Minggu, 23 November 2008
Kamis, 20 November 2008
Rabu, 19 November 2008
The Low Salary of Teachers Decreases Their Creativity
I was browsing around and this phrase caught my attention. It goes like this - There's no denying...that Beethoven came with music in his soul, Picasso was drawing like an angel in the crib. And you are born with it. I asked myself, “am I creative?”. I had doubts, but then again the answer came as yes. This statement is true. Everybody is born with creativity, all we have to do is be given the time and opportunity to explore it.
Now let me talk about the teaching profession. I’ll give you the facts simple and flat, according to what I have gathered. Teachers are highly respected. They have a profession that is given a high regard in the community. Along with it is dealing with different personalities and tempers of the students, thus, they have to be continuously inventive to accommodate the diversity. Unfortunately, the ugly part of it is in reality, teaching is one of the low paying professions. Based on the Human Development Index done by United Nations, Indonesia ranked 107 from 170 countries based on the quality of university students produced by our country. Why is this happening? It’s because those who graduated as teachers opt for a high paying job. And the hope for quality education dies.
My first reaction to this topic was – absolutely not! It doesn’t affect their creativity. They should be creative, they have passion and so on and so forth. A good lecture about it was given to me and blessed the people who opened my eyes and enabled me to look at the real problem. Now I can say that I do believe that, this statement is right.
You might wonder how I can say this? Of course, teachers are passionate and creative, however we must also remember that they are also human beings. They have basic needs that they have to fulfill.
This is actualy tricky. It is like a domino where all things are linked together. Teacher, creativity, time, passion, motivation and salary. When one is not fully supported then everything will come crashing down. I am not saying that teachers are only interested with the money, but let me share to you what I was made to realize.
Let’s start with passion. Passion goes hand and hand with creativity. Passion needs motivation and if the needed motivation is not supplied then passion will be affected. With this passion comes creativity. Of course, it will decrease the creativity because they don’t have the motivation to encourage them when they are teaching in class. A good salary is a good motivation.
And as I have mentioned earlier, teachers are also human who have their basic needs. Everybody works to fulfill this basic needs for them and their family. It is the same thing with teachers. Teachers try to get enough money to be able to sustain their needs. If they receive only a small amount of wage, how can they survive? The low salary won’t help much, thus it will decrease the teacher’s time and concentration, because they will now think of other means to be able to provide and fulfill their basic needs. They cannot concentrate well; they won’t become focused in their lesson. Some if not most of them would even consider getting a second source of income. It wouldn’t really matter what kind, but the point is it is able to support their needs. So, the time that is supposed to be used for being creative is lost.
A very obvious example are our state school teachers who look for a second job or even third job after school so as to be able to sustain their family ‘s basic needs. So where is the time for them to relax and enhance their teaching methodology. They get lower salary, I’d say they won’t be able to focus in class and it will definitely decrease their creativity. When this thing happens, it will now come to the point that it is like eating. We merely eat to survive and not to relish the food.
Sad to say that this problem is observed globally and not limited to Indonesia. In indonesia, we already know that the constitution demands, the government to spend 25% from APBN for education. Up until now, the government continuously fails to fulfill that and still can’t give the money from APBN to the teachers. Where does the money go? Is that about corruption again? How can Indonesian students improve?
Other countries like Malaysia are already trying to address the problem, they got 20% from the government and awarded it to education which resulted in having a better education. Indonesia is also trying, but the problem is the implementation. Teachers are the moulders of people in the society, thus the salary that greatly affects their creativity should be addressed. I am not saying that money is everything, but money can help, and it is very important.
Lastly, as I have mentioned earlier, everybody is born with creativity. All that is needed is time and the opportunity to explore and be resourceful. And not having a second job or the burden of thinking about how they could fulfill their basic needs is a key. The government must start giving more attention to this problem and not wait until the intellectuals who are supposed to be teachers would not choose to be a teacher, but opt for a better high paying job. Teachers are not asking for a skyrocketing salary. What they are asking is what they deserve and what is just.
The Second President of ESo
Personal Information
Name :Madlias
Address :Ratu Dibalau street - Bandar Lampung
Date of Birth :Bandar Lampung, September 25, 1986
Religion :Islam
Educational Background
1. Madrasah Ibtidaiyah Nurul Islam – South Lampung and SD Negeri 1 Way Kandis Bandar Lampung.
2. SMP Negeri 21 Bandar Lampung.
3. SMKN 2 Bandar Lampung
Organizational Background
1. The Chief of Technology English Club at SMKN2 Bandar Lampung.
2. The Chief of English Society at Lampung University
Occupation
1. The Teacher in Intensive English Course ( IEC ) Bandar Lampung.
Achievements
1. The Indonesian Youth Ambassador in Youth Exchange Program to Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam and with other South East Asian countries in SSEAYP 2007.
2. The First Winer of Mekhanai Lampung in Pemilihan Muli Mekhanai Lampung 2007
3. The First Winner of National Debating Championship in Gajah Mada University – Jogjakarta 2003.
4. The First Winner of many Debate, Speech and News Casting Championship in Lampung.
Australasian Parliamentary Debating
INTRODUCTION
THIS document is an introduction to Australasian Parliamentary debates, the motions/topics, team structure, etc. It is meant to help institutions and universities who are new to the Parliamentary debating format and are interested in participating in a debating competition using the format, but are still unclear on the rules and regulations. This document is not intended to serve as a definitive guide to the rules of the tournament.
THE BASICS OF DEBATING
DEBATING is about developing your communication skills. It is about assembling and organizing effective arguments, persuading and entertaining an audience, and using your voice and gestures to convince an adjudicator that your arguments outweigh your oppositions. Debating is not about personal abuse, irrational attacks or purely emotional appeals.
A debate is held between two teams of three members each. These two teams will be referred to as the Affirmative and the Negative. Members of each team are assigned positions as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd speakers. For each debate, a motion is given. After the motion is given, teams are given thirty (30) minutes to prepare for each debate.
Each of the speakers will deliver a substantial speech of seven (7) minutes duration and either the 1st or the 2nd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches for their teams. Reply speeches will be five (5) minutes.
Thus, the complete order of speaking during a debate is as follows:
• 1st Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 1st Negative – 7 minutes
• 2nd Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 2nd Negative – 7 minutes
• 3rd Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 3rd Negative – 7 minutes
• Negative Reply – 5 minutes
• Affirmative Reply – 5 minutes
What must both sides do? In general:
• Affirmative (also known as “the Government”)
The Affirmative team must define the motion and support this by giving constructive arguments. The right to define first resides with the Affirmative team, who is expected to give a reasonable definition for the motion.
• Negative (also known as “the Opposition”)
The Negative team must oppose the motion as defined by the Affirmative, and build a counter-case against the Affirmative. In the event the Negative team feels that the definition is invalid, they may challenge the definition and propose an alternative definition. However, the Negative team cannot raise a challenge simply on the basis that their definition is more reasonable.
MOTIONS
MOTIONS, also known as topics, are full propositional statements that determine what a debate shall be about. In the debate, the Affirmative team must argue to defend the propositional statement of the motion, and the Negative team must argue to oppose it.
Here are some examples of motions that can be debated about:
• That we should give President Habibie a chance
• That Indonesia should change its constitution
• That football is overvalued in today’s society
• That cigarette companies should not be held responsible for the bad effects of smoking
• That American pop culture is a threat to civilization
• That long is better than short
DEFINITIONS
BEFORE a debate ensues, the motion that is given must first be defined by the Affirmative team. A definition clarifies the motion. A definition gives a clear description of boundaries to the motion, thereby limiting what the debate will be about into a focused area of discussion. This prevents the debate from turning into a vague and confusing show of unrelated arguments and different interpretations from both teams of what is actually being debated among them.
