Australasian Parliamentary Debating

INTRODUCTION

THIS document is an introduction to Australasian Parliamentary debates, the motions/topics, team structure, etc. It is meant to help institutions and universities who are new to the Parliamentary debating format and are interested in participating in a debating competition using the format, but are still unclear on the rules and regulations. This document is not intended to serve as a definitive guide to the rules of the tournament.

THE BASICS OF DEBATING

DEBATING is about developing your communication skills. It is about assembling and organizing effective arguments, persuading and entertaining an audience, and using your voice and gestures to convince an adjudicator that your arguments outweigh your oppositions. Debating is not about personal abuse, irrational attacks or purely emotional appeals.
A debate is held between two teams of three members each. These two teams will be referred to as the Affirmative and the Negative. Members of each team are assigned positions as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd speakers. For each debate, a motion is given. After the motion is given, teams are given thirty (30) minutes to prepare for each debate.
Each of the speakers will deliver a substantial speech of seven (7) minutes duration and either the 1st or the 2nd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches for their teams. Reply speeches will be five (5) minutes.
Thus, the complete order of speaking during a debate is as follows:
• 1st Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 1st Negative – 7 minutes
• 2nd Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 2nd Negative – 7 minutes
• 3rd Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 3rd Negative – 7 minutes
• Negative Reply – 5 minutes
• Affirmative Reply – 5 minutes

What must both sides do? In general:
• Affirmative (also known as “the Government”)
The Affirmative team must define the motion and support this by giving constructive arguments. The right to define first resides with the Affirmative team, who is expected to give a reasonable definition for the motion.
• Negative (also known as “the Opposition”)
The Negative team must oppose the motion as defined by the Affirmative, and build a counter-case against the Affirmative. In the event the Negative team feels that the definition is invalid, they may challenge the definition and propose an alternative definition. However, the Negative team cannot raise a challenge simply on the basis that their definition is more reasonable.

MOTIONS

MOTIONS, also known as topics, are full propositional statements that determine what a debate shall be about. In the debate, the Affirmative team must argue to defend the propositional statement of the motion, and the Negative team must argue to oppose it.
Here are some examples of motions that can be debated about:
• That we should give President Habibie a chance
• That Indonesia should change its constitution
• That football is overvalued in today’s society
• That cigarette companies should not be held responsible for the bad effects of smoking
• That American pop culture is a threat to civilization
• That long is better than short

DEFINITIONS

BEFORE a debate ensues, the motion that is given must first be defined by the Affirmative team. A definition clarifies the motion. A definition gives a clear description of boundaries to the motion, thereby limiting what the debate will be about into a focused area of discussion. This prevents the debate from turning into a vague and confusing show of unrelated arguments and different interpretations from both teams of what is actually being debated among them.
The definition should take the motion as a whole, defining individual words only if they have a key role. Out of the definition should come a clear understanding of the issues that will be fought over in the debate. If the Affirmative chooses to define the motion on a word-by-word basis, it should define words or phrases by their common usage. Dictionaries may be useful for finding a common meaning or a pithy explanation of a word, but they are not an absolute authority.
An example of a definition could be as follows: Given the motion “that what goes up, must come down”, the Affirmative is presented with many options on how to define the motion, because the nature of the motion itself is quite abstract. One way they could define it is as follows: they could define the object (the ‘what’) as being the president of the Republic of Indonesia. In essence, the motion would then state that anyone who “goes up” (takes power) as president of Indonesia, must undoubtedly one day “come down” (step down from power). This would give us the definition “that the Indonesian presidency should be limited to 2 terms”. The Affirmative team could then argue on the detriments of having unlimited presidential terms, citing proof such as the total control of the past regime under Soeharto, etc.
The above example shows that in most situations, the actual issue of the debate is unknown until the Affirmative delivers their definition of the motion. Only then does it become clear.
Always keep in mind that a definition must be reasonable. This is to say that:
• it must be debatable (i.e. have two sides to it), and
• it must not be a bizarre distortion of the motion.

This is not to say that an Affirmative team may not choose an unusual interpretation of the motion, but they must be prepared to justify it.
The Negative, in general, must accept the definition made by the Affirmative, but the Negative shall have the right of challenging the definition if it does not conform to either of the two requirements set out above. However, a Negative team cannot raise a challenge simply on the basis that their definition seems more reasonable. They can only challenge a definition if they can prove it to be either Truistic, Tautological, Squirreling, or Time and place setting (see below).
If a Negative team accepts the definition, they only need to say so, and it is unnecessary to restate it. If they challenge it, their justification for doing so must be clearly stated, and an alternative definition must be put forward. If the definition is accepted, then that definition must stand. The Negative must adjust their case to that definition, and the adjudicator's views on its reasonableness become irrelevant.
The following definitions are strictly prohibited at the tournament, and should be challenged by the Negative team:
• Truistic definitions: These are definitions which are ‘true’ by nature and thus make the proposed arguments unarguable and therefore unreasonable in the context of the debate. If a team defines the debate truistically, they seek to win the debate by the truth of their definition rather than by the strength of their arguments and supporting evidence. An example of a truistic definition would be if the motion “that we should eat, drink, and be merry” were defined as “that we should eat, because otherwise we would starve to death; drink, because otherwise we would die of thirst; and be merry because we are alive”.
• Tautological or circular definitions: This happens when a definition is given in such a way that it is logically impossible to negate it. An example would be if the motion “that technology is killing our work ethic” were defined as follows: the Affirmative team decides to define the term ‘technology’ as meaning “all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kills our work ethic”. This would result in the whole definition “that all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kills our work ethic is killing our work ethic”. This cannot be logically proven false.
• Squirreling: Definitions that are not tied down to the spirit of the motion and do not have a proper logical link to the motion will constitute squirreling. For instance, when given the motion “that the USA is opening up to the PRC”, an Affirmative team could try and define USA as “Untidy Students of Asia”, and PRC as “Pretty Room Cleaners”. This is definitely squirreling, as anyone would agree that the spirit of the motion is about the relationship between the United States and China!
• Time and Place-setting: The subject matter of the debate cannot be confined to a particular time and place. For instance, trying to limit the subject matter to only the economic development of Japan during the specific period of the Meiji restoration.

