.67%) who got poor and The last, it also shows that there were 4 students (26.67)%) who got very poor. Based on the data above, it can be seen that the students got poor were more than the students got good score. It concluded that the students accuracy were still low. 2) Fluency In addition, the researcher also has written score of the students’ Fluency before giving treatment by British parliamentary debate style and it presented through the table rate percentage scores, it can be seen in table 4: Table 4 The Percentages Score of Students` Fluency in Pre-test Classification Score Frequency Percentage Excellent 6 - 0% Very good 5 - 0% Good 4 - 0% Average 3 3 20% Poor 2 7 46.67% Very Poor 1 5 33.33% Total 15 100% The table 4 indicates that students` score in Fluency of pretest. It shows that there was none of students got excellent (0%) and very good (0%) and also good(0%). Besides, there were 3 students (20%) who Average and there were 7 students (46.67%) who got Poor. And the last ,There were 5 students (33.33%) who got very poor. The total students got very poor and poor were more than the students got good score. It means that the students speaking ability especially in Fluency were still low. 3) Comprehensibility Besides, the researcher also has written score of the students’ rate before giving treatment by using British Parliamentary debate style and it presented through the table rate percentage scores. It can be seen in table 5: Table 5 The Percentages Score of Students` Comprehensibility in Pre-test Classification Rating Frequency Percentage Excellent 6 - 0% Very good 5 - 0% Good 4 1 6.67% Average 3 3 20% Poor 2 5 33.33% Very Poor 1 6 40% Total 15 100% The table 5 indicates that students` score in the rate of pre-test. The table shows that there was none of the students (0%) who got excellent and very good. Besides, there was 1 student (5%) who got good and 3 student (20%) who got average. There were also 5 students (33.33%) that got poor and 6 student (40%) who got very poor. The data shows that the students who got poor and very poor more than the students who got good score in comprehensibility. It concluded that most of students still had low Speaking skill in comprehensibility. Post-test In this section, the researcher shows the rate percentage of students’ score in speaking ability in post-test. The results of the students’ score in post-test are presented in the tables. The complete of the students’ scores in speaking skill of accuracy, Fluency, and Comprehensibility in post-test are tabulated. It can be seen in table 6: Table 6 The Scores of Students` Speaking Skill in the Post-test Name Dimension Total Real Score Accuracy Fluency Comprehensibility R1 2 3 2 7 38.88 R2 2 3 2 7 38.88 R3 2 2 2 6 33.33 R4 2 2 2 6 33.33 R5 4 4 4 12 66.66 R6 2 3 2 7 38.88 R7 3 3 3 9 50.00 R8 5 5 5 15 83.33 R9 3 3 4 10 55.55 R10 4 3 4 11 61.11 R11 4 4 5 13 72.22 R12 4 3 3 10 55.55 R13 3 2 2 7 38.88 R14 3 3 2 8 44.44 R15 5 3 4 12 66.66           Table 6 shows that The lowest score was 33.33, it was the score of students number 3 and 4 and the highest score 83, 33 it was the score of students number 8. In addition, the researcher had classified based on English reading assessments that consisted of accuracy, Fluency, Comprehensibility and it is presented through the table distribution frequency and percentage. It can be seen as follow: 1) Accuracy Besides, the researcher also has written score of the students’ accuracy who had been given treatment by using British parliamentary debate style and it presents through the table rate percentage scores. It can be seen in table 7: Table 7 The Percentages Score of Students` Accuracy in Post-test Classification Rating Frequency Percentage Excellent 6 - 0% Very good 5 2 13.33% Good 4 4 26.67% Average 3 4 26.67% Poor 2 5 33.33% Very Poor 1 - 0% Total 15 100% Based on table 7, the percentages of the students` accuracy score in post-test indicated that there was none of the students (0%) who got excellent but there were 2 students(13.33%) who got very good. Besides, it also showed that there were 4 students (26.67) who got good and 4 students (26.67%) who got average. There were 5 student (33.33%) who got poor. And the last there was none of students who got very poor. Based on the data above, it can be concluded that there was improvement of students’ accuracy after they were taught speaking skill by using british Parliamentary debate style. 