Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2093
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v12i4.1801
The impact of Debate Activities to Enhance Speaking Skills
on B1 learners at La Salle High School
El impacto de las actividades de debate para mejorar las habilidades orales en los
alumnos B1 de la Escuela Secundaria La Salle
Eric Fernando Martínez Maya
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4173-3183
efmartinezm@ube.edu.ec
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador – Riobamba
Johnny Segundo Campoverde López
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0108-4755
jscampoverdel@ube.edu.ec
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador – Guayaquil
Josué Reinaldo Bonilla Tenesaca
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2345
jrbonillat@ube.edu.ec
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador – Guayaquil
Artículo recibido: 18 septiembre 2025 -Aceptado para publicación: 28 octubre 2025
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
This study aims to investigate the implementation and effects of debate activities focusing on
proficiency, confidence and possible anxiety. Employing a qualitative and quantitative approach,
drawing insights from case studies and experimental designs, the research observes the
development of students speaking skills across various components such as fluency, grammar,
vocabulary, pronunciation and comprehension. Findings from relevant studies consistently
indicate that engagement in such activities leads to significant improvements in oral
communication, fosters critical thinking, enhances collaborative skills, and notably reduces
speaking anxiety. The sustained practice and structured environment of debates empower learners
to articulate ideas more effectively and confidently, suggesting that integrating debate is a highly
effective pedagogical strategy for B1 EFL learners. This exploration aims to provide a
comprehensive understanding of how these dynamic activities contribute to overall language
competence and a positive learning attitude.
Keywords: speaking proficiency, debate technique, persuasive speaking, B1 learners,
speaking anxiety
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2094
RESUMEN
Este estudio tiene como objetivo investigar la implementación y los efectos de las actividades de
debate, centrándose en la competencia, la confianza y la posible ansiedad. Empleando un enfoque
cualitativo y cuantitativo, y extrayendo información de estudios de caso y diseños experimentales,
la investigación observa el desarrollo de las habilidades orales de los estudiantes en diversos
componentes como la fluidez, la gramática, el vocabulario, la pronunciación y la comprensión.
Los hallazgos de estudios relevantes indican de manera consistente que la participación en este
tipo de actividades conduce a mejoras significativas en la comunicación oral, fomenta el
pensamiento crítico, mejora las habilidades colaborativas y reduce notablemente la ansiedad al
hablar. La práctica sostenida y el entorno estructurado de los debates empoderan a los estudiantes
para articular ideas de manera más efectiva y segura, lo que sugiere que integrar el debate es una
estrategia pedagógica altamente eficaz para estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera en nivel
B1. Esta exploración busca ofrecer una comprensión integral de cómo estas actividades dinámicas
contribuyen a la competencia lingüística general y a una actitud positiva hacia el aprendizaje.
Palabras clave: competencia oral, técnica de debate, discurso persuasivo, estudiantes B1,
ansiedad al hablar
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
RESUMEN
Este estudio tiene como objetivo investigar la implementación y los efectos de las actividades de
debate, centrándose en la competencia, la confianza y la posible ansiedad. Empleando un enfoque
cualitativo y cuantitativo, y extrayendo información de estudios de caso y diseños experimentales,
la investigación observa el desarrollo de las habilidades orales de los estudiantes en diversos
componentes como la fluidez, la gramática, el vocabulario, la pronunciación y la comprensión.
Los hallazgos de estudios relevantes indican de manera consistente que la participación en este
tipo de actividades conduce a mejoras significativas en la comunicación oral, fomenta el
pensamiento crítico, mejora las habilidades colaborativas y reduce notablemente la ansiedad al
hablar. La práctica sostenida y el entorno estructurado de los debates empoderan a los estudiantes
para articular ideas de manera más efectiva y segura, lo que sugiere que integrar el debate es una
estrategia pedagógica altamente eficaz para estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera en nivel
B1. Esta exploración busca ofrecer una comprensión integral de cómo estas actividades dinámicas
contribuyen a la competencia lingüística general y a una actitud positiva hacia el aprendizaje.
Palabras clave: competencia oral, técnica de debate, discurso persuasivo, estudiantes B1,
ansiedad al hablar
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2095
INTRODUCTION
The ability to communicate effectively in a foreign language remains one of the most
essential competencies for learners navigating increasingly globalized educational and
professional environments. Within this context, effective oral communication remains a central
objective in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education. It encompasses not only fluency but
also the confidence to convey ideas meaningfully in social and academic settings. Within the
communicative competence framework, speaking is one of the most complex and vital language
skills (Gonzalez, 2024). In B1-level learners, speaking ability serves as a significant indicator of
language development, as students at this level must be able to handle daily communicative tasks
using clear and structured language.
Research consistently emphasizes that active speaking practice especially through
interactive strategies like debates as this enhances learner motivation, language processing, and
expressive competence (Rica & Indra, 2021). Debate, as a structured and competitive oral activity,
offers multiple cognitive, linguistic, and social benefits. It provides opportunities for learners to
develop fluency, argumentation, critical thinking, and collaboration (Afri et al., 2021; Ghalib &
Mohammed, 2023). Importantly, it also addresses common affective filters such as anxiety,
shyness, and fear of making mistakes, which frequently hinder speaking progress in traditional
classrooms (Dieu, 2024).
Despite the growing recognition of debate's pedagogical value, many EFL classrooms,
especially in Latin America, continue to rely on teacher-centered approaches that restrict student
interaction. The Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) model dominates, often marginalizing
student voice and reducing communicative risk-taking (Sako & Shinozaki, 2023). This issue is
particularly critical at the B1 level, where students may possess enough vocabulary and grammar
but lack confidence and real-world practice. Therefore, student-centered interventions as in the
case of debate is necessary to bridge the gap between passive knowledge and active performance
(Iman, 2017).
Previous studies have examined the impact of debate techniques on university students,
adult learners, and beginners in EFL contexts. Amiri et al. (2017) reported that structured debate
improved ESL learners’ fluency, self-awareness of grammar, and interactive strategies. Ghalib
and Mohammed (2023), in a study with low-level university students, found measurable gains in
fluency, vocabulary use, and confidence. Similarly, Afri et al. (2021) concluded that debate
activities significantly enhance student participation and reduce anxiety. However, there is still a
limited body of literature focused specifically on high school B1 learners in private institutions
within Latin America.
This study aims to fill that gap by investigating how debate can affect the speaking skills
of B1 learners at La Salle High School. It explores how this activity influence not only linguistic
INTRODUCTION
The ability to communicate effectively in a foreign language remains one of the most
essential competencies for learners navigating increasingly globalized educational and
professional environments. Within this context, effective oral communication remains a central
objective in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education. It encompasses not only fluency but
also the confidence to convey ideas meaningfully in social and academic settings. Within the
communicative competence framework, speaking is one of the most complex and vital language
skills (Gonzalez, 2024). In B1-level learners, speaking ability serves as a significant indicator of
language development, as students at this level must be able to handle daily communicative tasks
using clear and structured language.
Research consistently emphasizes that active speaking practice especially through
interactive strategies like debates as this enhances learner motivation, language processing, and
expressive competence (Rica & Indra, 2021). Debate, as a structured and competitive oral activity,
offers multiple cognitive, linguistic, and social benefits. It provides opportunities for learners to
develop fluency, argumentation, critical thinking, and collaboration (Afri et al., 2021; Ghalib &
Mohammed, 2023). Importantly, it also addresses common affective filters such as anxiety,
shyness, and fear of making mistakes, which frequently hinder speaking progress in traditional
classrooms (Dieu, 2024).
Despite the growing recognition of debate's pedagogical value, many EFL classrooms,
especially in Latin America, continue to rely on teacher-centered approaches that restrict student
interaction. The Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) model dominates, often marginalizing
student voice and reducing communicative risk-taking (Sako & Shinozaki, 2023). This issue is
particularly critical at the B1 level, where students may possess enough vocabulary and grammar
but lack confidence and real-world practice. Therefore, student-centered interventions as in the
case of debate is necessary to bridge the gap between passive knowledge and active performance
(Iman, 2017).
Previous studies have examined the impact of debate techniques on university students,
adult learners, and beginners in EFL contexts. Amiri et al. (2017) reported that structured debate
improved ESL learners’ fluency, self-awareness of grammar, and interactive strategies. Ghalib
and Mohammed (2023), in a study with low-level university students, found measurable gains in
fluency, vocabulary use, and confidence. Similarly, Afri et al. (2021) concluded that debate
activities significantly enhance student participation and reduce anxiety. However, there is still a
limited body of literature focused specifically on high school B1 learners in private institutions
within Latin America.
This study aims to fill that gap by investigating how debate can affect the speaking skills
of B1 learners at La Salle High School. It explores how this activity influence not only linguistic
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2096
features like fluency, grammar, and pronunciation but also affective dimensions such as
confidence and anxiety. The ultimate goal is to provide a context-specific pedagogical model that
can improve speaking performance among intermediate-level EFL learners.
Research context
Unidad Educativa La Salle is a private Catholic institution located in the city of Riobamba,
Chimborazo province, Ecuador. It forms part of the international La Salle educational network,
which is renowned for its holistic approach to learning, emphasizing academic excellence,
personal integrity, and social responsibility. The school serves students from early childhood
education to the final year of high school, offering a comprehensive curriculum grounded in
Christian values and focused on forming ethical, reflective, and competent individuals.
As a private institution, La Salle Riobamba is distinguished by several characteristics that
make it a suitable context for educational research. Firstly, it maintains a bilingual education
policy, with English taught as a foreign language throughout all academic levels. By the upper
grades (from 10th EGB to 3rd BGU), students are expected to reach an intermediate proficiency
level aligned with the B1-B2 descriptors of the Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages (CEFR). The school’s emphasis on communicative competence is reflected in its
curricular design, which encourages the integration of student-centered methodologies.