A note on definitional challenges: be very careful about challenging definitions - only do so if you are absolutely certain that the Affirmative's definition is unfair. It is better to be brave and dump your prepared case in favor of tackling the Affirmative on their own terms than to issue an unjustified definition challenge. By the same token, Affirmative teams should try to ensure that their definition is fair.

THEME LINE

THE theme line is the underlying logic of a team’s case. It is the main instrument of argumentation that is used to prove a team’s stand on the motion. A theme line can be viewed as a ‘Case In A Nutshell’, because it concisely explains a team’s strategy in defending or negating the motion.
The theme line of a team must heavily imbue each speech of every team member. It is the main idea that links together the first, second, and third speakers, ensuring consistency among all speeches.
In formulating a theme line, it is often helpful to ask the question: Why is the propositional statement given by the definition of the motion true (or false, for the Negative team)? Without further explanation, this propositional statement is a mere assertion, or a statement which is logically unproven to be true. The answer to this question must be an argument which proves the assertion given by the motion. This argument is the theme line.
A theme line should be kept short, and it may take a form of a single sentence, an arrangement of several statements into a logical syllogism, etc. Whatever it is, it must by itself prove the motion (as it is defined) and all arguments brought forward should be based on this theme line.

TEAM SPLIT

DEBATING is a team activity. One person cannot take all the arguments and become the sole defender of the team's case. Therefore, there is a need to decide on how the arguments should be distributed among speakers. This is called the team split. Simply put, the team split is the distribution of arguments to the first, second, and third speaker.
Be careful, though, that each individual speech by itself must already prove the motion. You should not create what is called a hung case. A hung case is when an individual speech fails to prove the motion by itself, but instead requires coupling it with other speeches to be able to finally prove the motion.
For a more elaborate exposition on formulating theme lines and team splits, please consult the document entitled “Casebuilding Examples of Australasian Parliamentary Debates”. It contains thorough examples that give a very clear idea on how to construct theme lines and team splits from definitions.

ARGUMENTS

ARGUMENTATION is the process of explaining why a point of view should be accepted. It concerns the logic and the evidence supporting a particular conclusion. Use evidence (i.e. examples, facts, statistics, quotations of expert/public opinion etc.) to back up each point you make in your argument. Show how each piece of evidence is relevant and how it advances your argument. Make a point, give the reason for that point, and supply evidence to back it up.
Arguments are not assertions. Assertions are statements that have yet to be proven to be logically true. On the other hand, arguments must have supporting logic and facts that can show its validity.
What adjudicators look for in a good argument
• Relevance
• Organization
• Consistency and internal logic - i.e. don't contradict yourself or your teammates
• Clarity (remember, debating is about persuading your audience and adjudicator that you're right - so make sure they can understand what you're saying!)
• Effective use of evidence

Preparing a Reasonable Argument
One skill of good debating is being able to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and – especially important – to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument. The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a train of reasoning, but whether the conclusion follows from the premises and whether those premises are true.
When developing your argument, consider the following factors:
• Wherever possible offer independent confirmation of the "facts."
• Prepare for substantive debate on the evidence by considering all points of view.
• Arguments from authority carry little weight – "authorities" have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
• Prepare more than one case. If there's something to be defined, think of all the different ways in which it could be defined. Then think of arguments by which you might systematically rebut each of the cases. What survives, the case that resists rebuttal in this Darwinian selection among "multiple working cases," has a much better chance of being the stronger case than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
• Try not to get overly attached to a idea just because it's yours. It's only a waystation in the pursuit of a winning argument. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don't, others will.
• Quantify. If whatever it is you're explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you'll be much better able to defend it against generalized rebuttal. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
• If there's a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) – not just most of them.
• Occam's Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
• Always ask whether the case can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are unfalsifiable are called "truisms" and are not in the spirit of debating. You run a good chance of losing a debate, especially if the opposition correctly identifies that your arguments cannot be rebutted.

REBUTTAL

REBUTTAL is the process of proving that the opposing team's arguments should be accorded less weight than is claimed for them. It may consist of:
• showing that the opposing argument is based on an error of fact or an erroneous interpretation of fact
• showing that the opposing argument is irrelevant to the proof of the topic
• showing that the opposing argument is illogical
• showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, involves unacceptable implications
• showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, should be accorded little weight

As with arguments, assertions do not equal rebuttals. Just as teams must show how and why their own arguments are valid, so they must show how and why the opposition's arguments are invalid.
• An argument may be wrong in fact or logic - if so, say how and why
• An argument may contradict their team line, or something else a speaker on that team has said – if so, point it out
• An argument may be true but completely irrelevant – these are often called “red herrings”.

Organization of rebuttal
It is not necessary to rebutt every single point and fact raised by the opposition. Single out their main arguments and attack those first. Savage their theme line and show how it falls down – and show why yours is better! You should rebutt by both destroying the opposition's arguments and by establishing a case that directly opposes theirs.

ROLES OF THE SPEAKERS

THE six speakers in an Australasian Parliamentary debate each have different roles to play and adjudicators should take account of how well a speaker fulfills his/her obligations.
The first speakers establish the fundamentals of their team's cases
First Affirmative’s duties:
• Defines the motion of the debate. The 1st Affirmative should ensure that no important points of definition are left out.
• Presents the Affirmative’s theme line. This is normally presented in one or several lines of analysis, explaining why the Affirmative’s case is logically correct.
• Outlines the Affirmative’s team split. This can be done by saying, for example: “I, as the first affirmative will deal with the philosophical base of our case, while my colleague, the second affirmative speaker, will examine its practical implications”.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“1st Affirmative’s part of the split”). After establishing the definition, theme line, and team split, the 1st Affirmative should then deal with the arguments/points that have been assigned to him/her in the team split.
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.

The 1st Affirmative may spend some time on the definition and on establishing the theme line and showing how it is going to develop, but it is important to leave time to present some substantive arguments.
First Negative’s duties:
• Provide a response to the definition (accepts or challenges the definition).
• Rebutts 1st Affirmative, delivers a part of the negative's substantive case.
• Presents the Negative’s theme line.
• Outlines the Negative’s team split.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“1st Negative’s part of the split”).
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.

