AN ANALYZE OF STUDENTS’ CRITICAL THINKING IN SPEAKING THROUGH DEBATE AT ENGLISH MEETING CLUB OF MAN 2 PAREPARE

The purpose of the research is to describe the students’ critical thinking. The research is a descriptive method which aims to categorize the students’ critical thinking level and involve the participant of students’ English meeting club. The instrument for collecting data of the research is rubric scoring of students' critical thinking based on Ficione which includes interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and self-Examination in debate method. The result revealed that average percentage of all items in the first meeting till the third meeting were at a fair with a high percentage Interpretation 50%, Analysis 56.2%, Inference 50%, Evaluation 56.2%, Explanation, 56.2% and Self-Examination 62,6%. On the other side, the students’ critical thinking dominated at weak level. Even if it is not showing the significant improvement but, in every meeting, the students that conclude in weak level was subtracted in 75% to 68.8% and last 62.5% as well as the students in Acceptable level there are two students arise in the last meeting. Thus, it can be concluded that the students’ critical thinking of the English meeting club of MAN 2 Parepare was the majority in the weak level.


Introduction
Today we enter the revolution of 4.0. Where the sophistication of information technology is developing so rapidly. So that this affects all aspects of society, namely economic, social, and political. Therefore, we must have preparation to face compete and to seize opportunities.
One way to prepare yourself is to learn English. English is the language most often used throughout the world. English is also prioritized in each line of office work, administration, education, etc. A foreign language is an additional language learned by the speaker, but is not applied in the speaker's area as the priority. Indonesia is the country that makes English as a foreign language. We often stop to learn English and just focus on the skill parts only such as in speaking, writing, listening and reading. Whereas we can also develop many things in English, one of them is critical thinking that can be implemented with the debate method.
The countries that use English as a foreign language need effective activities which propel students to practice skills of the language properly inside and outside classrooms.
Debating is a practice that inspires learners to open their mouth, get into discussion, defend their own positions, place counter arguments and also conduct research on related issues.
While debating in English, the debaters get involved in a challenging and thrilling activity; they find themselves well-conversant in the aforesaid language.
Debate is an excellent activity for language learning because it engages students in a variety of cognitive and linguistic ways. Besides providing meaningful listening, speaking and writing practice, debate is also highly effective for developing argumentation skills for persuasive speech and writing.
Based on words above that in the debate method we can open new spaces as ideas development, discussion and will lead to one thing that will be very prominent when this method is implemented, namely a critical way of thinking that will make debaters see more aspects and solutions in each case and issues to be dissected.
Critical thinking skills and/or higher order thinking have received much attention from educationalists, researchers, employers, and mass media during these past several years.
Critical thinking skills have been recognized as essential skills for the growing workforce of the 21st century. There are more needs for staff and personnel that are equipped with advanced critical thinking skills, negotiation and problem-solving skills and superior communicative competence. Besides mastering English as a foreign language, an important point on which this research is based is that students can use English to hone their ability to think critically to create new ideas and ideas that are needed by the environment and many people.
In this research, the researcher will take speaking as the way of students to deliver their opinion, argument or even idea. Speaking is one of the most important aspects of English skill as well. For example, by oral speaking, the student doing real communication to the native speaker to see how far they can use English to be their secondary or foreign language.
Based on the explanations above, the researcher had motivation to research about the Critical Thinking of the students at the second grade of MAN 2 Parepare. Hopefully by this research will be the appropriate for the teacher to help them to conduct the better method to interact the students to having more understanding of English.
MAN 2 Parepare is the one of an Islamic school in Parepare. There are some of the students' organization that can help the students to increase their soft skill. English meeting club include of them which train the students in many divisions such as speech, scrabble, and debate. The students usually join in English competition that stated in this organization as the representative or the candidate of the school. So that the researcher interest to analyze the critical thinking of students in this English meeting club. Based on the explanations above, the researcher had motivated to analyze the students' critical thinking in speaking through debate in the English meeting club of MAN 2 Parepare.
Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.
Yasushi Gotoh said critical thinking as the set of skills and dispositions which enable one to solve problems logically and to reflect autonomously by metacognitive regulation on one's own problem-solving processes.
Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. It is thus to be contrasted with: 1) the mere acquisition and retention of information alone, because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated; 2) the mere possession of skills, because it involves the continual use of them; and 3) the mere use of those skills ('as an exercise') without acceptance of their results.
In detail, Facione explains that there are six components of Critical Thinking involves Interpretation is to comprehend and express the meaning or significance of a wide variety of "experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures, or criteria", Analysis is the experts infer examining ideas, detecting arguments, and analyzing arguments as sub-skills of analysis. Inference is the experts involve querying evidence, conjecturing alternatives, and drawing conclusions as sub-skills. Evaluation is judging about the arguments whether it is reliable and rational based on the logic and evidence given.
Explanation is the ability to communicate and be present in a cogent and coherent way. Self-Examination is the ability to monitor and correct flaws in logic.
According to the statement of the expert on, the researcher concludes that Critical Thinking is the skill to think logical, systematic, productive also structured and can have well consideration and conclusion to face any cases. Then, the components conclude Interpretation, Analysis, Evaluation, Inference, Explanation, and Self-Examination.