The school is technologically equipped, offering access to digital resources and platforms
that support interactive teaching and learning. It promotes an inclusive environment, with students
from diverse socio-economic backgrounds. Extracurricular activities such as academic contests,
cultural events, and public speaking opportunities further enrich the educational experience. In
total, the school serves approximately 950 students, with around 400 enrolled in upper secondary
education.
Given its commitment to academic innovation and the development of global
competencies, La Salle Riobamba provides a fertile ground for exploring the implementation of
a debate strategy. This research takes advantage of the school’s institutional strengths such as its
bilingual program, structured curriculum, and openness to methodological experimentation to
examine how dynamic speaking activities can improve English language proficiency among B1
learners.
Goal of the study
The main objective of this study is:
To analyze the impact of debate activities on the speaking proficiency of B1-level English
learners at Unidad Educativa La Salle Riobamba.
This objective focuses on examining how these oral communication strategies, when
applied in a structured and consistent manner, can enhance both the linguistic and affective
dimensions of students’ speaking abilities. It encompasses the observation of improvements in
features like fluency, grammar, and pronunciation but also affective dimensions such as
confidence and anxiety. The ultimate goal is to provide a context-specific pedagogical model that
can improve speaking performance among intermediate-level EFL learners.
Research context
Unidad Educativa La Salle is a private Catholic institution located in the city of Riobamba,
Chimborazo province, Ecuador. It forms part of the international La Salle educational network,
which is renowned for its holistic approach to learning, emphasizing academic excellence,
personal integrity, and social responsibility. The school serves students from early childhood
education to the final year of high school, offering a comprehensive curriculum grounded in
Christian values and focused on forming ethical, reflective, and competent individuals.
As a private institution, La Salle Riobamba is distinguished by several characteristics that
make it a suitable context for educational research. Firstly, it maintains a bilingual education
policy, with English taught as a foreign language throughout all academic levels. By the upper
grades (from 10th EGB to 3rd BGU), students are expected to reach an intermediate proficiency
level aligned with the B1-B2 descriptors of the Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages (CEFR). The school’s emphasis on communicative competence is reflected in its
curricular design, which encourages the integration of student-centered methodologies.
The school is technologically equipped, offering access to digital resources and platforms
that support interactive teaching and learning. It promotes an inclusive environment, with students
from diverse socio-economic backgrounds. Extracurricular activities such as academic contests,
cultural events, and public speaking opportunities further enrich the educational experience. In
total, the school serves approximately 950 students, with around 400 enrolled in upper secondary
education.
Given its commitment to academic innovation and the development of global
competencies, La Salle Riobamba provides a fertile ground for exploring the implementation of
a debate strategy. This research takes advantage of the school’s institutional strengths such as its
bilingual program, structured curriculum, and openness to methodological experimentation to
examine how dynamic speaking activities can improve English language proficiency among B1
learners.
Goal of the study
The main objective of this study is:
To analyze the impact of debate activities on the speaking proficiency of B1-level English
learners at Unidad Educativa La Salle Riobamba.
This objective focuses on examining how these oral communication strategies, when
applied in a structured and consistent manner, can enhance both the linguistic and affective
dimensions of students’ speaking abilities. It encompasses the observation of improvements in
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2097
fluency, accuracy, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension, as well as changes in learners’
confidence and levels of anxiety.
Based on this general aim, the study outlines two specific objectives:
The first specific objective is: “To evaluate the effectiveness of debate as a pedagogical
tool in improving key aspects of speaking proficiency, such as spontaneous speech production,
vocabulary usage, and pronunciation clarity.” The goal is to measure tangible progress in students'
oral performance through the implementation of debate practices.
The second specific objective is: “To promote the operational impact of participating in
debates on students’ speaking proficiency by analyzing self-confidence, levels of anxiety and
motivation to communicate in English.” These objectives are aligned with the instruments that
will be applied, including speaking tests and learner perception surveys, to generate both
quantitative and qualitative data that support the overall analysis.
Research question
The central research question that guides this study is:
- What measurable improvements in spontaneous speech production, vocabulary usage, and
pronunciation clarity can be observed in learners who participate in structured debate
sessions?
This question aims to explore the effects of implementing student-centered oral
communication strategies on both linguistic competence and affective outcomes within a high
school EFL context.
Variable definition
The present study involves two main variables: the independent variable—Debate
Activities—and the dependent variable—Speaking Proficiency.
Independent Variable: Debate Activities
The independent variable refers to the use of structured and competitive oral tasks designed
to encourage students to express ideas, evaluate different viewpoints, and defend arguments
within a communicative framework. Debate activities promote persuasive speaking,
argumentation, and critical thinking while providing a meaningful context for authentic language
use. As noted by Iman (2017), debate instruction in EFL classrooms enhances learners’ critical
thinking and speaking skills by encouraging active participation, collaboration, and linguistic
creativity. In this study, debate activities were operationalized through weekly sessions where
students engaged in argument mapping, rebuttals, and persuasive speeches based on relevant
social and academic topics.
Dependent Variable: Speaking Proficiency
The dependent variable represents learners’ ability to communicate effectively in English
through spoken interaction. Speaking proficiency encompasses several linguistic components,
including fluency, grammatical accuracy, vocabulary range, pronunciation, and comprehension.
fluency, accuracy, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension, as well as changes in learners’
confidence and levels of anxiety.
Based on this general aim, the study outlines two specific objectives:
The first specific objective is: “To evaluate the effectiveness of debate as a pedagogical
tool in improving key aspects of speaking proficiency, such as spontaneous speech production,
vocabulary usage, and pronunciation clarity.” The goal is to measure tangible progress in students'
oral performance through the implementation of debate practices.
The second specific objective is: “To promote the operational impact of participating in
debates on students’ speaking proficiency by analyzing self-confidence, levels of anxiety and
motivation to communicate in English.” These objectives are aligned with the instruments that
will be applied, including speaking tests and learner perception surveys, to generate both
quantitative and qualitative data that support the overall analysis.
Research question
The central research question that guides this study is:
- What measurable improvements in spontaneous speech production, vocabulary usage, and
pronunciation clarity can be observed in learners who participate in structured debate
sessions?
This question aims to explore the effects of implementing student-centered oral
communication strategies on both linguistic competence and affective outcomes within a high
school EFL context.
Variable definition
The present study involves two main variables: the independent variable—Debate
Activities—and the dependent variable—Speaking Proficiency.
Independent Variable: Debate Activities
The independent variable refers to the use of structured and competitive oral tasks designed
to encourage students to express ideas, evaluate different viewpoints, and defend arguments
within a communicative framework. Debate activities promote persuasive speaking,
argumentation, and critical thinking while providing a meaningful context for authentic language
use. As noted by Iman (2017), debate instruction in EFL classrooms enhances learners’ critical
thinking and speaking skills by encouraging active participation, collaboration, and linguistic
creativity. In this study, debate activities were operationalized through weekly sessions where
students engaged in argument mapping, rebuttals, and persuasive speeches based on relevant
social and academic topics.
Dependent Variable: Speaking Proficiency
The dependent variable represents learners’ ability to communicate effectively in English
through spoken interaction. Speaking proficiency encompasses several linguistic components,
including fluency, grammatical accuracy, vocabulary range, pronunciation, and comprehension.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2098
According to Ceneciro et al. (2023), speaking in a foreign language involves both linguistic
competence and affective dimensions such as confidence and reduced anxiety, which are essential
for meaningful communication. In this research, speaking proficiency was assessed using CEFR-
aligned pre- and post-tests, oral performance rubrics, and classroom observations to evaluate
students’ development across these linguistic and affective domains.
The Importance of Speaking in Language Learning
Speaking is a fundamental component of effective communication, especially for English
as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. It enables individuals to express thoughts, build social
relationships, and achieve academic or professional goals (Dieu, 2024). Defined as an interactive
process involving verbal and non-verbal communication, speaking requires both the ability to
produce language and to interpret messages. Mastery of this skill depends on various linguistic
elements, including vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, fluency, and comprehension. For EFL
learners, the ability to speak fluently is often viewed as a critical marker of language acquisition
and overall proficiency (Ceneciro et al., 2023).
Challenges in Developing Speaking Proficiency
Despite its importance, EFL learners frequently struggle with speaking due to a
combination of internal and external barriers. Internally, students may experience anxiety, lack of
confidence, fear of making mistakes, and shyness. These emotional challenges can occur across
proficiency levels and hinder learners' willingness to speak. Research made by Setiawan et. al.
(2024) show that linguistic limitations appear such as difficulty accessing vocabulary or forming
coherent sentences, also restrict fluency.
Externally, classroom dynamics often exacerbate these challenges. Traditional teacher-
centered instruction, characterized by the Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) model, limits
authentic interaction and promotes passive learning. Moreover, Laoli (2021) says that EFL
learners frequently lack real-world opportunities to practice English beyond the classroom, which
slows language development.
Debate as a Pedagogical Tool
To overcome these barriers, educators increasingly turn to student-centered approaches,
with debate emerging as a particularly effective strategy. Debate encourages learners to express
ideas, evaluate opposing viewpoints, and defend arguments using evidence, all within a
structured, interactive setting (Iman, 2017). Unlike traditional practices, debate shifts the focus
from teacher to student, fostering more meaningful communication and encouraging active
participation.
Debate has also been recognized for its cognitive and linguistic benefits. It engages students
in higher-order thinking, such as analysis and synthesis, while simultaneously promoting the use
of complex language structures. It provides an authentic context for language use, motivating
learners to speak and helping them overcome psychological barriers as stated by Gonzalez (2024).