The definition should take the motion as a whole, defining individual words only if they have a key role. Out of the definition should come a clear understanding of the issues that will be fought over in the debate. If the Affirmative chooses to define the motion on a word-by-word basis, it should define words or phrases by their common usage. Dictionaries may be useful for finding a common meaning or a pithy explanation of a word, but they are not an absolute authority.
An example of a definition could be as follows: Given the motion “that what goes up, must come down”, the Affirmative is presented with many options on how to define the motion, because the nature of the motion itself is quite abstract. One way they could define it is as follows: they could define the object (the ‘what’) as being the president of the Republic of Indonesia. In essence, the motion would then state that anyone who “goes up” (takes power) as president of Indonesia, must undoubtedly one day “come down” (step down from power). This would give us the definition “that the Indonesian presidency should be limited to 2 terms”. The Affirmative team could then argue on the detriments of having unlimited presidential terms, citing proof such as the total control of the past regime under Soeharto, etc.
The above example shows that in most situations, the actual issue of the debate is unknown until the Affirmative delivers their definition of the motion. Only then does it become clear.
Always keep in mind that a definition must be reasonable. This is to say that:
• it must be debatable (i.e. have two sides to it), and
• it must not be a bizarre distortion of the motion.
This is not to say that an Affirmative team may not choose an unusual interpretation of the motion, but they must be prepared to justify it.
The Negative, in general, must accept the definition made by the Affirmative, but the Negative shall have the right of challenging the definition if it does not conform to either of the two requirements set out above. However, a Negative team cannot raise a challenge simply on the basis that their definition seems more reasonable. They can only challenge a definition if they can prove it to be either Truistic, Tautological, Squirreling, or Time and place setting (see below).
If a Negative team accepts the definition, they only need to say so, and it is unnecessary to restate it. If they challenge it, their justification for doing so must be clearly stated, and an alternative definition must be put forward. If the definition is accepted, then that definition must stand. The Negative must adjust their case to that definition, and the adjudicator's views on its reasonableness become irrelevant.
The following definitions are strictly prohibited at the tournament, and should be challenged by the Negative team:
• Truistic definitions: These are definitions which are ‘true’ by nature and thus make the proposed arguments unarguable and therefore unreasonable in the context of the debate. If a team defines the debate truistically, they seek to win the debate by the truth of their definition rather than by the strength of their arguments and supporting evidence. An example of a truistic definition would be if the motion “that we should eat, drink, and be merry” were defined as “that we should eat, because otherwise we would starve to death; drink, because otherwise we would die of thirst; and be merry because we are alive”.
• Tautological or circular definitions: This happens when a definition is given in such a way that it is logically impossible to negate it. An example would be if the motion “that technology is killing our work ethic” were defined as follows: the Affirmative team decides to define the term ‘technology’ as meaning “all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kills our work ethic”. This would result in the whole definition “that all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kills our work ethic is killing our work ethic”. This cannot be logically proven false.
• Squirreling: Definitions that are not tied down to the spirit of the motion and do not have a proper logical link to the motion will constitute squirreling. For instance, when given the motion “that the USA is opening up to the PRC”, an Affirmative team could try and define USA as “Untidy Students of Asia”, and PRC as “Pretty Room Cleaners”. This is definitely squirreling, as anyone would agree that the spirit of the motion is about the relationship between the United States and China!
• Time and Place-setting: The subject matter of the debate cannot be confined to a particular time and place. For instance, trying to limit the subject matter to only the economic development of Japan during the specific period of the Meiji restoration.
A note on definitional challenges: be very careful about challenging definitions - only do so if you are absolutely certain that the Affirmative's definition is unfair. It is better to be brave and dump your prepared case in favor of tackling the Affirmative on their own terms than to issue an unjustified definition challenge. By the same token, Affirmative teams should try to ensure that their definition is fair.
THEME LINE
THE theme line is the underlying logic of a team’s case. It is the main instrument of argumentation that is used to prove a team’s stand on the motion. A theme line can be viewed as a ‘Case In A Nutshell’, because it concisely explains a team’s strategy in defending or negating the motion.
The theme line of a team must heavily imbue each speech of every team member. It is the main idea that links together the first, second, and third speakers, ensuring consistency among all speeches.
In formulating a theme line, it is often helpful to ask the question: Why is the propositional statement given by the definition of the motion true (or false, for the Negative team)? Without further explanation, this propositional statement is a mere assertion, or a statement which is logically unproven to be true. The answer to this question must be an argument which proves the assertion given by the motion. This argument is the theme line.
A theme line should be kept short, and it may take a form of a single sentence, an arrangement of several statements into a logical syllogism, etc. Whatever it is, it must by itself prove the motion (as it is defined) and all arguments brought forward should be based on this theme line.
TEAM SPLIT
DEBATING is a team activity. One person cannot take all the arguments and become the sole defender of the team's case. Therefore, there is a need to decide on how the arguments should be distributed among speakers. This is called the team split. Simply put, the team split is the distribution of arguments to the first, second, and third speaker.
Be careful, though, that each individual speech by itself must already prove the motion. You should not create what is called a hung case. A hung case is when an individual speech fails to prove the motion by itself, but instead requires coupling it with other speeches to be able to finally prove the motion.
For a more elaborate exposition on formulating theme lines and team splits, please consult the document entitled “Casebuilding Examples of Australasian Parliamentary Debates”. It contains thorough examples that give a very clear idea on how to construct theme lines and team splits from definitions.
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTATION is the process of explaining why a point of view should be accepted. It concerns the logic and the evidence supporting a particular conclusion. Use evidence (i.e. examples, facts, statistics, quotations of expert/public opinion etc.) to back up each point you make in your argument. Show how each piece of evidence is relevant and how it advances your argument. Make a point, give the reason for that point, and supply evidence to back it up.
Arguments are not assertions. Assertions are statements that have yet to be proven to be logically true. On the other hand, arguments must have supporting logic and facts that can show its validity.
What adjudicators look for in a good argument
• Relevance
• Organization
• Consistency and internal logic - i.e. don't contradict yourself or your teammates
• Clarity (remember, debating is about persuading your audience and adjudicator that you're right - so make sure they can understand what you're saying!)
• Effective use of evidence
Preparing a Reasonable Argument
One skill of good debating is being able to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and – especially important – to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument. The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a train of reasoning, but whether the conclusion follows from the premises and whether those premises are true.
When developing your argument, consider the following factors:
• Wherever possible offer independent confirmation of the "facts."
• Prepare for substantive debate on the evidence by considering all points of view.
• Arguments from authority carry little weight – "authorities" have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
• Prepare more than one case. If there's something to be defined, think of all the different ways in which it could be defined. Then think of arguments by which you might systematically rebut each of the cases. What survives, the case that resists rebuttal in this Darwinian selection among "multiple working cases," has a much better chance of being the stronger case than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
• Try not to get overly attached to a idea just because it's yours. It's only a waystation in the pursuit of a winning argument. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don't, others will.
• Quantify. If whatever it is you're explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you'll be much better able to defend it against generalized rebuttal. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
• If there's a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) – not just most of them.
• Occam's Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
• Always ask whether the case can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are unfalsifiable are called "truisms" and are not in the spirit of debating. You run a good chance of losing a debate, especially if the opposition correctly identifies that your arguments cannot be rebutted.
REBUTTAL
REBUTTAL is the process of proving that the opposing team's arguments should be accorded less weight than is claimed for them. It may consist of:
• showing that the opposing argument is based on an error of fact or an erroneous interpretation of fact
• showing that the opposing argument is irrelevant to the proof of the topic
• showing that the opposing argument is illogical
• showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, involves unacceptable implications
• showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, should be accorded little weight
As with arguments, assertions do not equal rebuttals. Just as teams must show how and why their own arguments are valid, so they must show how and why the opposition's arguments are invalid.