The 1st Negative’s role is similar to the role of the 1st Affirmative’s, with the added responsibility of responding to the arguments brought up by the latter. The response to the 1st Affirmative’s arguments can come before the 1st Negative presents his/her own arguments to support the Negative’s case or vice-versa. However, the delivery of rebuttals first is recommended.
After the first speakers have spoken the main direction of each team’s case should be apparent.
The second speakers deal with the bulk of the substantive argument
Second Affirmative’s duties:
• Rebutts the 1st Negative's major arguments.
• Briefly restates/reiterates in general terms the Affirmative’s team case.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“2nd Affirmative’s part of the split”). Most of the 2nd Affirmative's time should be spent dealing with new substantial material/arguments. He or she has the duty to present the bulk of the Affirmative's case in an attempt to further argue in favor of the Affirmative.
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.

The 2nd Affirmative should be prepared to defend the definition if necessary. If it is attacked, it is vital for the 2nd Affirmative to win back the initiative.
Second Negative’s duties:
• Rebuttal of the first two Affirmative speakers.
• Briefly restates/reiterates in general terms the Negative’s team case.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“2nd Negative’s part of the split”).
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.

The 2nd Negative has duties similar to the one performed by the 2nd Affirmative.
Most of the teams' substantive argument should have emerged by the time both second speakers have spoken.
The third speakers main duty is to rebutt the opponent’s case
Third Affirmative’s duties:
• Rebutt the points raised by the first two Negative speakers. The 3rd Affirmative is mainly entrusted with the duty of responding to the arguments of the Negative that were not previously dealt with by the first two Affirmative speakers. 3rd Affirmative may also reinforce rebuttals that have already been stated by teammates.
• Rebuild team’s case (briefly reiterate theme line and first two speakers’ arguments).
• Summarize the issues of the debate.

The role of the third speakers is simply this: Attack! Most of a third speaker's time must be spent rebutting the preceding speakers. Generally at least three quarters of a third speech should be rebuttal.
Rebuttal should ideally be carried out on two levels: on a global level (teamwise), a 3rd speaker should attack the opposing team’s whole case, pointing out the major flaws in argumentation and logic. On a more detailed level (speechwise), a 3rd speaker should be able to point out the mistakes in fact and inconsistency of each individual speech.
Third Negative’s duties:
• Rebutt the points raised by all three Affirmative speakers.
• Rebuild team’s case (briefly reiterate theme line and first two speakers’ arguments).
• Identify the points of contention / the clash of the debate
• Summarize the issues of the debate

The 3rd Negative has duties similar to the ones performed by the 3rd Affirmative. However, the 3rd Negative cannot introduce new matter, except for new examples to reinforce an argument that has previously been brought up. The logic behind this rule is that if a 3rd Negative is allowed to introduce new matter, the Affirmative would be at a disadvantage as they would not have any opportunity to be able to respond to these new arguments.
Reply speakers give a recap of the debate and a convincing biased adjudication
Reply speakers duties (both sides):
• Provide a summary or overview of the debate
• Identify the issues raised by both sides
• Provide a biased adjudication of the debate

Either the first or the second speaker of each side may deliver the reply speech. The Negative team delivers the first reply speech.
A reply speech is a review of both your own and the opposition's case. It represents a chance for the teams to show their arguments in the best light and to summarize the flaws in the opposition's case. The aim is to emphasize the major points made by your own team and to show how these contributed to a logical progression of argument in support of your theme line. At the same time the flaws in the opposition's argument must be outlined. This can be done point-by-point, or by taking a more global approach to the arguments. Both are effective if well done, so find the summary style that suits you best. However, the latter style is often more effective in light of the limited time frame.
The introduction of new material is absolutely prohibited and will be penalized. Any point brought up by the other side which had not been rebutted earlier in the substantial speeches may not be rebutted in the reply speeches. Therefore, this means that all substantive arguments presented in the debate must be dealt with by the opposing team in the substantial speeches.



CLOSING

THIS document is not intended to be the definitive set of rules that you must adhere to in debating. It serves as a source of information. For further information, please check out the Casebuilding Examples of Australasian Parliamentary Debate. It provides more in-depth explanation of cases, and gives examples to give a good idea of how one should construct cases.
Finally, it must be said that “practice makes perfect”. No one ever masters the art of swimming or riding a bicycle by thoroughly reading guidelines and handbooks. One must take that first plunge, and perhaps even fall down once or twice, before finally becoming skillful. The same applies to debating. These guidelines should be enough to get you started. But practice makes perfect.

ADJUDICATION

 

ADJUDICATION is the process of determining which team wins the debates. This is conducted by an adjudicator, or a panel consisting of an odd number of adjudicators.
There is always a winner in a debate. There are no ‘draws’ or ‘ties’. The speakers are assessed on Matter, Manner, and Method. Matter is 40 points, Manner is 40, and Method is 20, making a total of 100 points for each substantial speech. For reply speeches, Matter and Manner are 20 points and Method is 10, making a total of 50 points.
 

Matter refers to the points, arguments, logic, facts, statistics, and examples brought up during the course of the debate. Manner is concerned with the style of public-speaking – the use of voice, language, eye contact, notes, gesture, stance, humor and personality as a medium for making the audience more receptive to the argument being delivered. There are no set rules which must be followed by debaters. Method consists of the effectiveness of the structure and organization of each individual speech, the effectiveness of the structure and organization of the team case as a whole, and the extent to which the team reacted appropriately to the dynamics of the debate.

 THE ORAL ADJUDICATION

 As with things like note taking, individual adjudicators will each have their own way of giving an oral adjudication.
 

1 Announcing Positions

There is a division of opinion over whether it is best to announce results first and then give the feedback, or whether to give the feedback first and then announce the result. Our advice would be to adopt the former method, because it is questionable how much benefit teams and speakers can get if they are anxiously waiting for the result and you are, unconsciously perhaps, trying to give nothing away.
 