According to Ceneciro et al. (2023), speaking in a foreign language involves both linguistic
competence and affective dimensions such as confidence and reduced anxiety, which are essential
for meaningful communication. In this research, speaking proficiency was assessed using CEFR-
aligned pre- and post-tests, oral performance rubrics, and classroom observations to evaluate
students’ development across these linguistic and affective domains.
The Importance of Speaking in Language Learning
Speaking is a fundamental component of effective communication, especially for English
as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. It enables individuals to express thoughts, build social
relationships, and achieve academic or professional goals (Dieu, 2024). Defined as an interactive
process involving verbal and non-verbal communication, speaking requires both the ability to
produce language and to interpret messages. Mastery of this skill depends on various linguistic
elements, including vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, fluency, and comprehension. For EFL
learners, the ability to speak fluently is often viewed as a critical marker of language acquisition
and overall proficiency (Ceneciro et al., 2023).
Challenges in Developing Speaking Proficiency
Despite its importance, EFL learners frequently struggle with speaking due to a
combination of internal and external barriers. Internally, students may experience anxiety, lack of
confidence, fear of making mistakes, and shyness. These emotional challenges can occur across
proficiency levels and hinder learners' willingness to speak. Research made by Setiawan et. al.
(2024) show that linguistic limitations appear such as difficulty accessing vocabulary or forming
coherent sentences, also restrict fluency.
Externally, classroom dynamics often exacerbate these challenges. Traditional teacher-
centered instruction, characterized by the Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) model, limits
authentic interaction and promotes passive learning. Moreover, Laoli (2021) says that EFL
learners frequently lack real-world opportunities to practice English beyond the classroom, which
slows language development.
Debate as a Pedagogical Tool
To overcome these barriers, educators increasingly turn to student-centered approaches,
with debate emerging as a particularly effective strategy. Debate encourages learners to express
ideas, evaluate opposing viewpoints, and defend arguments using evidence, all within a
structured, interactive setting (Iman, 2017). Unlike traditional practices, debate shifts the focus
from teacher to student, fostering more meaningful communication and encouraging active
participation.
Debate has also been recognized for its cognitive and linguistic benefits. It engages students
in higher-order thinking, such as analysis and synthesis, while simultaneously promoting the use
of complex language structures. It provides an authentic context for language use, motivating
learners to speak and helping them overcome psychological barriers as stated by Gonzalez (2024).
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2099
Benefits of Debate in EFL Instruction
The pedagogical value of debate is well documented as shown by Usman et.al. (2020) and
Saputra & Fran (2024). Among the most frequently cited benefits is increased learner confidence
and reduced speaking anxiety. Participation in debates empowers students to express their ideas
more fluently and with greater conviction. Some learners report feeling less anxious due to the
structured and collaborative nature of debate, which allows for preparation rather than a
spontaneous interaction.
Debate also improves critical thinking, requiring learners to construct logical arguments,
identify assumptions, and respond to counterpoints. Baziganya et al. (2024) demonstrates that
these analytical skills enhance both speaking and academic writing abilities. Vocabulary
expansion and fluency are additional gains, as students are exposed to a broader lexical range and
must speak spontaneously.
Moreover, debate supports collaborative learning by fostering peer interaction and
teamwork. Through group preparation and discussion, learners share perspectives and co-
construct arguments, which strengthens social bonds and communication skills. Structured
discourse in debates also reinforces grammatical accuracy and improves sentence construction
under time constraints (Werdiningsih, 2018).
Empirical Evidence Supporting Debate
Research provides robust support for the effectiveness of debate in enhancing speaking
performance. For example, a case study in Malaysia found that five rounds of debate significantly
improved a student's collaboration, language accuracy, and use of compensatory strategies (Tajik
& Noor, 2022). Another study with 12 trained debaters reported improved sentence formation and
reduced fear of public speaking (Ceneciro et al., 2023).
A quasi-experimental study by Iman (2017) found that debate instruction contributed to
96.1% of the improvement in speaking skills and 82.1% in critical thinking. Fluency showed the
most significant gain (67.4%), followed by grammar and pronunciation.
Challenges in Implementation
Despite its advantages, implementing debate in EFL classrooms is not without obstacles.
Students with limited language proficiency may find it difficult to follow complex arguments or
respond spontaneously, leading to disengagement. Cultural norms can also inhibit participation,
especially in contexts were challenging authority or expressing dissent is discouraged.
Teacher-related challenges include a lack of training in structuring debates and providing
feedback. Without adequate resources or time, instructors may struggle to integrate debate into
the curriculum effectively. Students, too, may need support in research and argument organization
says Baziganya et al. (2024).
Benefits of Debate in EFL Instruction
The pedagogical value of debate is well documented as shown by Usman et.al. (2020) and
Saputra & Fran (2024). Among the most frequently cited benefits is increased learner confidence
and reduced speaking anxiety. Participation in debates empowers students to express their ideas
more fluently and with greater conviction. Some learners report feeling less anxious due to the
structured and collaborative nature of debate, which allows for preparation rather than a
spontaneous interaction.
Debate also improves critical thinking, requiring learners to construct logical arguments,
identify assumptions, and respond to counterpoints. Baziganya et al. (2024) demonstrates that
these analytical skills enhance both speaking and academic writing abilities. Vocabulary
expansion and fluency are additional gains, as students are exposed to a broader lexical range and
must speak spontaneously.
Moreover, debate supports collaborative learning by fostering peer interaction and
teamwork. Through group preparation and discussion, learners share perspectives and co-
construct arguments, which strengthens social bonds and communication skills. Structured
discourse in debates also reinforces grammatical accuracy and improves sentence construction
under time constraints (Werdiningsih, 2018).
Empirical Evidence Supporting Debate
Research provides robust support for the effectiveness of debate in enhancing speaking
performance. For example, a case study in Malaysia found that five rounds of debate significantly
improved a student's collaboration, language accuracy, and use of compensatory strategies (Tajik
& Noor, 2022). Another study with 12 trained debaters reported improved sentence formation and
reduced fear of public speaking (Ceneciro et al., 2023).
A quasi-experimental study by Iman (2017) found that debate instruction contributed to
96.1% of the improvement in speaking skills and 82.1% in critical thinking. Fluency showed the
most significant gain (67.4%), followed by grammar and pronunciation.
Challenges in Implementation
Despite its advantages, implementing debate in EFL classrooms is not without obstacles.
Students with limited language proficiency may find it difficult to follow complex arguments or
respond spontaneously, leading to disengagement. Cultural norms can also inhibit participation,
especially in contexts were challenging authority or expressing dissent is discouraged.
Teacher-related challenges include a lack of training in structuring debates and providing
feedback. Without adequate resources or time, instructors may struggle to integrate debate into
the curriculum effectively. Students, too, may need support in research and argument organization
says Baziganya et al. (2024).
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2100
Strategies for Effective Implementation
To maximize the benefits of debate, researchers recommend several strategies. First,
consistent practice and constructive feedback are essential for building speaking confidence and
accuracy. Teachers should avoid overcorrecting during debates to reduce pressure and instead
focus feedback on broader areas after the activity is what Amiri et al. (2017) mentions in their
study.
Second, explicit training in critical thinking and argumentation prepares students for
meaningful debate participation supports Lubis & Kurniawan (2021). Visual aids and structured
outlines can also assist learners in organizing their thoughts, particularly those with lower
proficiency.
Furthermore, integrating debate into the English curriculum with clear objectives and
assessment criteria ensures alignment with learning goals. Establishing debate clubs and offering
professional development for teachers can further institutionalize this practice. Selecting
engaging and relevant topics helps maintain student interest and encourages real-world
application of language skills.
Finally, fostering a supportive classroom environment one that encourages experimentation
and accepts errors can significantly reduce anxiety and enhance learner engagement (Sako &
Shinozaki, 2023).
METHODS AND MATERIALS
This study employed a mixed-methods approach to explore the effects of debate activities
on the speaking proficiency of B1 learners at La Salle High School. A quasi-experimental pre-
test and post-test design was implemented, supported by qualitative tools such as classroom
observations and perception surveys. This methodological triangulation helped ensure the
credibility of the data by integrating objective performance metrics and learners’ reflective
insights.
The rationale for using a mixed-methods design stems from the multifaceted nature of
speaking proficiency, which encompasses not only linguistic accuracy but also fluency,
confidence, and affective variables (Ina et. al., 2023). Debate as an instructional strategy has been
shown to influence these dimensions holistically, thereby justifying a research design that could
capture both measurable performance gains and student attitudes.
Research Design
The research followed a quasi-experimental model with a single group, where participants
served as their own control. A pre-test was administered before the intervention, followed by four
weeks of debate-based instruction, and a post-test at the end. This model was selected due to
logistical constraints and the ethical responsibility of not denying any students access to the
proposed pedagogical innovation.
Strategies for Effective Implementation
To maximize the benefits of debate, researchers recommend several strategies. First,
consistent practice and constructive feedback are essential for building speaking confidence and
accuracy. Teachers should avoid overcorrecting during debates to reduce pressure and instead
focus feedback on broader areas after the activity is what Amiri et al. (2017) mentions in their
study.
Second, explicit training in critical thinking and argumentation prepares students for
meaningful debate participation supports Lubis & Kurniawan (2021). Visual aids and structured
outlines can also assist learners in organizing their thoughts, particularly those with lower
proficiency.
Furthermore, integrating debate into the English curriculum with clear objectives and
assessment criteria ensures alignment with learning goals. Establishing debate clubs and offering
professional development for teachers can further institutionalize this practice. Selecting
engaging and relevant topics helps maintain student interest and encourages real-world
application of language skills.