• An argument may be wrong in fact or logic - if so, say how and why
• An argument may contradict their team line, or something else a speaker on that team has said – if so, point it out
• An argument may be true but completely irrelevant – these are often called “red herrings”.
Organization of rebuttal
It is not necessary to rebutt every single point and fact raised by the opposition. Single out their main arguments and attack those first. Savage their theme line and show how it falls down – and show why yours is better! You should rebutt by both destroying the opposition's arguments and by establishing a case that directly opposes theirs.
ROLES OF THE SPEAKERS
THE six speakers in an Australasian Parliamentary debate each have different roles to play and adjudicators should take account of how well a speaker fulfills his/her obligations.
The first speakers establish the fundamentals of their team's cases
First Affirmative’s duties:
• Defines the motion of the debate. The 1st Affirmative should ensure that no important points of definition are left out.
• Presents the Affirmative’s theme line. This is normally presented in one or several lines of analysis, explaining why the Affirmative’s case is logically correct.
• Outlines the Affirmative’s team split. This can be done by saying, for example: “I, as the first affirmative will deal with the philosophical base of our case, while my colleague, the second affirmative speaker, will examine its practical implications”.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“1st Affirmative’s part of the split”). After establishing the definition, theme line, and team split, the 1st Affirmative should then deal with the arguments/points that have been assigned to him/her in the team split.
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 1st Affirmative may spend some time on the definition and on establishing the theme line and showing how it is going to develop, but it is important to leave time to present some substantive arguments.
First Negative’s duties:
• Provide a response to the definition (accepts or challenges the definition).
• Rebutts 1st Affirmative, delivers a part of the negative's substantive case.
• Presents the Negative’s theme line.
• Outlines the Negative’s team split.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“1st Negative’s part of the split”).
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 1st Negative’s role is similar to the role of the 1st Affirmative’s, with the added responsibility of responding to the arguments brought up by the latter. The response to the 1st Affirmative’s arguments can come before the 1st Negative presents his/her own arguments to support the Negative’s case or vice-versa. However, the delivery of rebuttals first is recommended.
After the first speakers have spoken the main direction of each team’s case should be apparent.
The second speakers deal with the bulk of the substantive argument
Second Affirmative’s duties:
• Rebutts the 1st Negative's major arguments.
• Briefly restates/reiterates in general terms the Affirmative’s team case.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“2nd Affirmative’s part of the split”). Most of the 2nd Affirmative's time should be spent dealing with new substantial material/arguments. He or she has the duty to present the bulk of the Affirmative's case in an attempt to further argue in favor of the Affirmative.
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 2nd Affirmative should be prepared to defend the definition if necessary. If it is attacked, it is vital for the 2nd Affirmative to win back the initiative.
Second Negative’s duties:
• Rebuttal of the first two Affirmative speakers.
• Briefly restates/reiterates in general terms the Negative’s team case.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“2nd Negative’s part of the split”).
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 2nd Negative has duties similar to the one performed by the 2nd Affirmative.
Most of the teams' substantive argument should have emerged by the time both second speakers have spoken.
The third speakers main duty is to rebutt the opponent’s case
Third Affirmative’s duties:
• Rebutt the points raised by the first two Negative speakers. The 3rd Affirmative is mainly entrusted with the duty of responding to the arguments of the Negative that were not previously dealt with by the first two Affirmative speakers. 3rd Affirmative may also reinforce rebuttals that have already been stated by teammates.
• Rebuild team’s case (briefly reiterate theme line and first two speakers’ arguments).
• Summarize the issues of the debate.
The role of the third speakers is simply this: Attack! Most of a third speaker's time must be spent rebutting the preceding speakers. Generally at least three quarters of a third speech should be rebuttal.
Rebuttal should ideally be carried out on two levels: on a global level (teamwise), a 3rd speaker should attack the opposing team’s whole case, pointing out the major flaws in argumentation and logic. On a more detailed level (speechwise), a 3rd speaker should be able to point out the mistakes in fact and inconsistency of each individual speech.
Third Negative’s duties:
• Rebutt the points raised by all three Affirmative speakers.
• Rebuild team’s case (briefly reiterate theme line and first two speakers’ arguments).
• Identify the points of contention / the clash of the debate
• Summarize the issues of the debate
The 3rd Negative has duties similar to the ones performed by the 3rd Affirmative. However, the 3rd Negative cannot introduce new matter, except for new examples to reinforce an argument that has previously been brought up. The logic behind this rule is that if a 3rd Negative is allowed to introduce new matter, the Affirmative would be at a disadvantage as they would not have any opportunity to be able to respond to these new arguments.
Reply speakers give a recap of the debate and a convincing biased adjudication
Reply speakers duties (both sides):
• Provide a summary or overview of the debate
• Identify the issues raised by both sides
• Provide a biased adjudication of the debate
Either the first or the second speaker of each side may deliver the reply speech. The Negative team delivers the first reply speech.
A reply speech is a review of both your own and the opposition's case. It represents a chance for the teams to show their arguments in the best light and to summarize the flaws in the opposition's case. The aim is to emphasize the major points made by your own team and to show how these contributed to a logical progression of argument in support of your theme line. At the same time the flaws in the opposition's argument must be outlined. This can be done point-by-point, or by taking a more global approach to the arguments. Both are effective if well done, so find the summary style that suits you best. However, the latter style is often more effective in light of the limited time frame.
The introduction of new material is absolutely prohibited and will be penalized. Any point brought up by the other side which had not been rebutted earlier in the substantial speeches may not be rebutted in the reply speeches. Therefore, this means that all substantive arguments presented in the debate must be dealt with by the opposing team in the substantial speeches.
ADJUDICATION
ADJUDICATION is the process of determining which team wins the debates. This is conducted by an adjudicator, or a panel consisting of an odd number of adjudicators.
There is always a winner in a debate. There are no ‘draws’ or ‘ties’. The speakers are assessed on Matter, Manner, and Method. Matter is 40 points, Manner is 40, and Method is 20, making a total of 100 points for each substantial speech. For reply speeches, Matter and Manner are 20 points and Method is 10, making a total of 50 points.
Matter refers to the points, arguments, logic, facts, statistics, and examples brought up during the course of the debate. Manner is concerned with the style of public-speaking – the use of voice, language, eye contact, notes, gesture, stance, humor and personality as a medium for making the audience more receptive to the argument being delivered. There are no set rules which must be followed by debaters. Method consists of the effectiveness of the structure and organization of each individual speech, the effectiveness of the structure and organization of the team case as a whole, and the extent to which the team reacted appropriately to the dynamics of the debate.
CLOSING
THIS document is not intended to be the definitive set of rules that you must adhere to in debating. It serves as a source of information. For further information, please check out the Casebuilding Examples of Australasian Parliamentary Debate. It provides more in-depth explanation of cases, and gives examples to give a good idea of how one should construct cases.
Finally, it must be said that “practice makes perfect”. No one ever masters the art of swimming or riding a bicycle by thoroughly reading guidelines and handbooks. One must take that first plunge, and perhaps even fall down once or twice, before finally becoming skillful. The same applies to debating. These guidelines should be enough to get you started. But practice makes perfect.
THIS document is an introduction to Australasian Parliamentary debates, the motions/topics, team structure, etc. It is meant to help institutions and universities who are new to the Parliamentary debating format and are interested in participating in a debating competition using the format, but are still unclear on the rules and regulations. This document is not intended to serve as a definitive guide to the rules of the tournament.