2 Opening Remarks

You may like to preface your remarks with a few comments on the quality and standard of the debate (coming from your discussions on an overall debate grade?). You may also indicate whether there was a unanimous agreement, or whether the panel encountered some resolvable disagreements in the course of its discussion (thereby indicating that the match might well have been very close in some respects).
 

3 The Framework and Content of your Feedback

As with the set-up for a debater's speech, an adjudicator's feedback should have 'matter' and 'manner'. You should also 'structure' your own intended feedback.
Give the finishing order, from team placing first in the debate (and therefore &winning' it), to that placing last.
 

4 The Overview

Then, proceed with the overview of the debate that your panel has assembled during your discussions, but keep it brief. Focus on the definition, the parameters and demands that this set up, the cases and major arguments that followed this, the challenges that these represented and the way that these challenges were met.
You should be able to trace the major issue(s) or themes that ran through the debate through this overview, as well as focusing on the ways in which various teams dealt with these.
 

5 Relative merits of teams, roles, cases, argumentation, etc.

It would then be a good idea to explain exactly why the debate has been awarded to a particular team, and consider the positions of the other teams relative to this. The reasons why teams have finished in the particular order that you have determined should then follow, with the relevant explanations offered as you go. You should conclude this phase by summarising what you have said, but by means of reference to the key arguments and issues that you outlined in your opening commentary. Comments about eye contact, off-key humming and torn jeans are probably not appropriate at this point.
 

6 Concluding

Your adjudication feedback might then move towards a conclusion with any specific comments on the roles, performance and style of individual speakers being offered. However, this should only be necessary in the event that an individual's speech has affected the debate, or a team's role, in a particularly critical way. Please try to keep your remarks in these cases constructively critical, perhaps softening what might be construed as negative criticism by picking out some positive aspects as well and mentioning them. 

The Adjudication Check-list

1. The phases of a debate adjudication : Observing the debate (which includes chairing and time-keeping if necessary), Discussion of the debate ( a session led by the chair of the panel) and giving the oral adjudication ( announce decision, provide reasons for decision and offer advice to debaters). The final phase is excluded for the final three preliminary rounds and the final series.
    
2. Observing the debate
• Chairing the debate also includes the responsibility of keeping order in the debate, inviting speakers to speak and cautioning against inappropriate behaviour when warranted.
   
3. Discussing the debate
• Matter and Manner contribution of each team should be discussed (along with Points of Information- as in the quality of the questions and the responses to them, which possesses both manner and matter elements)
• All members of the panel are obliged to provide their read of the debate, and listen to the various views of the other members of the panel.
• Chairs of panel should drive the discussion and attempt to move it forward. Use their discretion to end dead discussions and allow all panel members equal access to the discussion.
   
4. Oral Adjudication
• Presented by the chair of the panel, or a member of the majority, if the chair is dissenting.
• Announce the rankings before explaining the verdict (encouraged), if not the explanation would ambiguous and not constructive.
• Explain to the debaters, why the panel/majority decided the team ranking in that order, so debaters can understand how the adjudicators distinguished the teams in terms of contribution and delivery.
• Provide constructive advice (drawn collectively from the panel) for the debaters.

Metode Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris

1. Metode Langsung (Direct Method)

Direct artinya langsung. Direct method atau model langsung yaitu suatu cara mengajikan materi pelajaran bahasa asing di mana guru langsung menggunakan bahasa asing tersebut sebagai bahasa pengantar, dan tanpa menggunakan bahasa anak didik sedikit pun dalam mengajar. Jika ada suatu kata-kata yang sulit dimengerti oleh anak didik, maka guru dapat mengartikan dengan menggunakan alat peraga, mendemontstrasikan, menggambarkan dan lain-lain.

Metode ini berpijak dari pemahaman bahwa pengajaran bahasa asing tidak sama halnya dengan mengajar ilmu pasti alam. Jika mengajar ilmu pasti, siswa dituntut agar dapat menghafal rumus-rumus tertentu, berpikir, dan mengingat, maka dalam pengajaran bahasa, siswa/anak didik dilatih praktek langsunng mengucapkan kata-kata atau kalimat-kalimat tertentu. Sekalipun kata-kata atau kalimat tersebut mula-mula masih asing dan tidak dipahami anak didik, namun sedikit demi sedikit kata-kata dan kalimat itu akan dapat diucapkan dan dapat pula mengartikannya.

Demikian halnya kalau kita perhatikan seorang ibu mengajarkan basah kepada anak-anaknya langsung dengan mengajarinya, menuntunnya mengucapkan kata per kata, kalimat per kalimat dan anaknya menurutinya meskipun masih terihat lucu. Misalnya ibunya mengajar “Ayah” maka anak tersebut menyebut “Aah” dan seterusnya. Namun lama kelamaan si anak mengenali kata-kata itu dan akhirnya ia mengerti pula maksudnya

Pada prinsipnya metode langsung (direct method) ini sangat utama dalam mengajar bahasa asing, karena melalui metode ini siswa dapat langsung melatih kemahiran lidah tanpa menggunakan bahasa ibu (bahasa lingkungannya). Meskipun pada mulanya terlihat sulit anak didik untuk menuirukannya, tapi adalah menarik bagi anak didik.

Ciri-ciri metode ini adalah :
Materi pelajaran pertama-tama diberikan kata demi kata, kemudian struktur kalimat Gramatika diajarkan hanya bersifat sambil lalu, dan siswa tidak dituntut menghafal rumus-rumus gramatika, tapi yang utam adalah siswa mampu mengucapkan bahasa secara baik
 

Dalam proses pengajaran senantiasa menggunakan alat bantu (alat peraga) baik berupa alat peraga langsung, tidak langsung (bnda tiruan) maupun peragaan melalui simbol-simbol atau gerakan-gerakan tertentu
Setelah masuk kelas, siswa atau anak didik benar-benar dikondisikan untuk menerima dan bercakap-cakap dalam bahasa asing, dan dilarang menggunakan bahasa lain.