Finally, fostering a supportive classroom environment one that encourages experimentation
and accepts errors can significantly reduce anxiety and enhance learner engagement (Sako &
Shinozaki, 2023).
METHODS AND MATERIALS
This study employed a mixed-methods approach to explore the effects of debate activities
on the speaking proficiency of B1 learners at La Salle High School. A quasi-experimental pre-
test and post-test design was implemented, supported by qualitative tools such as classroom
observations and perception surveys. This methodological triangulation helped ensure the
credibility of the data by integrating objective performance metrics and learners’ reflective
insights.
The rationale for using a mixed-methods design stems from the multifaceted nature of
speaking proficiency, which encompasses not only linguistic accuracy but also fluency,
confidence, and affective variables (Ina et. al., 2023). Debate as an instructional strategy has been
shown to influence these dimensions holistically, thereby justifying a research design that could
capture both measurable performance gains and student attitudes.
Research Design
The research followed a quasi-experimental model with a single group, where participants
served as their own control. A pre-test was administered before the intervention, followed by four
weeks of debate-based instruction, and a post-test at the end. This model was selected due to
logistical constraints and the ethical responsibility of not denying any students access to the
proposed pedagogical innovation.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2101
Quantitative data from the speaking tests allowed for a comparative analysis of students’
oral proficiency before and after the intervention. Meanwhile, qualitative data from surveys and
observations offered insights into the psychological and motivational shifts resulting from their
participation in structured debates. As emphasized by Baziganya et al. (2024), integrating both
types of data strengthens the validity of findings, particularly when assessing complex skills like
oral communication.
Participants
To establish the criteria for participant selection, it is necessary to first describe the broader
student population at Unidad Educativa La Salle Riobamba. The institution serves approximately
950 students, ranging from early childhood education (ages 3 to 4) to the final year of secondary
education (3rd year of Bachillerato General Unificado). Throughout their academic journey,
students receive continuous English instruction as part of the school’s bilingual education
program. A diagnostic assessment was conducted by the institution prior to the study, which
revealed that the majority of students enrolled in the second year of Bachillerato (2nd BGU)
demonstrated B1-level proficiency according to the Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages (CEFR).
From this larger population, a sample of 33 B1-level students from 2nd BGU was selected
to participate in the study. These students were enrolled in the researcher’s English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) class and had previously been assessed through institutional evaluations aligned
with CEFR standards. The sampling technique applied was non-probabilistic convenience
sampling, determined by the availability of students and their direct instructional relationship with
the researcher. As Gonzalez (2024) suggested, implementing debate strategies with intermediate-
level learners is particularly effective when students possess a foundational command of grammar
and vocabulary, which enables them to maximize the benefits of structured speaking activities
such as debate.
Instruments
Pre-Test and Post-Test
To measure oral proficiency, students completed two performance-based speaking
assessments: one before and one after the debate intervention (Annex B). Each test included:
- A personal interview with general questions (e.g., habits, experiences).
- An opinion-based monologue or guided discussion (e.g., "Do you think technology
improves communication?").
The format and conditions of both assessments were kept consistent to ensure reliability.
The tasks were aligned with CEFR B1 descriptors and assessed using a performance rubric based
on fluency, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension (Ghalib & Mohammed,
2023). Tests were recorded and scored independently by two raters to ensure inter-rater reliability.
Quantitative data from the speaking tests allowed for a comparative analysis of students’
oral proficiency before and after the intervention. Meanwhile, qualitative data from surveys and
observations offered insights into the psychological and motivational shifts resulting from their
participation in structured debates. As emphasized by Baziganya et al. (2024), integrating both
types of data strengthens the validity of findings, particularly when assessing complex skills like
oral communication.
Participants
To establish the criteria for participant selection, it is necessary to first describe the broader
student population at Unidad Educativa La Salle Riobamba. The institution serves approximately
950 students, ranging from early childhood education (ages 3 to 4) to the final year of secondary
education (3rd year of Bachillerato General Unificado). Throughout their academic journey,
students receive continuous English instruction as part of the school’s bilingual education
program. A diagnostic assessment was conducted by the institution prior to the study, which
revealed that the majority of students enrolled in the second year of Bachillerato (2nd BGU)
demonstrated B1-level proficiency according to the Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages (CEFR).
From this larger population, a sample of 33 B1-level students from 2nd BGU was selected
to participate in the study. These students were enrolled in the researcher’s English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) class and had previously been assessed through institutional evaluations aligned
with CEFR standards. The sampling technique applied was non-probabilistic convenience
sampling, determined by the availability of students and their direct instructional relationship with
the researcher. As Gonzalez (2024) suggested, implementing debate strategies with intermediate-
level learners is particularly effective when students possess a foundational command of grammar
and vocabulary, which enables them to maximize the benefits of structured speaking activities
such as debate.
Instruments
Pre-Test and Post-Test
To measure oral proficiency, students completed two performance-based speaking
assessments: one before and one after the debate intervention (Annex B). Each test included:
- A personal interview with general questions (e.g., habits, experiences).
- An opinion-based monologue or guided discussion (e.g., "Do you think technology
improves communication?").
The format and conditions of both assessments were kept consistent to ensure reliability.
The tasks were aligned with CEFR B1 descriptors and assessed using a performance rubric based
on fluency, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension (Ghalib & Mohammed,
2023). Tests were recorded and scored independently by two raters to ensure inter-rater reliability.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2102
Dieu (2024) mentions that debate provides a meaningful and interactive platform to
measure progress in speaking skills, especially when linked to real-life situations and spontaneous
production. Therefore, both pre- and post-tests emphasized spontaneous speech production rather
than memorized content.
Observation Checklists
Each debate session was monitored using a structured checklist to record levels of student
participation, engagement in argumentation, clarity of ideas, and interaction with peers. This
instrument helped document behavioral and communicative progress during the intervention
(Annex C). Observation is a key tool in capturing non-verbal cues, confidence levels, and shifts
in engagement especially important in research involving affective variables such as anxiety (Ali
& Souisa, 2019).
Oral Performance Rubric
In order to get a correct data collection, the same rubric was used for both speaking tests
and in-class debate assessments (Annex D). It included the following components: fluency,
grammatical accuracy, vocabulary use, pronunciation, comprehension, and argumentation skills.
This instrument was adapted from rubrics proposed in Iman (2017) and Afri et al. (2021), and
aligned with CEFR descriptors for speaking at the B1 level.
Student Perception Survey
At the end of the intervention, students completed a Likert-scale questionnaire aimed at
capturing changes in self-confidence, perceived fluency, anxiety levels, and attitudes toward
speaking in English (Annex E). The survey was adapted from Ceneciro et al. (2023), who found
that students engaged in debate often reported “a decrease in speaking-related anxiety and an
increase in willingness to participate”.
Procedure
The study was conducted over six weeks, following this sequence:
- Week 1 – Pre-Test and Survey: Students completed an oral test and answered a baseline
perception survey regarding their speaking confidence and anxiety. They were then
introduced to the purpose and format of debate activities.
- Weeks 2 to 5 – Debate Sessions: Each week, students participated in a structured debate
on relevant social or academic topics. Preparation included vocabulary brainstorming,
argument mapping, and role assignments (e.g., opening speaker, rebuttal speaker). Debate
formats included modified British Parliamentary and Four Corners, alternating between
individual and team formats to provide varied practice.
The structure of each session included:
- Topic introduction and preparation time (30 mins)
- Debate performance (10–15 mins per group)
- Teacher-guided reflection and feedback (10 mins)
Dieu (2024) mentions that debate provides a meaningful and interactive platform to
measure progress in speaking skills, especially when linked to real-life situations and spontaneous
production. Therefore, both pre- and post-tests emphasized spontaneous speech production rather
than memorized content.
Observation Checklists
Each debate session was monitored using a structured checklist to record levels of student
participation, engagement in argumentation, clarity of ideas, and interaction with peers. This
instrument helped document behavioral and communicative progress during the intervention
(Annex C). Observation is a key tool in capturing non-verbal cues, confidence levels, and shifts
in engagement especially important in research involving affective variables such as anxiety (Ali
& Souisa, 2019).
Oral Performance Rubric
In order to get a correct data collection, the same rubric was used for both speaking tests
and in-class debate assessments (Annex D). It included the following components: fluency,
grammatical accuracy, vocabulary use, pronunciation, comprehension, and argumentation skills.
This instrument was adapted from rubrics proposed in Iman (2017) and Afri et al. (2021), and
aligned with CEFR descriptors for speaking at the B1 level.
Student Perception Survey
At the end of the intervention, students completed a Likert-scale questionnaire aimed at
capturing changes in self-confidence, perceived fluency, anxiety levels, and attitudes toward
speaking in English (Annex E). The survey was adapted from Ceneciro et al. (2023), who found
that students engaged in debate often reported “a decrease in speaking-related anxiety and an
increase in willingness to participate”.
Procedure
The study was conducted over six weeks, following this sequence:
- Week 1 – Pre-Test and Survey: Students completed an oral test and answered a baseline
perception survey regarding their speaking confidence and anxiety. They were then
introduced to the purpose and format of debate activities.
- Weeks 2 to 5 – Debate Sessions: Each week, students participated in a structured debate
on relevant social or academic topics. Preparation included vocabulary brainstorming,
argument mapping, and role assignments (e.g., opening speaker, rebuttal speaker). Debate
formats included modified British Parliamentary and Four Corners, alternating between
individual and team formats to provide varied practice.
The structure of each session included:
- Topic introduction and preparation time (30 mins)
- Debate performance (10–15 mins per group)
- Teacher-guided reflection and feedback (10 mins)
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2103
This structure follows suggestions by Amiri et al. (2017), who emphasized the importance
of preparation and feedback to maximize student confidence and language accuracy.