2) Fluency The writer also has written score of the students’ Fluency who had been given treatment by using British parliamentary debate style and it presented through the table rate percentage scores. It can be seen in table 8: Table 8 The Percentages Score of Students` Fluency in Post-test Classification Rating Frequency Percentage Excellent 6 - 0% Very good 5 1 6.67% Good 4 2 13.33% Average 3 9 60% Poor 2 3 20% Very Poor 1 - 0% Total 15 100% Based on the table 8, the percentages of students’ Fluency score in post-test indicate that there was none of the students (0%) who got excellent and there was 1 students(6.67%) who got very good. Besides, there were 2 students (13.33%) who got good and 9 students (60%) who got average. The last, it shows that there were 3 students (20%) who got poor and none of the students (0%) who got very poor. From the data above, it can be seen that there were no students got very poor. It can be concluded that, the students’ Fluency increase after they learnt Speaking by Using british parliamentary debate style. 3) Comprehensibility The writer also has written score of the students’ Fluency who had been given treatment by using British parliamentary debate style and it presented through the table rate percentage scores. It can be seen in table 9. Table 9 The Percentages Score of Students` comprehensibility in Post-test Classification Rating Frequency Percentage Excellent 6 - 0% Very good 5 2 13.33% Good 4 4 23.33% Average 3 2 13.33% Poor 2 7 46.67% Very Poor 1 - 0% Total 15 100% Based on the table 4.22, the percentages of students’ comprehensibility score in post-test indicate that there was none of the students (0%) who got excellent and there were 2 students(13.33%) who got very good. Besides, there were 4 students (23.33%) who got good and 2 students (13.33%) who got average. The last, it shows that there were 7 students (46.67%) who got poor and none of the students (0%) who got very poor. From the data above, it can be seen that there were no students got very poor. It can be concluded that, the students’ Comprehensibility increase after they learnt Speaking by Using british parliamentary debate style. Besides showing about the mean score in each subject of Speaking skill (accuracy, Fluency, and Comprehensibility) one by one, this research also will present the total mean score and standard deviation of in pre-test and post-test, and then compare both of them. The result will be presented in to the table descriptive statistic. It can be seen in table 9: Table 9 The Paired Samples Statistics of Pre-test and Post-test Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pair 1 pretest 32.9587 15 13.52389 3.49185 posttest 51.8467 15 15.52630 4.00887 The table shows the mean score of the students pretest was 32.9587 and the mean score of posttest was 51.8467. Standard deviation of pretest was 13.52389 and the standard deviation of posttest was 11.52630. It means that using British parliamentary debate style in teaching Speaking skill can improve the students’ Speaking skill. Table 10 The Paired Samples Test of Pre-test and Post-test Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pair 1 pretest - posttest 18.88800 9.34362 2.41251 24.06232 13.71368 7.829 14 .000 The hypothesis was tested by using SPSS 20. In this case, the researcher used t-test (testing of significance) for paired sample t-test, that is, a test to know the significance difference between the result of students’ mean score in pretest and posttest. Assuming that the level of significance = 0.05, the only thing which is needed; the degree of freedom (df) = N – 1, where df = 14, than the t-test is presented in the following table Table 11 The Probability Value of T-Test of The Students’ Achievement Variable P-Value (α) X2 – X1 0.00 0.05 Discussion After calculating and analyzing the data at the findings, the researcher presents the discussion of students’ data. This section presents the result of data analysis and relates it to the theory in chapter II. Furthermore, this section aimed at describing the students’ enhancement in speaking skill by using British parliamentary debate style. Based on the result of data analysis, the researcher found out that the use of British parliamentary debate style in teaching students’ speaking skill at the second and forth grade students of english department of IAIN Palopo is effective. InTeaching students’ speaking skill by using British parliamentary debate style made the students of the second and forth semester of english department are confidence in practicing their speaking skill, enjoy getting the material in learning speaking, easy to express their opinions and arguments toward a topic or an issue without pressure and intimidation the result of their learning is improved. From the result of data analysis researcher describes that with df=14, standard of signification (= 0, 05 the researcher got ttable = 2,04 and for ttest the researcher got 7.829. This is indicates that British Parliamentary debate style to improve students’ speaking skill is an appropriate technique to English teacher in teaching their students. Thereby, the description of the data in findings shows that there is significant difference between the students’ score in pretest and posttest. It can be shown in the following chart: 1. Chart of students’ Accuracy in pretest and posttest 2. Chart of students’ Fluency in pretest and posttest 3. Chart students’ comprehensibility in pretest and posttest Bar chart of students’ rate shows that there is significance difference of students’ score in pre-test and post-test. The students’ score in post-test is higher than their score in pre-test. It means that there is improvement of students’ score from pre-test to post-test after they learnt speaking skill through British parliamentary debate style. 