THE BASICS OF DEBATING
DEBATING is about developing your communication skills. It is about assembling and organizing effective arguments, persuading and entertaining an audience, and using your voice and gestures to convince an adjudicator that your arguments outweigh your oppositions. Debating is not about personal abuse, irrational attacks or purely emotional appeals.
A debate is held between two teams of three members each. These two teams will be referred to as the Affirmative and the Negative. Members of each team are assigned positions as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd speakers. For each debate, a motion is given. After the motion is given, teams are given thirty (30) minutes to prepare for each debate.
Each of the speakers will deliver a substantial speech of seven (7) minutes duration and either the 1st or the 2nd speaker on both sides will deliver the reply speeches for their teams. Reply speeches will be five (5) minutes.
Thus, the complete order of speaking during a debate is as follows:
• 1st Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 1st Negative – 7 minutes
• 2nd Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 2nd Negative – 7 minutes
• 3rd Affirmative – 7 minutes
• 3rd Negative – 7 minutes
• Negative Reply – 5 minutes
• Affirmative Reply – 5 minutes
What must both sides do? In general:
• Affirmative (also known as “the Government”)
The Affirmative team must define the motion and support this by giving constructive arguments. The right to define first resides with the Affirmative team, who is expected to give a reasonable definition for the motion.
• Negative (also known as “the Opposition”)
The Negative team must oppose the motion as defined by the Affirmative, and build a counter-case against the Affirmative. In the event the Negative team feels that the definition is invalid, they may challenge the definition and propose an alternative definition. However, the Negative team cannot raise a challenge simply on the basis that their definition is more reasonable.
MOTIONS
MOTIONS, also known as topics, are full propositional statements that determine what a debate shall be about. In the debate, the Affirmative team must argue to defend the propositional statement of the motion, and the Negative team must argue to oppose it.
Here are some examples of motions that can be debated about:
• That we should give President Habibie a chance
• That Indonesia should change its constitution
• That football is overvalued in today’s society
• That cigarette companies should not be held responsible for the bad effects of smoking
• That American pop culture is a threat to civilization
• That long is better than short
DEFINITIONS
BEFORE a debate ensues, the motion that is given must first be defined by the Affirmative team. A definition clarifies the motion. A definition gives a clear description of boundaries to the motion, thereby limiting what the debate will be about into a focused area of discussion. This prevents the debate from turning into a vague and confusing show of unrelated arguments and different interpretations from both teams of what is actually being debated among them.
The definition should take the motion as a whole, defining individual words only if they have a key role. Out of the definition should come a clear understanding of the issues that will be fought over in the debate. If the Affirmative chooses to define the motion on a word-by-word basis, it should define words or phrases by their common usage. Dictionaries may be useful for finding a common meaning or a pithy explanation of a word, but they are not an absolute authority.
An example of a definition could be as follows: Given the motion “that what goes up, must come down”, the Affirmative is presented with many options on how to define the motion, because the nature of the motion itself is quite abstract. One way they could define it is as follows: they could define the object (the ‘what’) as being the president of the Republic of Indonesia. In essence, the motion would then state that anyone who “goes up” (takes power) as president of Indonesia, must undoubtedly one day “come down” (step down from power). This would give us the definition “that the Indonesian presidency should be limited to 2 terms”. The Affirmative team could then argue on the detriments of having unlimited presidential terms, citing proof such as the total control of the past regime under Soeharto, etc.
The above example shows that in most situations, the actual issue of the debate is unknown until the Affirmative delivers their definition of the motion. Only then does it become clear.
Always keep in mind that a definition must be reasonable. This is to say that:
• it must be debatable (i.e. have two sides to it), and
• it must not be a bizarre distortion of the motion.
This is not to say that an Affirmative team may not choose an unusual interpretation of the motion, but they must be prepared to justify it.
The Negative, in general, must accept the definition made by the Affirmative, but the Negative shall have the right of challenging the definition if it does not conform to either of the two requirements set out above. However, a Negative team cannot raise a challenge simply on the basis that their definition seems more reasonable. They can only challenge a definition if they can prove it to be either Truistic, Tautological, Squirreling, or Time and place setting (see below).
If a Negative team accepts the definition, they only need to say so, and it is unnecessary to restate it. If they challenge it, their justification for doing so must be clearly stated, and an alternative definition must be put forward. If the definition is accepted, then that definition must stand. The Negative must adjust their case to that definition, and the adjudicator's views on its reasonableness become irrelevant.
The following definitions are strictly prohibited at the tournament, and should be challenged by the Negative team:
• Truistic definitions: These are definitions which are ‘true’ by nature and thus make the proposed arguments unarguable and therefore unreasonable in the context of the debate. If a team defines the debate truistically, they seek to win the debate by the truth of their definition rather than by the strength of their arguments and supporting evidence. An example of a truistic definition would be if the motion “that we should eat, drink, and be merry” were defined as “that we should eat, because otherwise we would starve to death; drink, because otherwise we would die of thirst; and be merry because we are alive”.
• Tautological or circular definitions: This happens when a definition is given in such a way that it is logically impossible to negate it. An example would be if the motion “that technology is killing our work ethic” were defined as follows: the Affirmative team decides to define the term ‘technology’ as meaning “all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kills our work ethic”. This would result in the whole definition “that all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kills our work ethic is killing our work ethic”. This cannot be logically proven false.
• Squirreling: Definitions that are not tied down to the spirit of the motion and do not have a proper logical link to the motion will constitute squirreling. For instance, when given the motion “that the USA is opening up to the PRC”, an Affirmative team could try and define USA as “Untidy Students of Asia”, and PRC as “Pretty Room Cleaners”. This is definitely squirreling, as anyone would agree that the spirit of the motion is about the relationship between the United States and China!
• Time and Place-setting: The subject matter of the debate cannot be confined to a particular time and place. For instance, trying to limit the subject matter to only the economic development of Japan during the specific period of the Meiji restoration.
A note on definitional challenges: be very careful about challenging definitions - only do so if you are absolutely certain that the Affirmative's definition is unfair. It is better to be brave and dump your prepared case in favor of tackling the Affirmative on their own terms than to issue an unjustified definition challenge. By the same token, Affirmative teams should try to ensure that their definition is fair.
THEME LINE
THE theme line is the underlying logic of a team’s case. It is the main instrument of argumentation that is used to prove a team’s stand on the motion. A theme line can be viewed as a ‘Case In A Nutshell’, because it concisely explains a team’s strategy in defending or negating the motion.
The theme line of a team must heavily imbue each speech of every team member. It is the main idea that links together the first, second, and third speakers, ensuring consistency among all speeches.
In formulating a theme line, it is often helpful to ask the question: Why is the propositional statement given by the definition of the motion true (or false, for the Negative team)? Without further explanation, this propositional statement is a mere assertion, or a statement which is logically unproven to be true. The answer to this question must be an argument which proves the assertion given by the motion. This argument is the theme line.
A theme line should be kept short, and it may take a form of a single sentence, an arrangement of several statements into a logical syllogism, etc. Whatever it is, it must by itself prove the motion (as it is defined) and all arguments brought forward should be based on this theme line.
TEAM SPLIT
DEBATING is a team activity. One person cannot take all the arguments and become the sole defender of the team's case. Therefore, there is a need to decide on how the arguments should be distributed among speakers. This is called the team split. Simply put, the team split is the distribution of arguments to the first, second, and third speaker.
Be careful, though, that each individual speech by itself must already prove the motion. You should not create what is called a hung case. A hung case is when an individual speech fails to prove the motion by itself, but instead requires coupling it with other speeches to be able to finally prove the motion.
For a more elaborate exposition on formulating theme lines and team splits, please consult the document entitled “Casebuilding Examples of Australasian Parliamentary Debates”. It contains thorough examples that give a very clear idea on how to construct theme lines and team splits from definitions.