Interpretation
To comprehend and express the meaning or significance of a wide variety of experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures or criteria. Interpretation is an ability to understand and re-describe the meaning of conditions, information, or messages that are received. In this research, the interpretation is how the students will express the idea that comprises the stance side of its own position.

Analysis
To identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions or other forms of representation intended to express beliefs, judgments, experiences, reasons, information, or opinions. In this part, analysis is observing and deciphering the topic and then will express it more.

Evaluation
To assess the credibility of statements or other representations, which are accounts or descriptions of a person's perception, experience, situation, judgment, belief, or opinion; and to assess the logical strength of the actual or intend inferential relationships among statements, descriptions, questions or other forms of representation. Evaluation is the ability for the students to structure assessment to attain an appropriate considers and measured the issues.

Inference
It is necessary to identify and secure elements to draw reasonable conclusions. To form conjectures and hypotheses; to consider relevant information and to reduce the consequences flowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation. Inference means the conclusion point of the students according to the issue that has been correlated or considered by the assessment of the topic.

Explanation
To state the results of one's reasoning; to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteria, logical and contextual considerations upon which one's results were based; and to present one's reasoning as cogent arguments.
Explanation toward the topic should be clearly then the aim will be delivered with strongly understandable reason.

Self-Examination
Self-consciously to monitor one's cognitive activities, the elements used in those activities, and the results educed, particularly by applying skills in analysis and evaluation to one's own inferential judgments with a view toward questioning, confirming, validating, or correcting either's reasoning or one's results. Self-Examination is self-managing ability to take an idea to the topic.
According to Steinberg, debate is "process of inquiry and advocacy of a way of arriving at a reason judgment to preposition". People debate by explaining a concept of idea using a persuasive manner through his ability to speak. A debate is a speaking situation in which opposite points of view are presented and argued, Dale and Wolf.

The American Format
According to Shuster, American parliamentary debate is, "a debate which include two terms, one on a side proposition which support the motion (the motions known as debate) and another side in side of opposition which against the motion", for each debate, a motion is announced and terms are given a period to prepare debate. The typical time for preparation is thirty minutes, although there are variations in several debate tournaments. The debate started when the preparation time is ended.

The British Format
According to Shuster, British parliamentary is side of motion". The terms inside of the debate are dividing into two terms in the affirmative side and two teams in negative side.
For each debate, a motion is announced and terms are given a period to prepare the debate.
The typical time for preparation is fifteen minutes. The debate started when the preparation time is ended.

Method
The researcher used descriptive method as the method of this research. It refers to describe the analysis of student' critical thinking in speaking by measure it used the Components of critical Thinking. The participants in this research were the students that coming from the English Meeting club of MAN 2 Parepare, which comprised 16 students that have already analyzed by the researcher.
The instruments that used in this research were motion preparation and rubric scoring analysis. The motion preparations were given to know how the students critically explain it and the rubric scoring analysis, which based on Facione theory, was used to know students' category and component of critical thinking. The researcher begun the debate towards the motion preparations while recording their voice in the tape record.