4. Chart mean score of students’ pretest and posttest From the chart above it can be seen there is significance difference of students’ score in pre-test and post-test. The students’ score in post-test is higher than their score in pre-test. The students’ accuracy score in pretest got 21% but in posttest the students’ got 32%, in Fluency the students’ got 18% in pretest but in posttest the students’ got 31% and the students’ Comprehensibility score in pretest got 19% but in posttest the students’ got 31%. It means that there is improvement of students’ score from pre-test to post-test after they learnt speaking skill through British parliamentary debate style. Conclusion Based on the findings and discussion at the previous chapter, the researcher can conclude that using British Parliamentary debate style is effective in Teaching Speaking skill at the second and forth semester of English Education Program of IAIN Palopo. It was proven by there was a significant difference between the students’ mean score of pretest and posttest. In pretest, the students’ mean score is 32.9587 and the students’ score in posttest is 51.8467. Moreover, it also can be seen by t-test of the students’ speaking skill achievement was smaller than α = (0.00 < 0.05). Suggestions Based on the result of the data analysis and conclusion, the researcher proposes suggestion as follow: 1. The English Lecturer of English Tarbiyah Faculty of IAIN Palopo can apply British parliamentary debate style in teaching English, especially in increasing the students’ speaking skill. 2. It is suggested for the students to increase the ability mastery in English especially speaking skill. 3. The future researcher expected to conduct a research to find another significant of British parliamentary debate style in other English language skills. References Australasian Debat Parlementer. 2008. What is debate. Online: http://www.clsb.org.lik/debating.com. Bailey. M Kathleen in David Nunari. Practical English Language Teaching. Longman. Brown, H Doughlas. 2001. Teaching by Principles an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, New York: Longman. Ferraro, Maria Cecilia. 2008. Online: “Teaching English”, www. bbc.uk/world/.com. Accessed on 19th April 2016. Clarck, Herborth H and Eve V. Clark. 1997. Physiology and Language: an Introduction to Psycholinguistic. United States of America: Harcourt Brace Jovanivich Incb. Ensiklopedia Bebas Berbahasa Indonesia. 2008. Online: “Wikipedia Debat”, (Website), www.wikipedia.com. Accessed on 19th April 2016. Hadley, Alice Omaggio, 1993. Teaching Language in Context. United States of America: Heinle & Heinle Publisher. Hasriani, 2009“Improving Students’ Speaking Skill through Debating Activity at the Eleventh Grade of SMA Negeri 2 Palopo” Thesis, Palopo: SekolahTinggi Agama Islam Negeri, 2009,. Harmer, Jeremy., 1991. The Practice of English Language Teaching. New York. Longman Group UK. Heaton, James B. 1983. Writing English Language Test : New York : Longman Group UK. Janet, 2008. Adjudicating online:http://www.actdu.org.au/archive/actein-site/adjaj.html. accessed on 19th of April 2016. Popper, Karl. 2007. What is Debate & Rules of Debate. Online: http://www.idebate.org/standards/rulestwoteamfourteam.com. Accessed on 19th April 2016. Quinto, Edward Jay. 2016. British Parliamentary Style Debate, online: http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Parliamentary_Style. Accessed on 19th April 2016 Richard, Jack E. and Willy. A Renandya. 2002. Methodology in Language Teaching, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Accuracy pretest excellent very good good average poor very poor 0 0 6.6699999999999995E-2 0.2 0.33329999999999999 0.4 Accuracy posttest excellent very good good average poor very poor 0 0.13 0.23330000000000001 0.1333 0.4667 0 Accuracy pretest excellent very good good average poor very poor 0 0 6.6699999999999995E-2 0.2 0.33329999999999999 0.4 Accuracy posttest excellent very good good average poor very poor 0 0.13 0.23330000000000001 0.1333 0.4667 0 pretest accuracy Fluency comprehensibility 0.21 0.18 0.19 posttest accuracy Fluency comprehensibility 0.32 0.31 0.31 Accuracy pretest excellent very good good average poor very poor 0 0 6.6699999999999995E-2 0.2 0.33329999999999999 0.4 Accuracy posttest excellent very good good average poor very poor 0 0.13 0.23330000000000001 0.1333 0.4667 0 109 110 111