Week 6 – Post-Test and Final Survey: Students completed the same oral assessment as in Week
1 (with a different but equivalent topic), and the final perception survey.
Research Scope
This study focuses on analyzing the effects of structured debate and persuasive speaking
activities on the speaking proficiency of B1-level English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners
at Unidad Educativa La Salle Riobamba. It examines both linguistic dimensions—such as
fluency, vocabulary range, grammatical accuracy, pronunciation, and oral comprehension—and
affective components, including students’ levels of confidence, speaking-related anxiety, and
classroom motivation. These two categories are essential for understanding not only how students
perform linguistically, but also how they perceive and emotionally respond to oral tasks in a
second language (Ceneciro et. al., 2023). The research is delimited to students in the second year
of Bachillerato General Unificado (2nd BGU), equivalent to the fifth year of high school, and is
situated in a private bilingual educational institution in Ecuador that follows CEFR-aligned
instruction. The educational context offers continuous English language instruction, creating a
consistent foundation for longitudinal interventions focused on oral production.
Type of Research
The study adopts a mixed-methods approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative
research methodologies to obtain a comprehensive perspective on students’ development.
Quantitative data were derived from pre- and post-test speaking assessments, as well as Likert-
scale surveys, while qualitative data were collected through classroom observations, teacher field
notes, and students’ open-ended survey responses. The design is quasi-experimental, structured
as a single-group pre-test/post-test model, which allows for within-subject comparison over the
intervention period. Although the study does not include a control group, the use of multiple data
sources enhances its internal validity (Wariyati et. al., 2024). As a piece of applied research, its
primary aim is to identify practical pedagogical strategies that can be implemented to improve
EFL oral communication in similar school contexts.
Data Collection and Compilation
Data were collected over a six-week intervention period conducted during the second
academic term. In the first week, students completed a diagnostic speaking test and a baseline
survey measuring self-reported confidence and anxiety. Debate activities began in Week 2 and
continued through Week 5, with structured tasks assigned and monitored by the instructor. During
these sessions, learners prepared arguments, participated in oral exchanges, and received real-
time feedback. Observations were conducted simultaneously to capture behavioral and affective
patterns (Dieu, 2024). The final week included the administration of a post-test and a follow-up
This structure follows suggestions by Amiri et al. (2017), who emphasized the importance
of preparation and feedback to maximize student confidence and language accuracy.
Week 6 – Post-Test and Final Survey: Students completed the same oral assessment as in Week
1 (with a different but equivalent topic), and the final perception survey.
Research Scope
This study focuses on analyzing the effects of structured debate and persuasive speaking
activities on the speaking proficiency of B1-level English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners
at Unidad Educativa La Salle Riobamba. It examines both linguistic dimensions—such as
fluency, vocabulary range, grammatical accuracy, pronunciation, and oral comprehension—and
affective components, including students’ levels of confidence, speaking-related anxiety, and
classroom motivation. These two categories are essential for understanding not only how students
perform linguistically, but also how they perceive and emotionally respond to oral tasks in a
second language (Ceneciro et. al., 2023). The research is delimited to students in the second year
of Bachillerato General Unificado (2nd BGU), equivalent to the fifth year of high school, and is
situated in a private bilingual educational institution in Ecuador that follows CEFR-aligned
instruction. The educational context offers continuous English language instruction, creating a
consistent foundation for longitudinal interventions focused on oral production.
Type of Research
The study adopts a mixed-methods approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative
research methodologies to obtain a comprehensive perspective on students’ development.
Quantitative data were derived from pre- and post-test speaking assessments, as well as Likert-
scale surveys, while qualitative data were collected through classroom observations, teacher field
notes, and students’ open-ended survey responses. The design is quasi-experimental, structured
as a single-group pre-test/post-test model, which allows for within-subject comparison over the
intervention period. Although the study does not include a control group, the use of multiple data
sources enhances its internal validity (Wariyati et. al., 2024). As a piece of applied research, its
primary aim is to identify practical pedagogical strategies that can be implemented to improve
EFL oral communication in similar school contexts.
Data Collection and Compilation
Data were collected over a six-week intervention period conducted during the second
academic term. In the first week, students completed a diagnostic speaking test and a baseline
survey measuring self-reported confidence and anxiety. Debate activities began in Week 2 and
continued through Week 5, with structured tasks assigned and monitored by the instructor. During
these sessions, learners prepared arguments, participated in oral exchanges, and received real-
time feedback. Observations were conducted simultaneously to capture behavioral and affective
patterns (Dieu, 2024). The final week included the administration of a post-test and a follow-up
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2104
survey. All data were compiled manually, reviewed by the researcher for completeness, and stored
in a secure digital database for further processing.
Data Entry and Coding
Quantitative results, including rubric-based speaking scores and Likert-scale survey
responses, were entered into Excel spreadsheets for statistical analysis. Survey responses were
numerically coded using a five-point scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly
Agree), enabling the identification of trends across individual items and composite variables.
Qualitative data from classroom observations and open-ended survey items were transcribed and
categorized according to recurring themes such as participation, turn-taking, error correction, and
spontaneous speaking (Ghalib & Mohammed, 2023). This thematic coding supported a deeper
understanding of how learners engaged with the speaking tasks and how their affective responses
evolved over time.
Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics, including measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode) and
variability (standard deviation), were calculated to evaluate the distribution of students’
performance before and after the intervention. These indicators helped to quantify gains in
speaking fluency, vocabulary use, and confidence levels, and allowed for the detection of any
outliers in student performance. Visual tools such as bar charts and frequency tables were also
generated to illustrate changes in students’ scores and perceptions. This stage of analysis was
crucial for providing an objective representation of the overall effectiveness of the intervention
(Burak & Saricoban, 2023).
Comparative Analysis
To examine differences between students’ initial and final performance, pre- and post-
test results were compared using rubric-based scoring systems aligned with CEFR B1 descriptors.
Changes in individual components—such as coherence, vocabulary control, and pronunciation—
were analyzed both at the group level and individually to identify patterns of progress. Parallel
analysis was conducted on survey data to compare students’ self-perceptions before and after the
intervention, particularly focusing on speaking confidence and anxiety. Previous research has
shown that such pre/post comparisons are effective in evaluating the impact of communicative
strategies like debate (Afri et. al., 2021), as they often yield measurable shifts in learners’
linguistic and emotional engagement.
Triangulation and Integration
The reliability of the findings was reinforced through data triangulation, in which results
from test scores, survey responses, and observation records were cross-referenced to validate
consistency. This methodological integration enabled the study to verify whether linguistic
improvements coincided with positive shifts in students’ attitudes and behaviors. For instance, a
student showing increased fluency in the post-test was also observed to participate more
survey. All data were compiled manually, reviewed by the researcher for completeness, and stored
in a secure digital database for further processing.
Data Entry and Coding
Quantitative results, including rubric-based speaking scores and Likert-scale survey
responses, were entered into Excel spreadsheets for statistical analysis. Survey responses were
numerically coded using a five-point scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly
Agree), enabling the identification of trends across individual items and composite variables.
Qualitative data from classroom observations and open-ended survey items were transcribed and
categorized according to recurring themes such as participation, turn-taking, error correction, and
spontaneous speaking (Ghalib & Mohammed, 2023). This thematic coding supported a deeper
understanding of how learners engaged with the speaking tasks and how their affective responses
evolved over time.
Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics, including measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode) and
variability (standard deviation), were calculated to evaluate the distribution of students’
performance before and after the intervention. These indicators helped to quantify gains in
speaking fluency, vocabulary use, and confidence levels, and allowed for the detection of any
outliers in student performance. Visual tools such as bar charts and frequency tables were also
generated to illustrate changes in students’ scores and perceptions. This stage of analysis was
crucial for providing an objective representation of the overall effectiveness of the intervention
(Burak & Saricoban, 2023).
Comparative Analysis
To examine differences between students’ initial and final performance, pre- and post-
test results were compared using rubric-based scoring systems aligned with CEFR B1 descriptors.
Changes in individual components—such as coherence, vocabulary control, and pronunciation—
were analyzed both at the group level and individually to identify patterns of progress. Parallel
analysis was conducted on survey data to compare students’ self-perceptions before and after the
intervention, particularly focusing on speaking confidence and anxiety. Previous research has
shown that such pre/post comparisons are effective in evaluating the impact of communicative
strategies like debate (Afri et. al., 2021), as they often yield measurable shifts in learners’
linguistic and emotional engagement.
Triangulation and Integration
The reliability of the findings was reinforced through data triangulation, in which results
from test scores, survey responses, and observation records were cross-referenced to validate
consistency. This methodological integration enabled the study to verify whether linguistic
improvements coincided with positive shifts in students’ attitudes and behaviors. For instance, a
student showing increased fluency in the post-test was also observed to participate more
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2105
frequently during debate sessions and reported greater confidence on the final survey. According
to Laoli (2021), triangulation enhances the interpretative depth of classroom-based research and
supports the practical applicability of its outcomes.
Description and Analysis of the Pre and Post Test.
The speaking pre- and post-tests were administered using a rubric aligned with the CEFR
B1 descriptors, assessing fluency, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension.
Students completed an individual oral task before and after the intervention. The rubric provided
a score from 0 to 2 for each criterion, with a maximum total score of 10 points. Results are
expected to show a measurable increase in speaking proficiency after the debate sessions.
Preliminary data indicate that the average pre-test score was approximately 6.74, while the post-
test average increased to 7.93, reflecting gains in fluency and vocabulary use. These
improvements suggest that structured debate activities enhanced learners’ spontaneous speaking
abilities and accuracy in communication.