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTATION is the process of explaining why a point of view should be accepted. It concerns the logic and the evidence supporting a particular conclusion. Use evidence (i.e. examples, facts, statistics, quotations of expert/public opinion etc.) to back up each point you make in your argument. Show how each piece of evidence is relevant and how it advances your argument. Make a point, give the reason for that point, and supply evidence to back it up.
Arguments are not assertions. Assertions are statements that have yet to be proven to be logically true. On the other hand, arguments must have supporting logic and facts that can show its validity.
What adjudicators look for in a good argument
• Relevance
• Organization
• Consistency and internal logic - i.e. don't contradict yourself or your teammates
• Clarity (remember, debating is about persuading your audience and adjudicator that you're right - so make sure they can understand what you're saying!)
• Effective use of evidence
Preparing a Reasonable Argument
One skill of good debating is being able to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and – especially important – to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument. The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a train of reasoning, but whether the conclusion follows from the premises and whether those premises are true.
When developing your argument, consider the following factors:
• Wherever possible offer independent confirmation of the "facts."
• Prepare for substantive debate on the evidence by considering all points of view.
• Arguments from authority carry little weight – "authorities" have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
• Prepare more than one case. If there's something to be defined, think of all the different ways in which it could be defined. Then think of arguments by which you might systematically rebut each of the cases. What survives, the case that resists rebuttal in this Darwinian selection among "multiple working cases," has a much better chance of being the stronger case than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
• Try not to get overly attached to a idea just because it's yours. It's only a waystation in the pursuit of a winning argument. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don't, others will.
• Quantify. If whatever it is you're explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you'll be much better able to defend it against generalized rebuttal. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
• If there's a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) – not just most of them.
• Occam's Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
• Always ask whether the case can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are unfalsifiable are called "truisms" and are not in the spirit of debating. You run a good chance of losing a debate, especially if the opposition correctly identifies that your arguments cannot be rebutted.
REBUTTAL
REBUTTAL is the process of proving that the opposing team's arguments should be accorded less weight than is claimed for them. It may consist of:
• showing that the opposing argument is based on an error of fact or an erroneous interpretation of fact
• showing that the opposing argument is irrelevant to the proof of the topic
• showing that the opposing argument is illogical
• showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, involves unacceptable implications
• showing that the opposing argument, while itself correct, should be accorded little weight
As with arguments, assertions do not equal rebuttals. Just as teams must show how and why their own arguments are valid, so they must show how and why the opposition's arguments are invalid.
• An argument may be wrong in fact or logic - if so, say how and why
• An argument may contradict their team line, or something else a speaker on that team has said – if so, point it out
• An argument may be true but completely irrelevant – these are often called “red herrings”.
Organization of rebuttal
It is not necessary to rebutt every single point and fact raised by the opposition. Single out their main arguments and attack those first. Savage their theme line and show how it falls down – and show why yours is better! You should rebutt by both destroying the opposition's arguments and by establishing a case that directly opposes theirs.
ROLES OF THE SPEAKERS
THE six speakers in an Australasian Parliamentary debate each have different roles to play and adjudicators should take account of how well a speaker fulfills his/her obligations.
The first speakers establish the fundamentals of their team's cases
First Affirmative’s duties:
• Defines the motion of the debate. The 1st Affirmative should ensure that no important points of definition are left out.
• Presents the Affirmative’s theme line. This is normally presented in one or several lines of analysis, explaining why the Affirmative’s case is logically correct.
• Outlines the Affirmative’s team split. This can be done by saying, for example: “I, as the first affirmative will deal with the philosophical base of our case, while my colleague, the second affirmative speaker, will examine its practical implications”.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“1st Affirmative’s part of the split”). After establishing the definition, theme line, and team split, the 1st Affirmative should then deal with the arguments/points that have been assigned to him/her in the team split.
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 1st Affirmative may spend some time on the definition and on establishing the theme line and showing how it is going to develop, but it is important to leave time to present some substantive arguments.
First Negative’s duties:
• Provide a response to the definition (accepts or challenges the definition).
• Rebutts 1st Affirmative, delivers a part of the negative's substantive case.
• Presents the Negative’s theme line.
• Outlines the Negative’s team split.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“1st Negative’s part of the split”).
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 1st Negative’s role is similar to the role of the 1st Affirmative’s, with the added responsibility of responding to the arguments brought up by the latter. The response to the 1st Affirmative’s arguments can come before the 1st Negative presents his/her own arguments to support the Negative’s case or vice-versa. However, the delivery of rebuttals first is recommended.
After the first speakers have spoken the main direction of each team’s case should be apparent.
The second speakers deal with the bulk of the substantive argument
Second Affirmative’s duties:
• Rebutts the 1st Negative's major arguments.
• Briefly restates/reiterates in general terms the Affirmative’s team case.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“2nd Affirmative’s part of the split”). Most of the 2nd Affirmative's time should be spent dealing with new substantial material/arguments. He or she has the duty to present the bulk of the Affirmative's case in an attempt to further argue in favor of the Affirmative.
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 2nd Affirmative should be prepared to defend the definition if necessary. If it is attacked, it is vital for the 2nd Affirmative to win back the initiative.
Second Negative’s duties:
• Rebuttal of the first two Affirmative speakers.
• Briefly restates/reiterates in general terms the Negative’s team case.
• Delivers substantial arguments (“2nd Negative’s part of the split”).
• Provide a brief summary/recap of the speech.
The 2nd Negative has duties similar to the one performed by the 2nd Affirmative.
Most of the teams' substantive argument should have emerged by the time both second speakers have spoken.
The third speakers main duty is to rebutt the opponent’s case
Third Affirmative’s duties:
• Rebutt the points raised by the first two Negative speakers. The 3rd Affirmative is mainly entrusted with the duty of responding to the arguments of the Negative that were not previously dealt with by the first two Affirmative speakers. 3rd Affirmative may also reinforce rebuttals that have already been stated by teammates.
• Rebuild team’s case (briefly reiterate theme line and first two speakers’ arguments).
• Summarize the issues of the debate.
The role of the third speakers is simply this: Attack! Most of a third speaker's time must be spent rebutting the preceding speakers. Generally at least three quarters of a third speech should be rebuttal.
Rebuttal should ideally be carried out on two levels: on a global level (teamwise), a 3rd speaker should attack the opposing team’s whole case, pointing out the major flaws in argumentation and logic. On a more detailed level (speechwise), a 3rd speaker should be able to point out the mistakes in fact and inconsistency of each individual speech.
Third Negative’s duties:
• Rebutt the points raised by all three Affirmative speakers.
• Rebuild team’s case (briefly reiterate theme line and first two speakers’ arguments).
• Identify the points of contention / the clash of the debate
• Summarize the issues of the debate
The 3rd Negative has duties similar to the ones performed by the 3rd Affirmative. However, the 3rd Negative cannot introduce new matter, except for new examples to reinforce an argument that has previously been brought up. The logic behind this rule is that if a 3rd Negative is allowed to introduce new matter, the Affirmative would be at a disadvantage as they would not have any opportunity to be able to respond to these new arguments.
Reply speakers give a recap of the debate and a convincing biased adjudication
Reply speakers duties (both sides):
• Provide a summary or overview of the debate
• Identify the issues raised by both sides
• Provide a biased adjudication of the debate
Either the first or the second speaker of each side may deliver the reply speech. The Negative team delivers the first reply speech.
A reply speech is a review of both your own and the opposition's case. It represents a chance for the teams to show their arguments in the best light and to summarize the flaws in the opposition's case. The aim is to emphasize the major points made by your own team and to show how these contributed to a logical progression of argument in support of your theme line. At the same time the flaws in the opposition's argument must be outlined. This can be done point-by-point, or by taking a more global approach to the arguments. Both are effective if well done, so find the summary style that suits you best. However, the latter style is often more effective in light of the limited time frame.