Kebaikan metode langsung (Direct)

Metode langsung (direct) dilihat dari segi efektivitasnya memiliki keunggulan antara lain :
Siswa termotivasi untuk dapat menyebutkan dan mengerti kata-kata kalimat dalam bahasa asing yang diajarkan oleh gurunya, apalagi guru menggunakan alat peraga dan macam-macam media yang menyenangkan.Karena metode ini biasanya guru mula-mula mengajarkan kata-kata dan kalimat-kalimat sederhana yang dapat dimengerti dan diketahui oleh siswa dalam bahasa sehari-hari misalnya (pena, pensil, bangku, meja, dan lain-lain), maka siswa dapat dengan mudah menangkap simbol-simbol bahasa asing yang diajarkan oleh gurunya.
 

Metode ini relatif banyak menggunakan berbagai macam alat peraga : apakah video, film, radio kaset, tape recorder, dan berbagaimedia/alat peraga yang dibuat sendiri, maka metode ini menarik minat siswa, karena sudah merasa senang/tertarik, maka pelajaran terasa tidak sulit
 

Siswa memperoleh pengalaman langsung danpraktis, sekalipun mula-mula kalimat yang diucapkan itu belum dimengerti dan dipahami sepenuhnya
Alat ucap / lidah siswa/anak didik menjadi terlatih dan jika menerima ucapan-ucapan yang semula sering terdengar dan terucapkan

Kekurangan-kekurangan metode langsung (Direct)
 

Pengajaran dapat menjadi pasif, jika guru tidakdapat memotivasi siswa, bahkan mungkin sekali siswa merasa jenuh dan merasa dfongkol karena kata-kata dan kalimat yang dituturkan gurunya itu tidak pernah dapat dimengerti, karena memang guru hanya menggunakan bahasa asing tanpa diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa anak.
 

Pada tingkat-tingkat permulaan kelihatannya metode ini terasa sulit diterapkan, karena siswa belum memiliki bahan (perbendaharaan kata) yang sudah dimengerti
Meskipun pada dasarnya metode ini guru tidak boleh menggunakan bahasa sehari-hari dalam menyampaikan bahan pelajaran bahasa asing tapi pada kenyataannya tidak selalu konsisten demikian, guru terpaksa misalnya menterjemahkan kata-kata sulit bahasa asing itu ke dalam bahasa anak didik.

Metode ini sebenarnya tepat sekali digunakan pada tingkat permulaan maupun atas karena si siswa merasa telah memiliki bahan untuk bercakap/cercicara dan tentu saja agar siswa betul-betul merasa tertantang untuk bercakap/berkomunikasi; maka sanksi-sanksi dapat ditetapkan bagi mereka yang menggunakan bahasa sehari-hari.

2. Metode Berlitz (Berlitz Method)

Metode Berlitz (Berlitz Metode) adakah metode langsung (Direct Method) yang selalu digunakan di sekolah-sekolah Berlitz sebagai metode utama.

Semua sekolah-sekolah Berlitz menggunakan metode langsung (direct Method) ini dalam pengajaran bahasa-bahasa asing di sekolahnya dan bnyak lagi sekolah-sekolah lain di Amerika dan Eropa yang secara rutin menerapkan metode ini.

Mereka telah yakin bahwa metode inilah yang paling cocok dan paling berhasil untuk pengajaran bahasa asing agar lebih serasi dan mencapai kemampuan aktif berbahasa asing.

Karena itu metode langsung disebut juga dengan metode Berlitz, sebab sekolah-sekolah berlitz lebih banyak mempopulerkan pemakaian metode ini secara kontinu dan mereka ternyata memang berhasil sangat baik.

3. Metode Alami (Natural Method)

Metode alami (Natural Method) disebut demikian karena dalam proses belajar, siswa dibawa ke alam seperti halnya pelajaran bahasa ibu sendiri

Dalam pelaksanaannya metode ini tidak jauh berbeda dengan metode langsung (direct) dimana guru menyajikan materi pelajaran langsung dalam bahasa asing tanpa diterjemahkan sedikitpun, kecuali dalam hal-hal tertentu di mana kamus dan bahasa anak didik dapat digunakan.

Ciri Metode Natural ini antara lain :
Urutan pelajaran mula-mula diberikan melalui menyimak/mendengarkan (listening) baru kemudian percakapan (speaking), membaca (reading) menulis atau (writing) terahir baru gramatika
 

Pelajaran disajikan mula-mula memperkenalkan kata-kata yang sederhana yang telah diketahui oleh anak didik, kemudian memperkenalkan benda-benda mulai dari benda-benda yang ada di dalam kelas, dirumah dan luar kelas, bahkan mengenal luar negeri atau negara-negara asing terutama Timur Tengah.
Alat peraga dan kamus yang dapat digunakan sewaktu-waktu sangat diperlukan, misalnya untuk menjelaskan dan mengartikan kata-kata sulit dalam bahasa asing, dan memperbanyak perbendaharaan kata-kata atau memperkaya Vocabulary sebagai syarat utama menguasai bahasa asing
Oleh karena kemampuan dan kelancaran membaca dan bercakap-cakap sangat diutamakan dalam metode ini maka pelajaran gramatikal (tata bahasa) kurang diperhatikan
 

Kebaikan Metode Natural

Kebaikan metode ini antara lain :
Pada tingkat lanjutan metode ini sangat efektif, karena setiap individu siswa dibawa ke dalam suasana lingkungan sesungguhnya untuk aktif mendnegarkan dan menggunakan percakapan dalam bahasa asing
Pengajaran membaca dan bercakap-cakap dalam bahasa asing sangat diutamakan, sedangkan pelajaran gramatika diajarkan sewaktu-waktu saja
Pengajaran menjadi bermakna dan mudah diserap oleh siswa, karena setiap kata dan kalimat yang diajarkan memiliki konteks (hubungan) dengan dunia (kehidupan sehari-hari) siswa/anak didik

Segi kekurangan metode ini antara lain :
 

Siswa merasa kesulitan belajar apabila belum memiliki bekal dasar bahasa asing terutama pada pada tingkat-tingkat pemula, sehingga penggunaan/ pemakaian bahasa asli siswa tidak dapat dihindari. Dengan demikian tujuan semua dari metode ini untuk membaca dan bercakap-cakap selalu dalam bahasa asing sulit diterapkan secara murni, tapi harus diterapkan secara konsekuen
Pada umumnya anak didik dan guru bersikap tradisional mengutamakan gramatika lebih dahulu daripada membaca dan percakapan sesuatu hal yang salah secara alamiah yang amat perlu diubah
 

Pada umumnya pengajaran bahasa asing di sekolah-sekolah kita sangat terasa kekurangan macam-macam media/alat peraga yang diperlukan; yang seyogyanya para guru harus aktif membuatnya
Guru yang kurang memiliki kemampuan dan pengalaman praktis dalam berbahasa asing merupakan faktor sulitnya diterapkan dan berhasil secara baik metode tersebut. Guru haruslah seorang yang aktif berbicara di dalam bahasa asing tersebut, barulah murid-muridnya akan mampu pula aktif di dalam belajar (praktek) bahasa.