Figure 1
Average scores obtained in pre- and post-test
Note. Figure created by the author
Student Survey on Confidence and Anxiety
A Likert-scale survey was conducted at the beginning and end of the intervention to
measure students’ self-perceived confidence and anxiety when speaking English. The survey
included items such as “I feel confident speaking in front of others” and “I get nervous when I
speak in English.” Responses ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Initial
results revealed high anxiety levels and low confidence, with an average score of 8.33 in Week
1. By Week 6, the average confidence score increased a 18.91%, while anxiety scores declined
19.2%, indicating that students became more comfortable and willing to speak in public. These
outcomes suggest that debate activities contributed positively to learners’ emotional responses
toward English communication.
6,00 6,20 6,40 6,60 6,80 7,00 7,20 7,40 7,60 7,80 8,00 8,20
Pre-Test
Post-Test
frequently during debate sessions and reported greater confidence on the final survey. According
to Laoli (2021), triangulation enhances the interpretative depth of classroom-based research and
supports the practical applicability of its outcomes.
Description and Analysis of the Pre and Post Test.
The speaking pre- and post-tests were administered using a rubric aligned with the CEFR
B1 descriptors, assessing fluency, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension.
Students completed an individual oral task before and after the intervention. The rubric provided
a score from 0 to 2 for each criterion, with a maximum total score of 10 points. Results are
expected to show a measurable increase in speaking proficiency after the debate sessions.
Preliminary data indicate that the average pre-test score was approximately 6.74, while the post-
test average increased to 7.93, reflecting gains in fluency and vocabulary use. These
improvements suggest that structured debate activities enhanced learners’ spontaneous speaking
abilities and accuracy in communication.
Figure 1
Average scores obtained in pre- and post-test
Note. Figure created by the author
Student Survey on Confidence and Anxiety
A Likert-scale survey was conducted at the beginning and end of the intervention to
measure students’ self-perceived confidence and anxiety when speaking English. The survey
included items such as “I feel confident speaking in front of others” and “I get nervous when I
speak in English.” Responses ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Initial
results revealed high anxiety levels and low confidence, with an average score of 8.33 in Week
1. By Week 6, the average confidence score increased a 18.91%, while anxiety scores declined
19.2%, indicating that students became more comfortable and willing to speak in public. These
outcomes suggest that debate activities contributed positively to learners’ emotional responses
toward English communication.
6,00 6,20 6,40 6,60 6,80 7,00 7,20 7,40 7,60 7,80 8,00 8,20
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2106
Figure 2
Average of the perception survey by question
Note. Figure created by the author
Classroom Observation Checklist
Throughout the intervention, a classroom observation checklist was used to monitor
student participation, turn-taking, use of target vocabulary, and non-verbal indicators of
engagement. The checklist included both quantitative marks and qualitative notes. Observations
suggest a steady increase in active participation and the use of academic language structures, with
the number of students initiating speech acts rising from 39.39% in Week 2 to 67.27% in Week
5. The observer also noted improvements in students’ posture, eye contact, and willingness to
volunteer during debates. These findings support the conclusion that students were increasingly
engaged and took ownership of their speaking development over time.
Figure 3
Average of the answers obtained in the classroom observation checklist
Note. Figure created by the author
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
The results of the study revealed measurable progress in students’ speaking proficiency
after participating in four weeks of structured debate sessions. Comparative analysis between the
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12
Week 1 2,7273 2,9697 2,6364 2,7273 3,1515 2,4848 2,7879 2,8788 2,7273 3,0303 2,5152 2,8182
Week 6 3,2424 3,3939 3,2727 3,1515 3,4242 3,3939 3,2727 3,5152 3,1818 3,5758 3,2424 3,4545
0
1
2
3
4
Mean of the Perception Survey by Question
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
Week 2 Week 5
Figure 2
Average of the perception survey by question
Note. Figure created by the author
Classroom Observation Checklist
Throughout the intervention, a classroom observation checklist was used to monitor
student participation, turn-taking, use of target vocabulary, and non-verbal indicators of
engagement. The checklist included both quantitative marks and qualitative notes. Observations
suggest a steady increase in active participation and the use of academic language structures, with
the number of students initiating speech acts rising from 39.39% in Week 2 to 67.27% in Week
5. The observer also noted improvements in students’ posture, eye contact, and willingness to
volunteer during debates. These findings support the conclusion that students were increasingly
engaged and took ownership of their speaking development over time.
Figure 3
Average of the answers obtained in the classroom observation checklist
Note. Figure created by the author
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
The results of the study revealed measurable progress in students’ speaking proficiency
after participating in four weeks of structured debate sessions. Comparative analysis between the
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12
Week 1 2,7273 2,9697 2,6364 2,7273 3,1515 2,4848 2,7879 2,8788 2,7273 3,0303 2,5152 2,8182
Week 6 3,2424 3,3939 3,2727 3,1515 3,4242 3,3939 3,2727 3,5152 3,1818 3,5758 3,2424 3,4545
0
1
2
3
4
Mean of the Perception Survey by Question
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
Week 2 Week 5
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2107
pre-test and post-test demonstrated overall improvement across all evaluated components—
fluency, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension. Students exhibited greater
spontaneity in oral production, reduced hesitation, and a more coherent organization of ideas. The
increase in mean scores between the pre- and post-test indicates that the debate-based instruction
had a positive impact on learners’ communicative performance.
Qualitative observations supported these findings. Throughout the intervention, students
showed higher levels of engagement and participation during debate activities. Observation
checklists documented noticeable growth in confidence, peer interaction, and the use of
persuasive and academic language. Learners who were initially reluctant to speak became more
active and expressive by the end of the sessions, demonstrating improved argumentation skills
and willingness to take part in discussions.
Results from the post-intervention perception survey further confirmed the positive effect
of debate activities on affective variables. Most participants reported increased confidence and
motivation to speak English, as well as a decline in speaking-related anxiety. The majority agreed
that debates provided an enjoyable and meaningful context to practice speaking, helping them
overcome fear of making mistakes. These outcomes align with previous research (Iman, 2017;
Ceneciro et al., 2023; Ghalib & Mohammed, 2023), which also highlights the role of debate in
fostering both linguistic and psychological growth in EFL learners.
Overall, the data triangulation of test results, surveys, and classroom observations
validates the effectiveness of debate as a pedagogical tool for enhancing speaking skills. The
integration of both quantitative and qualitative evidence strengthens the interpretation that
structured debate fosters a communicative and supportive classroom atmosphere conducive to
oral proficiency development.
CONCLUSION
The results of the study suggest that structured debate activities had a notable positive
impact on B1-level learners’ speaking proficiency and affective development. Students not only
demonstrated measurable improvements in fluency, lexical diversity, and pronunciation accuracy,
but also reported higher levels of motivation and reduced speaking anxiety. These findings are
consistent with earlier research showing that debate-based instruction promotes spontaneous
communication and enhances learner confidence in oral tasks (Iman, 2017). Based on this
evidence, the integration of structured debates into EFL classroom routines can be recommended
as an effective strategy to foster communicative competence and a more engaging language
learning environment.
pre-test and post-test demonstrated overall improvement across all evaluated components—
fluency, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and comprehension. Students exhibited greater
spontaneity in oral production, reduced hesitation, and a more coherent organization of ideas. The
increase in mean scores between the pre- and post-test indicates that the debate-based instruction
had a positive impact on learners’ communicative performance.
Qualitative observations supported these findings. Throughout the intervention, students
showed higher levels of engagement and participation during debate activities. Observation
checklists documented noticeable growth in confidence, peer interaction, and the use of
persuasive and academic language. Learners who were initially reluctant to speak became more
active and expressive by the end of the sessions, demonstrating improved argumentation skills
and willingness to take part in discussions.
Results from the post-intervention perception survey further confirmed the positive effect
of debate activities on affective variables. Most participants reported increased confidence and
motivation to speak English, as well as a decline in speaking-related anxiety. The majority agreed
that debates provided an enjoyable and meaningful context to practice speaking, helping them
overcome fear of making mistakes. These outcomes align with previous research (Iman, 2017;
Ceneciro et al., 2023; Ghalib & Mohammed, 2023), which also highlights the role of debate in
fostering both linguistic and psychological growth in EFL learners.
Overall, the data triangulation of test results, surveys, and classroom observations
validates the effectiveness of debate as a pedagogical tool for enhancing speaking skills. The
integration of both quantitative and qualitative evidence strengthens the interpretation that
structured debate fosters a communicative and supportive classroom atmosphere conducive to
oral proficiency development.
CONCLUSION
The results of the study suggest that structured debate activities had a notable positive
impact on B1-level learners’ speaking proficiency and affective development. Students not only
demonstrated measurable improvements in fluency, lexical diversity, and pronunciation accuracy,
but also reported higher levels of motivation and reduced speaking anxiety. These findings are
consistent with earlier research showing that debate-based instruction promotes spontaneous
communication and enhances learner confidence in oral tasks (Iman, 2017). Based on this
evidence, the integration of structured debates into EFL classroom routines can be recommended
as an effective strategy to foster communicative competence and a more engaging language
learning environment.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2108
REFERENCES
Afri E.; Ezir E.; Maulina I. (2021) Enhancing students speaking skills through debate techniques.