The introduction of new material is absolutely prohibited and will be penalized. Any point brought up by the other side which had not been rebutted earlier in the substantial speeches may not be rebutted in the reply speeches. Therefore, this means that all substantive arguments presented in the debate must be dealt with by the opposing team in the substantial speeches.
ADJUDICATION
ADJUDICATION is the process of determining which team wins the debates. This is conducted by an adjudicator, or a panel consisting of an odd number of adjudicators.
There is always a winner in a debate. There are no ‘draws’ or ‘ties’. The speakers are assessed on Matter, Manner, and Method. Matter is 40 points, Manner is 40, and Method is 20, making a total of 100 points for each substantial speech. For reply speeches, Matter and Manner are 20 points and Method is 10, making a total of 50 points.
Matter refers to the points, arguments, logic, facts, statistics, and examples brought up during the course of the debate. Manner is concerned with the style of public-speaking – the use of voice, language, eye contact, notes, gesture, stance, humor and personality as a medium for making the audience more receptive to the argument being delivered. There are no set rules which must be followed by debaters. Method consists of the effectiveness of the structure and organization of each individual speech, the effectiveness of the structure and organization of the team case as a whole, and the extent to which the team reacted appropriately to the dynamics of the debate.
CLOSING
THIS document is not intended to be the definitive set of rules that you must adhere to in debating. It serves as a source of information. For further information, please check out the Casebuilding Examples of Australasian Parliamentary Debate. It provides more in-depth explanation of cases, and gives examples to give a good idea of how one should construct cases.
Finally, it must be said that “practice makes perfect”. No one ever masters the art of swimming or riding a bicycle by thoroughly reading guidelines and handbooks. One must take that first plunge, and perhaps even fall down once or twice, before finally becoming skillful. The same applies to debating. These guidelines should be enough to get you started. But practice makes perfect.
Selasa, 18 November 2008
Tutorial Group
Monday Group
The PIC of the Group : Indah Pratiwi
Trainee:
Tiya Rahmuna Kesuma
Indah Pratiwi
Efelin Dewi Novita
Ledia Nurmalini
Embun Pagi
Novie Triyana Erda
Melvin Indriani
Fani Pratama
Ismail
Tuesday Group
The PIC of the Group : Hendra Putra Turnip
Trainee:
Myra Desmayenni
Mei Dianita
Candra C. Gani
Berlinda Mandasari
Tresia Noviyanti
Ma’ruf
Fangki
Wednesday Group
The PIC of the Group : Muhammad Arif Proklamasi
Trainee:
Rizka Mahardika
Rian Diasti
Hervin Maulina
Gustia Paramita Sari
Diah Wulandari
Sabila Rusyda
Adenty Novalia
Selly Hermavilia
Johan Kurniawan
Thursday Group
The PIC of the Group : Umi Azizah and Resika Gustiani
Rizka Amelia
Dita Windaviani
Resika Gustiani
Robby
Widi Ilham P
Sekar Wulandari
Linda Setiyana
Syayid Anwar
Saur Sinurat
Note:
1. For the Trainee of Tutorial
Please carefully look at the schedule of your tutorial and the PIC of your group. Try to contact the PIC as intensively as possible to get the information of the latest ESo’s activity. If you don’t have any class in campus, please go to ESo and do whatever you want to do there so that you will not be lost. Contact your PIC to open the door and don’t say “There is no one in ESo’s Home base everyday.” We open at 1:00 P.M. so you know the consequence if you come at 5:00 A.M. We’ll not be there of course. The more intensive you come, the more you will have the opportunity to be delegated in a competition and of course the more you will be able to speak English.
2. For all students of Lampung University
We reopen the recruitment of new members. How? Please come to ESo’s Home Base on Saturday, November 22, 2008 from 9:00 A.M. to 17:00 A.M. wear black t-shirt or shirt and bring food that at least the cost of the food is Rp. 5000. Meet Kristian, Balqis and Hendra to get the detail information at that day.
UKM-U English Society of Lampung University
Jalan Prof. Soemantri Brojonegoro No. 1 Gedung PUSKOM Lantai 1, Bandar Lampung 35145
Email : esounila@yahoo.com
Website : http://esounila.blogspot.com/
CP : Hendra Putra-Head of Administration and Home Base Security (085269662349)
The PIC of the Group : Indah Pratiwi
Trainee:
Tiya Rahmuna Kesuma
Indah Pratiwi
Efelin Dewi Novita
Ledia Nurmalini
Embun Pagi
Novie Triyana Erda
Melvin Indriani
Fani Pratama
Ismail
Tuesday Group
The PIC of the Group : Hendra Putra Turnip
Trainee:
Myra Desmayenni
Mei Dianita
Candra C. Gani
Berlinda Mandasari
Tresia Noviyanti
Ma’ruf
Fangki
Wednesday Group
The PIC of the Group : Muhammad Arif Proklamasi
Trainee:
Rizka Mahardika
Rian Diasti
Hervin Maulina
Gustia Paramita Sari
Diah Wulandari
Sabila Rusyda
Adenty Novalia
Selly Hermavilia
Johan Kurniawan
Thursday Group
The PIC of the Group : Umi Azizah and Resika Gustiani
Rizka Amelia
Dita Windaviani
Resika Gustiani
Robby
Widi Ilham P
Sekar Wulandari
Linda Setiyana
Syayid Anwar
Saur Sinurat
Note:
1. For the Trainee of Tutorial
Please carefully look at the schedule of your tutorial and the PIC of your group. Try to contact the PIC as intensively as possible to get the information of the latest ESo’s activity. If you don’t have any class in campus, please go to ESo and do whatever you want to do there so that you will not be lost. Contact your PIC to open the door and don’t say “There is no one in ESo’s Home base everyday.” We open at 1:00 P.M. so you know the consequence if you come at 5:00 A.M. We’ll not be there of course. The more intensive you come, the more you will have the opportunity to be delegated in a competition and of course the more you will be able to speak English.
2. For all students of Lampung University
We reopen the recruitment of new members. How? Please come to ESo’s Home Base on Saturday, November 22, 2008 from 9:00 A.M. to 17:00 A.M. wear black t-shirt or shirt and bring food that at least the cost of the food is Rp. 5000. Meet Kristian, Balqis and Hendra to get the detail information at that day.
UKM-U English Society of Lampung University
Jalan Prof. Soemantri Brojonegoro No. 1 Gedung PUSKOM Lantai 1, Bandar Lampung 35145
Email : esounila@yahoo.com
Website : http://esounila.blogspot.com/
CP : Hendra Putra-Head of Administration and Home Base Security (085269662349)
The Cabinet of UKM-U English Society of Lampung University 2008-2009
Board of Advisor
Patron : Prof. Dr. Ir. Sugeng P. harijanto, M.S. (Rector of Lampung University)
Advisor : Prof. Dr. Hertanto, S.H. M.H. (Vice Rector III of Lampung University)