Discussion
The result in the first meeting there were 4 students that included in Unacceptable and 12 students in low position or in weak level in critical thinking category based on the interval score. In Acceptable and strong level no student was included in that category. In the second meeting that the calculation of student in weak level was going down around 6.2% which meant one of them has included in unacceptable level. Even if there was no significant increasing but in the second meeting, the students understood the motion and correlate it to their own self and their real life. In the third meeting16 students there were 10 students or 62.5% in the weak category, 4 students or 25% in the Unacceptable category and 2 students in the acceptable category. No students that included in the strong category. It aimed some students have done better than previous meeting. In an acceptable category purposed to the student, which had critical ideas or good argumentation to clarify the motion and what they would like to deliver and stand with. It was very well improvement that the student shows it better than their own previous meeting.
Based the Result of students' critical thinking in speaking it would be identifiable that no one student in the strong category and was dominated in weak level category but some of them stand in acceptable and unacceptable category which meant that most of them still had deficient critical thinking. Besides, this method could help them as well as their diligence to train it as often as they could.
The result of the students' component of critical thinking in the first meeting was most of the students barely on good level performed the meaning, situation, data, events, judgments, conventions, belief, rules or procedure. Most of the students in the average, fair also poor category of each category. In the second meeting, the most students in the fair level that percentage over 30 percent in every component and no one student stayed in the excellent or even the very poor level. In the second meeting, several of the students move to the better places but it is still on average indeed. It was because even they had explained their argumentation; it did not exact to the topic, or they bound at one idea without clear additional evidence to support their explanation. In the third meeting, no students enter the excellent as well as very poor level. Although anyone students were fulfilled at the highest level of each component which was aimed, their score was not deserve for it.
The researcher was holding analysis in students' critical thinking of the students by conducting the debate told debate with the topic to the students while the researcher pay attention to the students' statement or argument during the debate which one of the students' idea that correlate to the components of critical Thinking, or how the student will do a good structuring to the delivered their performance based on the result of the building case they had already done.
The researcher found that only a few students that had critical thinking in the Unacceptable, which aimed that the students didn't fulfill the components well. Majority of them lack on interpretation and the evidence of the cases that given to them. For example, they just performed about the assertion but did not prepare the valid data or few of the student had not clearly explanation toward the topic.
Majority of the students did not achieve the excellent of the component level of the critical thinking which shows in the previous table. Most of them categorized at average, fair also poor level in each component. The student asked to explore the idea, argument, evidence and clear stance on the position they had. However, they did not have a deep analysis of the issues or cases.
As well as the explanation, they did not clearly explain the point of the view. For example, mention the assertion, performed the reason, but lack of evidence even experience on themselves also the environment of society. That was the reason affected by their result none of strong components were the students attained.
Same problem happened to the students' analysis. They were not had structure and precious analysis of the topic. Most of them are weak in structuring their reason and their evidence. When they brought the argument, they just said some point and lack of explaining well the reason behind the point of their idea. That was affected by their results that stayed in fair but none of them in very poor level.

Conclusion
Majority of the students' critical thinking in English club meeting of MAN 2 Parepare was in the weak level it showed from the percentage of students in the first meeting there were 75%, in the second meeting 31.2% and in the third meeting 62.5% students showed the weak level dominated the students result. It was because the students did not demand every component, especially in a clear explanation of the students' view. But it showed that few of them had an acceptable level of critical thinking and the data in the third meeting, which 12.5% students categorized at that level.
Based on the components of critical thinking, the researcher found that the student in the fair and poor category was dominated. Only five students that entered to the good category in interpretation, explanation, and self-examination, while the rest of components was in fair levels in the first meeting. But, during the debate, the researcher saw the students had good significant improvement toward each component. It was because the student was accustomed to the analysis process. Interpretation is a component that significantly increased.
For example, good and average was the dominate level of component in critical thinking.