1(2) DOI: https://doi.org/ijeal.v1n1.1121
Ali D.; Souisa T. (2019) The influence of debate technique, and students’ critical thinking
towards their speaking ability. Journal Pedagogika dan Dinamika Pendidikan. 7(1)
DOI: https://ojs3.unpatti.ac.id/index.php/pedagogika
Amiri F.; Othman M.; Jahedi M. (2017) A case study of the development of an ESL learner’s
speaking skills through instructional debate. International Journal of humanities and
social science. 7(2) ISSN 2220-8488
Burak M.; Saricoban A. (2023) Using shadowing technique to measure B1 level learners’
attitudes towards Speaking Skills. Shanlax International Journal of Education 11(2) DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v11i2.6084
Baziganya D.; Mitari M.; Uwamariya J.; Ngoboka J. (2024) Investigating teachers and students’
views on debate activities as a tool to improve English speaking skills: A case of Rulindo
district, Rwanda. African Journal of Empirical Research 5(2) ISSN: 2709-2607
Ceneciro C.; Estoque M.; Chavez J. (2023) Analysis of debate skills to the learner’s confidence
and anxiety in the use of the English Language in Academic Engagements. Journal of
Namibian Studies 3(3) ISSN 2197-5523
Dieu P. (2024) The use of debate technique to develop students’ speaking skills. HNUE journal
of science. 69(3) https://doi.org/10.18173/2354-1075.2024-0048
Ghalib M.; Mohammed F. (2023) Effect of debate strategy on developing EFL learners speaking
proficiency at Ibb University and their attitudes towards it. International journal of
language and literary studies 5(1) DOI: https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v5il.1262
Gonzalez M. (2024) A comparative study of discussions, debates and oral presentations in
enhancing EFL Learners’ oral proficiency. Open journal for educational research 8 (1)
27-36 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojer.0801.03027g
Iman J. (2017) Debate instruction in EFL classroom: Impacts on the critical thinking and
speaking skill. 10(4) e-ISSN 1308-1470
Ina M.; Bhoko M.; Wati E. (2023) Improving students speaking skills through debate strategy.
Journal of linguistics, literature and language teaching. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33479/klausa.v6i2.625
Laoli A. (2021) Improving English speaking skills through debate methods in students’ junior
high school. Journal Ilmu Pendidkan 3(6) https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v3i6.1706
Lubis R.; Kurniawan I. (2021) Improving students’ speaking skill through debate Journal of
English education and linguistics 2(1) e-ISSN: 2721-8236
REFERENCES
Afri E.; Ezir E.; Maulina I. (2021) Enhancing students speaking skills through debate techniques.
1(2) DOI: https://doi.org/ijeal.v1n1.1121
Ali D.; Souisa T. (2019) The influence of debate technique, and students’ critical thinking
towards their speaking ability. Journal Pedagogika dan Dinamika Pendidikan. 7(1)
DOI: https://ojs3.unpatti.ac.id/index.php/pedagogika
Amiri F.; Othman M.; Jahedi M. (2017) A case study of the development of an ESL learner’s
speaking skills through instructional debate. International Journal of humanities and
social science. 7(2) ISSN 2220-8488
Burak M.; Saricoban A. (2023) Using shadowing technique to measure B1 level learners’
attitudes towards Speaking Skills. Shanlax International Journal of Education 11(2) DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v11i2.6084
Baziganya D.; Mitari M.; Uwamariya J.; Ngoboka J. (2024) Investigating teachers and students’
views on debate activities as a tool to improve English speaking skills: A case of Rulindo
district, Rwanda. African Journal of Empirical Research 5(2) ISSN: 2709-2607
Ceneciro C.; Estoque M.; Chavez J. (2023) Analysis of debate skills to the learner’s confidence
and anxiety in the use of the English Language in Academic Engagements. Journal of
Namibian Studies 3(3) ISSN 2197-5523
Dieu P. (2024) The use of debate technique to develop students’ speaking skills. HNUE journal
of science. 69(3) https://doi.org/10.18173/2354-1075.2024-0048
Ghalib M.; Mohammed F. (2023) Effect of debate strategy on developing EFL learners speaking
proficiency at Ibb University and their attitudes towards it. International journal of
language and literary studies 5(1) DOI: https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v5il.1262
Gonzalez M. (2024) A comparative study of discussions, debates and oral presentations in
enhancing EFL Learners’ oral proficiency. Open journal for educational research 8 (1)
27-36 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojer.0801.03027g
Iman J. (2017) Debate instruction in EFL classroom: Impacts on the critical thinking and
speaking skill. 10(4) e-ISSN 1308-1470
Ina M.; Bhoko M.; Wati E. (2023) Improving students speaking skills through debate strategy.
Journal of linguistics, literature and language teaching. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33479/klausa.v6i2.625
Laoli A. (2021) Improving English speaking skills through debate methods in students’ junior
high school. Journal Ilmu Pendidkan 3(6) https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v3i6.1706
Lubis R.; Kurniawan I. (2021) Improving students’ speaking skill through debate Journal of
English education and linguistics 2(1) e-ISSN: 2721-8236
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2109
Rica L.; Indra K. (2021) Improving students’ speaking skill through debate. Journal of English
education and linguistics 2(1) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.56874/jeel.v2i1.396
Sako T.; Shinozaki F. (2023) Impact of debate instruction and pair practice on Japanese high
school students speaking skills and critical thinking. The English teacher. 52(1) 32-48
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52696/BLJD6558
Saputra E.; Fran I. (2024) Indonesian undergraduate EFL students’ perception of the use of
debate as learning English-speaking method. Indonesian journal of English language
teaching and applied linguistics. 9(1) e-ISSN: 2527-8746 DOI:
https://dx.doi.org/10.21093/ijeltal.v9i1.1638
Setiawan H.; Budiyanto D.; Insan J. (2024) Promoting critical thinking and public speaking
skills through debates at Tridinanti University. Journal of language teaching and
learning linguistics and literature 12(2) DOI:
https://doi.org/10.224256/ideas.v12i2.4299
Tajik O.; Noor S. (2022) Empowering speaking skill through debate: The case of Afghan EFL
learners at Herat University. International journal of multidisciplinary: applied business
and education research. 3(12) DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.03.12.16
Usman M.; Fadinata A.; Fajri N.; Ulminarika; Maulisa R. (2020) Debate technique: A way to
enhance students’ speaking skill. English language study and teaching (ELASTE) 1(1)
e-ISSN: 2746-380X
Wariyati; Pratiwi N.; Amin T.; Asnawi; Nurlnili (2024) Debate technique implementation on
students’ speaking skill acceleration. Indonesian Journal of ELT and applied linguistics
(IJEAL) 4(1) ISSN: 2809-557X URL: https://journal-
lp2m.umnaw.ac.id/index.php/IJEAL
Werdiningsih I. (2018) The use of debate method to improve students’ speaking skill. Journal of
English teaching, literature and applied linguistics. 2(2) ISSN: 2614-5871
Rica L.; Indra K. (2021) Improving students’ speaking skill through debate. Journal of English
education and linguistics 2(1) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.56874/jeel.v2i1.396
Sako T.; Shinozaki F. (2023) Impact of debate instruction and pair practice on Japanese high
school students speaking skills and critical thinking. The English teacher. 52(1) 32-48
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52696/BLJD6558
Saputra E.; Fran I. (2024) Indonesian undergraduate EFL students’ perception of the use of
debate as learning English-speaking method. Indonesian journal of English language
teaching and applied linguistics. 9(1) e-ISSN: 2527-8746 DOI:
https://dx.doi.org/10.21093/ijeltal.v9i1.1638
Setiawan H.; Budiyanto D.; Insan J. (2024) Promoting critical thinking and public speaking
skills through debates at Tridinanti University. Journal of language teaching and
learning linguistics and literature 12(2) DOI:
https://doi.org/10.224256/ideas.v12i2.4299
Tajik O.; Noor S. (2022) Empowering speaking skill through debate: The case of Afghan EFL
learners at Herat University. International journal of multidisciplinary: applied business
and education research. 3(12) DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.03.12.16
Usman M.; Fadinata A.; Fajri N.; Ulminarika; Maulisa R. (2020) Debate technique: A way to
enhance students’ speaking skill. English language study and teaching (ELASTE) 1(1)
e-ISSN: 2746-380X
Wariyati; Pratiwi N.; Amin T.; Asnawi; Nurlnili (2024) Debate technique implementation on
students’ speaking skill acceleration. Indonesian Journal of ELT and applied linguistics
(IJEAL) 4(1) ISSN: 2809-557X URL: https://journal-
lp2m.umnaw.ac.id/index.php/IJEAL
Werdiningsih I. (2018) The use of debate method to improve students’ speaking skill. Journal of
English teaching, literature and applied linguistics. 2(2) ISSN: 2614-5871
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2110
ANNEX A.- OPERATIONALIZATION MATRIX
Variable
Category Variable Definition Indicators Measurement Instruments
Independent
Variable
Debate
Activities
Structured and competitive oral activities that
encourage learners to express ideas, evaluate
viewpoints, and defend arguments.
Dimension Persuasive speaking.
- Participation in debate rounds
- Engagement in argumentation and critical
thinking during debates
- Use of complex language structures during
debates
- Delivery of persuasive speeches
- Application of persuasive techniques
Observation checklists of
debate performance,
potentially rubrics for
judging debate rounds.
Dependent
Variable
Speaking
Proficiency
The ability to communicate effectively in
English, encompassing fluency, confidence, and
the ability to convey ideas meaningfully in social
and academic settings.
- Fluency: Spontaneous speech production,
rate of speech, smoothness of delivery
- Accuracy (Grammar): Correct use of
grammatical structures, sentence formation
- Vocabulary: Range and appropriate use of
lexical items
- Pronunciation: Clarity and comprehensibility
of spoken English
- Comprehension: Understanding and
responding to input during interaction
Speaking tests (pre and post-
intervention), rubrics for
evaluating speaking
performance.
Note. Matrix created by the author.