Excecutive Advisor
1. Arizka Warganegara, S.I.P.,M.A.
2. Intan Fitri Meutia, S.A.N.
3. Masduki, S.T.
4. Madlias
Board of President
President : Kristian Adi Putra
Vice President : Balqis Nur Kemala Sari
Secretary : Eka Setiawan
Vice Secretary : Mei Dianita
Treasurer : Indah Pratiwi
Vice Treasurer : Umi Azizah
Department
1. Education and Human Resources Development Department
Head : Erlan Heryanto
Vice : Candra M. Gani
2. Creativity and Financial Support Department
Head : Muhammad Arif Proklamasi
Vice : Resika Gustiani
3. Administration and Home Base Security Department
Head : Hendra Putra Turnip
Vice : Riska Mahardika
4. Public Relation Department
Head : Muhammad Rudy
Vice : Efelina Dewi Novita
Patron : Prof. Dr. Ir. Sugeng P. harijanto, M.S. (Rector of Lampung University)
Advisor : Prof. Dr. Hertanto, S.H. M.H. (Vice Rector III of Lampung University)
Excecutive Advisor
1. Arizka Warganegara, S.I.P.,M.A.
2. Intan Fitri Meutia, S.A.N.
3. Masduki, S.T.
4. Madlias
Board of President
President : Kristian Adi Putra
Vice President : Balqis Nur Kemala Sari
Secretary : Eka Setiawan
Vice Secretary : Mei Dianita
Treasurer : Indah Pratiwi
Vice Treasurer : Umi Azizah
Department
1. Education and Human Resources Development Department
Head : Erlan Heryanto
Vice : Candra M. Gani
2. Creativity and Financial Support Department
Head : Muhammad Arif Proklamasi
Vice : Resika Gustiani
3. Administration and Home Base Security Department
Head : Hendra Putra Turnip
Vice : Riska Mahardika
4. Public Relation Department
Head : Muhammad Rudy
Vice : Efelina Dewi Novita
INDONESIA ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDY POGRAM (IELSP)
“Frequently Asked Questions”
1. Apakah IELSP itu?
Indonesia English Language Study Program adalah program beasiswa yang menawarkan kesempatan untuk mengikuti kursus Bahasa Inggris di universitas-universitas di Amerika Serikat selama 8 (delapan) minggu.
Program ini bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kemampuan Bahasa Inggris peserta, khususnya dalam English for Academic Purposes. Selain itu, peserta akan memiliki kesempatan untuk mempelajari secara langsung kebudayaan dan masyarakat Amerika Serikat karena peserta akan mengikuti program immersion dalam kelas internasional dimana mereka akan bergabung dengan peserta lain dari berbagai bangsa dan negara. Dalam program ini, peserta tidak hanya akan belajar Bahasa Inggris, namun juga akan mengikuti berbagai program kultural yang akan memberikan pengalaman yang sangat berharga.
2. Siapa yang berhak mendaftar?
IELSP terbuka untuk mereka yang berumur 19 – 24 tahun dan masih aktif sebagai mahasiswa S1 minimal tahun ketiga (semester 5 keatas) di perguruan tinggi mana pun di Indonesia dari berbagai jurusan. Pendaftar juga harus memiliki kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang baik yang ditunjukkan dengan nilai TOEFL® baik International TOEFL® atau TOEFL® ITP minimal 450. Peserta terpilih juga harus bersedia untuk meninggalkan kuliah di tanah air selama 8 minggu karena akan mengikuti kursus intensif di Amerika Serikat selama waktu tersebut.
3. Apa saja persyaratannya?
-berumur 19 – 24 tahun, dan
-aktif sebagai mahasiswa S1 minimal tahun ketiga (semester 5 keatas) di perguruan tinggi manapun di seluruh Indonesia (BELUM DINYATAKAN LULUS/MENEMPUH SIDANG KELULUSAN)
-memiliki kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang baik yang ditunjukkan dengan nilai TOEFL® baik International TOEFL® atau TOEFL® ITP minimal 450 (bukan Prediction Test)
-memiliki prestasi akademik yang baik
-aktif dalam berbagai kegiatan atau organisasi
-memiliki komitmen penuh untuk segera kembali ke tanah air segera setelah program ini selesai
-tidak memiliki pengalaman belajar di Amerika Serikat atau negara lain selain Indonesia
-memiliki sifat-sifat: aktif, mandiri, bertanggung jawab, percaya diri dan berpikiran luas.
-menguasai komputer
4. Bagaimana cara mendaftar?
Untuk mendaftar, dapat mengambil formulir di kantor Indonesian International Education Foundation (IIEF), Menara Imperium Lt. 28 Suite B, Jl. HR Rasuna Said Kav 1, Jakarta 12980. Formulir juga dapat di-download dari website IIEF di http://www.iief.or.id/. Formulir boleh di fotokopi.
5. Dokumen apa saja yang harus disertakan dalam formulir pendaftaran?
Pendaftar harus melampirkan dokumen-dokumen berikut dalam formulir pendaftaran yang telah dilengkapi:
-1 (satu) buah pasfoto berwarna ukuran 4x6
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi Kartu Identitas (KTP)
-1 (satu) buah surat keterangan resmi dari universitas bahwa yang bersangkutan masih aktif terdaftar di universitas tersebut
-transkrip nilai dari semester 1
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi Ijazah SMA (tidak perlu diterjemahkan)
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi Surat Tanda Tamat Belajar (STTB) SMA (tidak perlu diterjemahkan)
-1 (satu) buah Surat Referensi dari dosen di universitas – menggunakan form khusus yang terlampir dalam Formulir Pendaftaran. Form Referensi yang telah dilengkapi harap dimasukkan kedalam amplop tertutup dan disertakan bersama Formulir Pendaftaran yang telah dilengkapi. Surat Referensi dari Dosen Matakuliah Bahasa Inggris lebih baik.
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi nilai TOEFL® (International TOEFL® atau TOEFL® ITP)
6. Formulir ditujukan ke mana?
Formulir yang telah dilengkapi dan disertai oleh dokumen persyaratan dialamatkan ke:
IELSP
Indonesian International Education Foundation (IIEF)
Menara Imperium Lt. 28 Suite B
Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav. 1 Kuningan
Jakarta 12980
(harap menuliskan IELSP di sudut kiri atas amplop)
7. Kapan batas waktu pendaftaran?
Untuk Gelombang VI (terakhir), formulir yang telah dilengkapi dan disertai oleh dokumen persyaratan harus diterima oleh IIEF paling lambat tanggal 20 November 2008 .
8. Apakah saya harus sudah memiliki paspor dan visa Amerika Serikat sebelum mendaftar?
Seseorang tidak perlu sudah memiliki paspor dan visa Amerika Serikat untuk bisa mendaftar. Jika terpilih, peserta akan diberikan waktu untuk mengurus paspor. Visa Amerika Serikat akan diurus oleh IIEF sebelum keberangkatan. Perhatian: Penerima beasiswa dijadualkan untuk berangkat ke Amerika Serikat pada bulan April/Mei/Juni/Oktober 2009. (catatan: keputusan hasil seleksi tidak dapat diganggu gugat)
9. Apakah ada biaya tertentu yang harus saya bayar dalam program beasiswa ini?
Program ini merupakan beasiswa penuh, dan peserta tidak dipungut biaya apapun. Penerima beasiswa akan ditanggung seluruh biaya kecuali biaya pembuatan paspor.
10. Kemana saya harus bertanya untuk mendapatkan informasi?
Untuk informasi dapat menghubungi:
Indonesian International Education Foundation (IIEF)
Menara Imperium Lt. 28 Suite B
Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav. 1 Kuningan Jakarta 12980
Telp: 021 – 831 7330,Fax: 021 – 831 7331 (pada jam kerja)
Email: scholarship@iief.or.id
1. Apakah IELSP itu?
Indonesia English Language Study Program adalah program beasiswa yang menawarkan kesempatan untuk mengikuti kursus Bahasa Inggris di universitas-universitas di Amerika Serikat selama 8 (delapan) minggu.