4. Metode Percakapan (Conversation Method)

Yaitu mengajarkan bahasa asing seperti bahasa Inggris, bahasa Arab atau bahasa-bahasa lainnya yang cara langsung mengajak murid-murid bercakap-cakap/berbicara di dalam bahasa asing yang sedang diajarkan ini. Tentunya dimulai dengan kata-kata atau kalimat-kalimat atau ungkapan-ungkapan yang biasa berlaku pada kegiatan-kegiatan sehari-hari, seperti : Good Morning, How are you? What are you doing? Can you speak English? Dan sebagainya; atau kalimat-kalimat, percakapan di dalam kelas di sekitar sekolah, dirumah di kantor dan sebagainya; semakin lama semakin meluas dan beragam.

Yang namanya berbahasa itu ialah berbicara (sebagai fungsi pokok bahasa); peran kedua barulah membaca/memahami tulisan atau buku.

Jadi fungsi utama belajar bahasa asing itu ialah kemampuan berbahasa aktif, berkomunikasi lisan atau bercakap-cakap. Itulah tujuan utama atau target pokok mempelajari bahasa asing, disusul dengan kemampuan membaca dan memahami atau penguasaan pasif.

Oleh karena itu, metode utama dan pertama di dalam kegiatan belajar mengajar bahasa asing itu semestinya adalah Metode Percakapan (Conversation Method). Metode ini disejalankan dengan Direct Method dan Natural Method, yang pelaksanaanya dengan menerapkan fungsi dan prinsip-prinsip ketentuan dari tiap-tiap metode ini.

Di negara-negara maju seperti AS dan Eropa, orang menerapkan ketiga methode ini sebagai praktek utama ditambah lagi dengan alat peraga/audio visual aids yang mencukupi dan serasi sehingga dalam waktu satu semester telah mampu mengunjungi negara dari bahasa bangsa yang dipelajari, belajar dan praktek selama 1 tahun telah langsung mampu menulis disertai di dalam bahasa asing tersebut.

Jadi disamping metodenya yang serasi, medianya dan buku-buku yang lengkap, gurunya punya kepabelitas tinggi, muridnya pun perlu bersungguh-sungguh belajar serta cerdas. Tanpa keempat syarat tersebut terpenuhi maka orang bertahun-tahun bahkan belasan tahun belajar bahasa asing.

5. Metode Phonetic (Mendengar dan Mengucapkan)

Metode ini mengutamakan ear training dan speak training yaitu cara menyajikan pelajaran bahasa asing melalui latihan-latihan mendengarkan kemudian diikuti dengan latihan-latihan mengucapkan kata-kata dan kalimat dalam bahasa asing yang sedang dipelajari.

Metode Phonetic ini dapat dikatakan gabungan dari dua metode Natural dan Reading diatas. Dimana mula-mula menurut metode ini pelajaran dimulai dengan latihan-latihan mendengar kemudian diikuti dengan latihan-latihan mengucapkan kata-kata atau kalimat-kalimat dalam bahasa asing. Kemudian disusul latihan-latihan membaca (reading and conversation).

Langkah-langkah pelaksanaan metode ini yang dapat dilakukan :
 

Guru membacakan bacaan-bacaan bahasa asing di depan kelas, atau membuka/menghidupkan acara bacaan berupa radio kaset/video, siswa mendengarkan dan memperhatikan baik-baik acara bacaan ini dengan cermat, serius (tidak ada yang main-main saat pembacaan itu), siswa harus memperhatikan betul langgam dan intonasi, serta gerak-gerik bentuk mimik tertentu dalam bacaan
Seri-seri dalam bacaan itu hendaknya disusun sedemikian rupa sehingga menjadi bahan bacaan yang sempurna/berkelanjutan
Guru dapat menghentikan seri-seri tertentu jika seri pelajaran tersebut sudah dianggap selesai dan dikuasai oleh anak didik, kemudian dapat dilanjutkan pada session/seri berikutnya
Setelah pelajaran membaca selesai, maka latihan percakapan dapat dilakukan. Misalnya percakapan-percakapan yang sifatnya mula-mula sederhana, setelah itu menuju pada percakapan yang kompleks/lebih sulit
Untuk memperjelas ucapan dan percakapan, maka metode ini dianjurkan untuk menggunakan alat peraga/media pengajaran
Pada setiap akhir materi pelajaran, guru hendaknya memberikan latihan-latihan praktis membaca dan larihan bercakap-cakap pada masing-masing anak didik, dan jangan lupa guru dapat memberikn berbagai catatan-catatan khusus, kesimpulan-kesimpulan dan juga nasihat-nasihat berupa dorongan (memberi motivasi bagi anak didik) supaya belajar sungguh-sungguh, rajin dan rutin tiap hari latihan (PR)
 

Kebaikan-kebaikan Metode Phonetic
 

Metode ini mengajarkan kemampuan membaca anak didik dengan lancar dan fasih sekaligus kemampuan percakapan, banyak latihan-latihan dialog dan menulis (dikte)
 