ANNEX A.- OPERATIONALIZATION MATRIX
Variable
Category Variable Definition Indicators Measurement Instruments
Independent
Variable
Debate
Activities
Structured and competitive oral activities that
encourage learners to express ideas, evaluate
viewpoints, and defend arguments.
Dimension Persuasive speaking.
- Participation in debate rounds
- Engagement in argumentation and critical
thinking during debates
- Use of complex language structures during
debates
- Delivery of persuasive speeches
- Application of persuasive techniques
Observation checklists of
debate performance,
potentially rubrics for
judging debate rounds.
Dependent
Variable
Speaking
Proficiency
The ability to communicate effectively in
English, encompassing fluency, confidence, and
the ability to convey ideas meaningfully in social
and academic settings.
- Fluency: Spontaneous speech production,
rate of speech, smoothness of delivery
- Accuracy (Grammar): Correct use of
grammatical structures, sentence formation
- Vocabulary: Range and appropriate use of
lexical items
- Pronunciation: Clarity and comprehensibility
of spoken English
- Comprehension: Understanding and
responding to input during interaction
Speaking tests (pre and post-
intervention), rubrics for
evaluating speaking
performance.
Note. Matrix created by the author.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2111
ANNEX B.- Pre-Test and Post-Test Design
Objective: Evaluate the development of speaking proficiency (fluency, grammar, vocabulary,
pronunciation, comprehension) before and after the debate intervention for B1-level.
Test Format (3 minutes per student):
Part 1 – Warm-Up Interview (1 minute)
Purpose: assess spontaneous interaction and general fluency
- Tell me about your daily routine.
- What do you usually do on weekends?
- Can you describe your favorite memory at school?
Part 2 – Guided Monologue (1 minute)
Purpose: assess extended speaking and organization
Pre-Test Topic: "Describe your favorite place and explain why it is important to you."
Post-Test Topic: "Talk about a problem in society and share your opinion about how to solve
it."
Part 3 – Follow-Up Questions (1 minute)
Purpose: assess comprehension, elaboration, and interaction
- Do you think your ideas are easy to understand?
- How do you feel when giving your opinion in English?
ANNEX B.- Pre-Test and Post-Test Design
Objective: Evaluate the development of speaking proficiency (fluency, grammar, vocabulary,
pronunciation, comprehension) before and after the debate intervention for B1-level.
Test Format (3 minutes per student):
Part 1 – Warm-Up Interview (1 minute)
Purpose: assess spontaneous interaction and general fluency
- Tell me about your daily routine.
- What do you usually do on weekends?
- Can you describe your favorite memory at school?
Part 2 – Guided Monologue (1 minute)
Purpose: assess extended speaking and organization
Pre-Test Topic: "Describe your favorite place and explain why it is important to you."
Post-Test Topic: "Talk about a problem in society and share your opinion about how to solve
it."
Part 3 – Follow-Up Questions (1 minute)
Purpose: assess comprehension, elaboration, and interaction
- Do you think your ideas are easy to understand?
- How do you feel when giving your opinion in English?
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2112
ANNEX C.- Classroom Observation Checklist
Objective: Monitor participation, engagement, language use, and affective responses during debate
activities in B1 level
Category Indicators Observed (0-10) Notes
Participation Volunteers to speak,
takes roles in debates
Engagement Shows interest in the
topic, listens to others
attentively
Use of Complex
Language
Uses connectors,
persuasive phrases,
and arguments
Fluency and
Coherence
Maintains flow of
ideas without long
pauses or breakdowns
Confidence Makes eye contact,
speaks without fear,
responds without
prompting
Peer Interaction Rebuttals, questions,
support or challenge
of classmates’
arguments
Affective Signs Appears relaxed,
smiles, or seems
more comfortable
over time
Improvements Over
Time
Demonstrates visible
progress in speech
quality or reduced
hesitation
Note. Observation checklist created by the author.
ANNEX C.- Classroom Observation Checklist
Objective: Monitor participation, engagement, language use, and affective responses during debate
activities in B1 level
Category Indicators Observed (0-10) Notes
Participation Volunteers to speak,
takes roles in debates
Engagement Shows interest in the
topic, listens to others
attentively
Use of Complex
Language
Uses connectors,
persuasive phrases,
and arguments
Fluency and
Coherence
Maintains flow of
ideas without long
pauses or breakdowns
Confidence Makes eye contact,
speaks without fear,
responds without
prompting
Peer Interaction Rebuttals, questions,
support or challenge
of classmates’
arguments
Affective Signs Appears relaxed,
smiles, or seems
more comfortable
over time
Improvements Over
Time
Demonstrates visible
progress in speech
quality or reduced
hesitation
Note. Observation checklist created by the author.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2113
ANNEX D.- Oral Performance Rubric
Objective: Assess B1-level EFL students' ability to communicate effectively in spoken English,
focusing on fluency, accuracy, pronunciation, and interaction. The rubric evaluates performance in
familiar contexts using appropriate vocabulary and coherent speech.
Criteria 5 –
Excellent
4 – Good 3 – Fair 2 – Needs
Improvemen
t
1 – Limited
Fluency Speaks
smoothly
with little
hesitation
Some hesitation
but generally
fluent
Frequent
pauses and
self-
correction
Disrupted
flow; relies
on short
phrases
Speech is slow,
fragmented, hard
to follow
Grammar Accurate
and
varied
use of
grammar
Minor mistakes,
meaning is clear
Some
consistent
errors
Frequent
errors,
affecting
clarity
Errors dominate
and prevent
understanding
Vocabulary Rich and
precise
vocabular
y
Adequate range;
few repetitions
Limited
range and
repetitions
Frequent
errors and
gaps
Very basic or
incorrect
vocabulary
Pronunciatio
n
Clear and
natural;
easily
understoo
d
Generally clear;
few
mispronunciatio
ns
Understandab
le with some
effort
Difficult to
understand at
times
Mostly
unintelligible
Comprehensi
on &
Interaction
Responds
accuratel
y and
elaborate
s ideas
Responds with
detail; minor
lapses
Answers are
short; needs
support
Limited
comprehensio
n; off-topic
Unable to
understand/respo
nd effectively
Argumentatio
n (for
debates)
Presents
structure
d,
convincin
g
argument
s
Gives reasons
with some
structure
Simple ideas;
few
connections
Weak
arguments or
off-topic
No logical
structure or
clarity
Note. Oral performance rubric created by the author.
ANNEX D.- Oral Performance Rubric
Objective: Assess B1-level EFL students' ability to communicate effectively in spoken English,
focusing on fluency, accuracy, pronunciation, and interaction. The rubric evaluates performance in
familiar contexts using appropriate vocabulary and coherent speech.
Criteria 5 –
Excellent
4 – Good 3 – Fair 2 – Needs
Improvemen
t
1 – Limited
Fluency Speaks
smoothly
with little
hesitation
Some hesitation
but generally
fluent
Frequent
pauses and
self-
correction
Disrupted
flow; relies
on short
phrases
Speech is slow,
fragmented, hard
to follow
Grammar Accurate
and
varied
use of
grammar
Minor mistakes,
meaning is clear
Some
consistent
errors
Frequent
errors,
affecting
clarity
Errors dominate
and prevent
understanding
Vocabulary Rich and
precise
vocabular
y
Adequate range;
few repetitions
Limited
range and
repetitions
Frequent
errors and
gaps
Very basic or
incorrect
vocabulary
Pronunciatio
n
Clear and
natural;
easily
understoo
d
Generally clear;
few
mispronunciatio
ns
Understandab
le with some
effort
Difficult to
understand at
times
Mostly
unintelligible
Comprehensi
on &
Interaction
Responds
accuratel
y and
elaborate
s ideas
Responds with
detail; minor
lapses
Answers are
short; needs
support
Limited
comprehensio
n; off-topic
Unable to
understand/respo
nd effectively
Argumentatio
n (for
debates)
Presents
structure
d,
convincin
g
argument
s
Gives reasons
with some
structure
Simple ideas;
few
connections
Weak
arguments or
off-topic
No logical
structure or
clarity
Note. Oral performance rubric created by the author.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 4 2025 pág. 2114
ANNEX E.- Student Perception Survey
Objective: Assess students’ perception of their speaking ability, confidence, anxiety, and engagement
after the intervention.
Format: 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree)
Part A – Confidence & Motivation
1. I feel more confident speaking English after participating in debates.
2. I am more motivated to improve my speaking skills.
3. I am more comfortable speaking in front of the class.
Part B – Anxiety Reduction
4. I feel less nervous when I speak English now.
5. I no longer worry much about making mistakes in English.
6. Debate helped me reduce my fear of public speaking.
Part C – Perceived Progress
7. My vocabulary has improved because of debates.
8. I can now speak more fluently than before.
9. I can organize my ideas more clearly when I speak.
Part D – Engagement with Debate
10. I enjoyed participating in the debates.
11. I would like to continue using debates in English class.
12. Debates helped me learn from my classmates.
ANNEX E.- Student Perception Survey
Objective: Assess students’ perception of their speaking ability, confidence, anxiety, and engagement
after the intervention.
Format: 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree)
Part A – Confidence & Motivation
1. I feel more confident speaking English after participating in debates.
2. I am more motivated to improve my speaking skills.
3. I am more comfortable speaking in front of the class.
Part B – Anxiety Reduction
4. I feel less nervous when I speak English now.
5. I no longer worry much about making mistakes in English.
6. Debate helped me reduce my fear of public speaking.
Part C – Perceived Progress
7. My vocabulary has improved because of debates.
8. I can now speak more fluently than before.
9. I can organize my ideas more clearly when I speak.
Part D – Engagement with Debate
10. I enjoyed participating in the debates.
11. I would like to continue using debates in English class.
12. Debates helped me learn from my classmates.