Siswa menyimak kesalahan bacaan dan percakapan dari guru atau teman sekelasnya, untuk kemudian diubah dan diperbaiki letak-letak kesalahannya itu
Kekurangan-kekurangan Metode Phonetic
Metode ini memerlukan kesungguhan dan keahlian (profesional) dari pihak guru. Disamping perencanaan dan waktu harus matang
Pada tingkat-tingkat pemula (pertama) metode ini masih sulit diterapkan, terutama bagi anak-anak yang belum memiliki bekal (basic) bahasa asing yang cukup memadai, sebab itu perlu memotivasi murid dan mengajar secara komunikatif
 

Kalau seri-seri pelajaran tidak disusun dan direncanakan sedemikian rupa, maka pelajaran dan penguasaan materi bagi siswa menjadi mengambang; misalnya materi pelajaran membaca diberikan sedikit, juga percakapan pun serba tanggung. Oleh sebab itu pengaturan waktu dan materi hendaknya diatur sedemikian rupa, sehingga keduanya dikuasai

6. Metode Practice – Theory

Metode ini sesuai dengan namanya, lebih menekankan pada kemampuan praktis dari teori. Perbandingan dapat berupa 7 unit materi praktis dan 3 unit materi yang bersifat teoritis. Belajar bahasa asing lebih dulu dan mengutamakan praktek, lalu diiringi dengan teori (tata bahasa).

Jadi disini yang dipentingkan adalah bagaimana siswa/anak didik dapat mampu berbahasa asing itu secara praktis bukan teoritis. Oleh sebab itu pengajaran harus diarahkan pada kemampuan komunikatif atau percakapan, sedangkan gramatika dapat diajarkan sambil lalu saja.

Pada tingkat-tingkat awal materi pelajaran praktis dapat dipilih dan diterapkan pada hal-hal yang sederhana, apakah itu lewat percakapan sehari-hari yang ada hubungannya dengan dunia sekolah anak didik atau lingkungan rumah tangga dan masyarakat lebih luas atau dapat pula menyebutkan rincian nama-nama benda dan kata kera sebagai dasar pembentukan bahasa percakapan.

Sedangkan pada tingkat lanjutan atas materi pelajaran dikembangkan lebih luas dan kompleks melalui percakapan teoritis dan penalaran ilmiah.

Kelebihan-kelebihan Metode Practice-Theory :
 

Siswa memperoleh ketrampilan langsung atau praktis dalam berbahasa asing
Siswa merasa tidak dipusingkan oleh aturan-aturan atau kaidah-kaidah gramatikal karena pelajaran gramatikal hanya diajarkan sambil lalu, sebagai penajam pemahaman
 

Pengajaran dapat dinamis (hidup) dan menyenangkan, apalagi sesekali guru dapat menyelingi dengan percakapan lucu dan media peragaan yang menarik
Paling sesuai dengan alamiah tujuan pengajaran bahasa : yang disebut berbahasa itu ialah berbicara, berkomunikasi lisan

Kekurangan-kekurangan Metode Ptactice Theory
 

Memerlukan guru yang betul-betul mahir dan aktif berbahasa asing
Pada tingkat-tingkat dasar (awal) metode ini masih sulit diterapkan karena perbendaharaan kata dan bahasa anak didik masih terbatas, bahkan terasa kaku. Guru harus memperbanyak menghafalkan pola-pola kalimat yang baik kepada murid-murid
 

Pada umumnya kemampuan aplikatif bahasa asing anak didik sangat ditentukan oleh faktor motivasi dari pihak guru disamping gaya dan simpatik kepribadian guru. Dan ini jarang dimiliki dalam satu pribadi guru. Guru perlu sering memotivasi anak didik disela-sela mengajar bahasa asing (Inggris/Arab)
Kekurangan media peraga sebagai penguat persepsi dan ingatan dapat merupakan sisi lain kekurangan metode ini

7. Metode Membaca (Reading Method)

Metode membaca (Reading Method) yaitu menyajikan materi pelajaran dengan cara lebih dulu mengutamakan membaca, yakni guru mula-mula membacakan topik-topik bacaan, kemudian diikuti oleh siswa anak didik. Tapi kadang-kadang guru dapat menunjuk langsung anak didik untuk membacakan pelajaran tertentu lebih dulu, dan tentu siswa lain memperhatikan dan mengikutinya.

Teknik metode membaca (Reading Method) ini dapat dilakukan dengan cara guru langsung membacakan materi pelajaran dan siswa disuruh memperhatikan/ mendengarkan bacaan-bacaan gurunya dengan baik, setelah itu guru menunjuk salah satu di antara siswa untuk membacakannya, dengan jalan berganti-ganti (bergiliran).

Setelah masing-masing siswa mendapat giliran membaca, maka guru mengulangi bacaan itu sekali lagi dengan diikuti oleh semua siswa hal ini terutama pada tingkat-tingkat pertama; lalu kemudian guru mencatatkan kata-kata sulit atau baru yang belum diketahui siswa di papan tulis untuk dicatat di buku catatan untuk memperkaya perbendaharaan kata-kata dan begitulah selanjutnya, hingga selesai topik-topik yang telah ditetapkan/ditentukan.
 

Kebaikan Metode Reading/Membaca

Jika dibandingkan dengan metode-metode lain, maka metode ini memiliki segi kelebihan/kebaikan-kebaikan antara lain :
Siswa dapat dengan lancar membaca dan memahami bacaan-bacaan berbahasa asing dengan fasih dan benar
Siswa dapat menggunakan intonasi bacaan bahasa asing sesuai dengan kaidah membaca yang benar
Tentu saja dengan pelajaranmembaca tersebut siswa diharapkan mampu pula menerjemahkan kata-kata atau memahami kalimat-kalimat bahasa asing yang diajarkan, dengan demikian pengetahuan dan penguasaan bahasa anak menjadi utuh
 

Kekurangan Metode Reasing/Membaca
 

Pada metode membaca ini, untuk tingkat-tingkat pemula terasa agak sukar diterapkan, karena siswa masing sangat asing untuk membiasakan lidahnya, sehingga kadang-kadang harus terpaksa untuk berkali-kali menuntun dan mengulang-ulang kata dan kalimat yang sulit ditiru oleh lidah siswa yang bukan dari bahasa asing yang sedang diajarkan. Dan dengan demikian metode ini relatif banyak menyita waktu.
 

Dilihat dari segi penguasaan bahasa, metode reading lebih menitikberatkan pada kemampuan siswa untuk mengucapkan/melafalkan kata-kata dalam kalimat-kalimat bahasa asing yang benar dan lancar. Adapun arti dan makna kata dan kalimat kadang-kadang kurang diutamakan. Hal ini dapat berarti pengajaran terlalu bersifat Verbalisme
 

Pengajaran sering terasa memboankan, terutama apabila guru yang mengajarkan tidak simpatik/metode diterapkan secara tidak menarik bagi siswa. Dari segi tensi suarapun kadang-kadang cukup menjenuhkan karena masing-masing guru dan siswa terus-menerus membaca topik-topik pelajaran. Oleh karena metode ini memiliki segi kekurangan yang berarti, maka perlu diperhatikan hal-hal yang berikut :
 

Hendaknya pokok-pokok materi yang akan disajikan senantiasa disesuaikan dengan taraf perkembangan dan kemampuan siswa pada tingkat tertentu. Pilih topik dan materi pelajaran yang menarik hati bagi para siswa/yang sesuai dengan keinginan jiwa mereka
 

Untuk menghindari verbalisme dalam pengajaran maka guru hendaknya dapat mengartikan/menerjemahkan kata-kata atau kalimat-kalimat yang belum dimengerti/pahami siswa dalam bacaan-bacaan tersebut
Pada umumnya alat peraga/media pengajaran berupa pengeras suara, radio tape/kaset, video dan alat-alat sejenisnya sangat membantu mempercepat/ memperlambat lidah/bacaan siswa. Disamping itu dengan alat peraga, pengajaran menjadi menarik dan tidak membosankan.
Buku-buku bacaan dapat dipilih dan disusun sedemikian rupa hingga menarik/menyenangkan siswa. Pada umumnya bacaan berupa novel, cerpen (cerita-cerita), pepatah, hikmah-hikmah dalam bahasa asing, ilmu pengetahuan dan lain-lain sangat menarik untuk bahan bacaan, terutama pada tingkat-tingkat pemula; pada tingkat-tingkat lanjutan bacaan-bacaan dapat diarahkan pada yang bersifat ilmiah/pemikiran.

8. Metode Bicara Lisan (Oral Method)

Metode ini adalah hampir sama dengan metode phonetic dan reform method, tetapi pada orak method adalah menitikberatkan pada latihan-latihan lisan atau penuturan-penutuan dengan mulut. Melatih untuk bisa lancar berbicara (fluently), keserasian dan spontanitas

Melatih lisan/mulut agar pengucapan bahasa asing itu bisa tepat bunyi, tidak kedengaran janggal. Latihan-latihan Sistem bunyi melalui bibir, melatih tepatnya keluarnya huruf-huruf kerongkongan, huruf-huruf di ujung atau di pangkal lidah dan sebagainya

Latihan-latihan menyusun kata-kata membuat kalimat sendiri dan sebagainya, semua dilakukan dengan mengaktifkan bicara lisan, oral, speaking

Target yang hendak dicapai melalui metode ini ialah keammpuan dan kelancaran berbahasa lisan atau berbicara lisan atau berkomunikasi langsung sebagai fungsi utama bahasa

Prinsip metode ini ialah : Teach the language, don’t teach only about the language.
 

9. Metode Praktek Pola-pola Kalimat (Pattern-Practice Method)

Penerapan terpenting metode ini ialah dengan melatih murid-murid secara praktek langsung mengucapkan pola-pola kalimat yang sudah tersusun baik betul, atau mengerjakan sebagaimana yang dimaksud oleh pola kalimat tersebut.

Jadi pola-pola kalimat yang mengandung arti, telah lebih dulu disediakan atau disusun secara serasi dari yang mudah, secara berangsung-angsur sampai sulit; dan bahan perbendaharaan kata-kata yang sederhana sampai yang rumit. Murid-murid memang harus aktif mengucapkan, melakukan sampai menjadi kebiasaan, sehingga menghayati pola-pola kalimat tersebut sampai membudaya.

Semestinya guru itu adalah seorang Bilingual (yang mengusai dua bahasa atau lebih sampai dihayati), yakni bahasa asing yang diajarkan dan bahasa Indonesia, dengan kemampuan yang sebenar-benarnya. Pertama-tama guru membanding-bandingkan kedua bahasa, misalnya bahasa Arab dengan bahasa Indonesia, tentang kata-kata yang sama, cara-cara pengucapan sistem tata bahasa, arti, bunyi dan seterusnya dan memberi penjelasan-penjelasan. Dari bahasa dwi-bahasa (bilingual) diuraikan dan dipilih pola-pola kalimat dengan bunyi-bunyi tertentu untuk mater drill atau bahan-bahan latihan yang intensif. Susunlah pola-pola kalimat yang baik, dan ditambah terus perbendaharaan kata-kata, sehingga menggarkan sesuatu situasi atau cerita. Latihlah secara berulang-ulang dan sampai setiap siswa mendapat giliran. Para siswa dilatih mengucapkan pola-pola kalimat sampai benar-benar memahami dan menghayati arti/maksudnya serta hafal-lancar tanpa berpikir-pikir menyusun kalimat sendiri.

Setelah itu murid-murid perlu dilatih pula Listening untuk mencapai kepekaan pendengaran (Listening, dll).

Seterusnya latihan-latihan speaking (speaking drill) untuk kelancaran berbicara, reading drill untuk mencapai bacaan-bacaan yang betul, dan Writing Drill yakni latihan-latihan menulis secara benar, menghindarkan salah-salah di dalam menulis ejaan atau huruf. Latihan-latihan listening, speaking, reading and writing ini amat diperlukan mengiringi pada hampir semua macam metode mengajar bahasa asing, khususnya bahasa Inggris dan Arab.

Metode ini seperti yang dipraktekkan pada buku-buku pelajaran bahasa Inggris antara lain English 900, English 901 dan sebagainya dan dianggap sebagai yang paling sesuai dengan alamiah pengajaran bahasa asing.

Sumber : http://abudira.wordpress.com