Program ini bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kemampuan Bahasa Inggris peserta, khususnya dalam English for Academic Purposes. Selain itu, peserta akan memiliki kesempatan untuk mempelajari secara langsung kebudayaan dan masyarakat Amerika Serikat karena peserta akan mengikuti program immersion dalam kelas internasional dimana mereka akan bergabung dengan peserta lain dari berbagai bangsa dan negara. Dalam program ini, peserta tidak hanya akan belajar Bahasa Inggris, namun juga akan mengikuti berbagai program kultural yang akan memberikan pengalaman yang sangat berharga.
2. Siapa yang berhak mendaftar?
IELSP terbuka untuk mereka yang berumur 19 – 24 tahun dan masih aktif sebagai mahasiswa S1 minimal tahun ketiga (semester 5 keatas) di perguruan tinggi mana pun di Indonesia dari berbagai jurusan. Pendaftar juga harus memiliki kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang baik yang ditunjukkan dengan nilai TOEFL® baik International TOEFL® atau TOEFL® ITP minimal 450. Peserta terpilih juga harus bersedia untuk meninggalkan kuliah di tanah air selama 8 minggu karena akan mengikuti kursus intensif di Amerika Serikat selama waktu tersebut.
3. Apa saja persyaratannya?
-berumur 19 – 24 tahun, dan
-aktif sebagai mahasiswa S1 minimal tahun ketiga (semester 5 keatas) di perguruan tinggi manapun di seluruh Indonesia (BELUM DINYATAKAN LULUS/MENEMPUH SIDANG KELULUSAN)
-memiliki kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang baik yang ditunjukkan dengan nilai TOEFL® baik International TOEFL® atau TOEFL® ITP minimal 450 (bukan Prediction Test)
-memiliki prestasi akademik yang baik
-aktif dalam berbagai kegiatan atau organisasi
-memiliki komitmen penuh untuk segera kembali ke tanah air segera setelah program ini selesai
-tidak memiliki pengalaman belajar di Amerika Serikat atau negara lain selain Indonesia
-memiliki sifat-sifat: aktif, mandiri, bertanggung jawab, percaya diri dan berpikiran luas.
-menguasai komputer
4. Bagaimana cara mendaftar?
Untuk mendaftar, dapat mengambil formulir di kantor Indonesian International Education Foundation (IIEF), Menara Imperium Lt. 28 Suite B, Jl. HR Rasuna Said Kav 1, Jakarta 12980. Formulir juga dapat di-download dari website IIEF di http://www.iief.or.id/. Formulir boleh di fotokopi.
5. Dokumen apa saja yang harus disertakan dalam formulir pendaftaran?
Pendaftar harus melampirkan dokumen-dokumen berikut dalam formulir pendaftaran yang telah dilengkapi:
-1 (satu) buah pasfoto berwarna ukuran 4x6
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi Kartu Identitas (KTP)
-1 (satu) buah surat keterangan resmi dari universitas bahwa yang bersangkutan masih aktif terdaftar di universitas tersebut
-transkrip nilai dari semester 1
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi Ijazah SMA (tidak perlu diterjemahkan)
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi Surat Tanda Tamat Belajar (STTB) SMA (tidak perlu diterjemahkan)
-1 (satu) buah Surat Referensi dari dosen di universitas – menggunakan form khusus yang terlampir dalam Formulir Pendaftaran. Form Referensi yang telah dilengkapi harap dimasukkan kedalam amplop tertutup dan disertakan bersama Formulir Pendaftaran yang telah dilengkapi. Surat Referensi dari Dosen Matakuliah Bahasa Inggris lebih baik.
-1 (satu) buah fotokopi nilai TOEFL® (International TOEFL® atau TOEFL® ITP)
6. Formulir ditujukan ke mana?
Formulir yang telah dilengkapi dan disertai oleh dokumen persyaratan dialamatkan ke:
IELSP
Indonesian International Education Foundation (IIEF)
Menara Imperium Lt. 28 Suite B
Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav. 1 Kuningan
Jakarta 12980
(harap menuliskan IELSP di sudut kiri atas amplop)
7. Kapan batas waktu pendaftaran?
Untuk Gelombang VI (terakhir), formulir yang telah dilengkapi dan disertai oleh dokumen persyaratan harus diterima oleh IIEF paling lambat tanggal 20 November 2008 .
8. Apakah saya harus sudah memiliki paspor dan visa Amerika Serikat sebelum mendaftar?
Seseorang tidak perlu sudah memiliki paspor dan visa Amerika Serikat untuk bisa mendaftar. Jika terpilih, peserta akan diberikan waktu untuk mengurus paspor. Visa Amerika Serikat akan diurus oleh IIEF sebelum keberangkatan. Perhatian: Penerima beasiswa dijadualkan untuk berangkat ke Amerika Serikat pada bulan April/Mei/Juni/Oktober 2009. (catatan: keputusan hasil seleksi tidak dapat diganggu gugat)
9. Apakah ada biaya tertentu yang harus saya bayar dalam program beasiswa ini?
Program ini merupakan beasiswa penuh, dan peserta tidak dipungut biaya apapun. Penerima beasiswa akan ditanggung seluruh biaya kecuali biaya pembuatan paspor.
10. Kemana saya harus bertanya untuk mendapatkan informasi?
Untuk informasi dapat menghubungi:
Indonesian International Education Foundation (IIEF)
Menara Imperium Lt. 28 Suite B
Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav. 1 Kuningan Jakarta 12980
Telp: 021 – 831 7330,Fax: 021 – 831 7331 (pada jam kerja)
Email: scholarship@iief.or.id
Minggu, 16 November 2008
Kamis, 13 November 2008
ESo's Department Program 2008-2009
Education and Human Resources Development Department
Head : Erlan Heryanto
1. Managing new member selection’s, weekly tutorial, and specific and acceleration class tutorial;
2. Conducting workshop on “Effective Public Speaking”
3. Upgrading of organizational skills for board.
4. Certification of tutorial program.
5. Conducting ESo’s EXPO
6. Conducting internal competition and delegation.
7. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Administration and Home Base Security Department
Head : Hendra Putra Turnip
1. Managing the schedule of secretariat room use and preparing the tools needed.
2. Managing in and out letter; including the number of letter, etc.
3. Being SC in every event; making proposal, letters needed, and being responsible to everything that relates to correspondence and administration.
4. Making a data about ESo’s stuff and helping Education and Development Department in making tidy the report of tutorial program.
5. Making an archive of all ESo’s Department program and the mapping of the program in form of hard copy, soft copy, and table.
6. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Creativity and Financial Support Department
Head : Arif Proklamasi
1. Publishing Intermezzo (wall magazine and bulletin)
2. Organizing ESo’s holiday and creativity days for members each month.
3. Creating and marketing some ESo’s stuff, e.g. T-shirt, pin, stickers, etc.
4. Helping treasurer in financing the organization.
5. Fulfilling facilities of ESo’s secretariat room.
6. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Public Relation Department
Head : Rudi Hariyanto
1. Managing Website, Friendster, and Email, ESo’s Corner (containing the information of activities to do and done)
2. Initiating three monthly EC meeting.
3. Handling and looking for the information of English competition locally or nationally; including getting the invitation.
4. Being responsible to the success and the delivery of the proposal to rectorat, regency, etc.
5. Being responsible to every invitation of events conducted by ESo; meeting, competition, etc.
6. Managing invitation of a certain program from other organization.
7. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Head : Erlan Heryanto
1. Managing new member selection’s, weekly tutorial, and specific and acceleration class tutorial;
2. Conducting workshop on “Effective Public Speaking”
3. Upgrading of organizational skills for board.
4. Certification of tutorial program.
5. Conducting ESo’s EXPO
6. Conducting internal competition and delegation.
7. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Administration and Home Base Security Department
Head : Hendra Putra Turnip
1. Managing the schedule of secretariat room use and preparing the tools needed.
2. Managing in and out letter; including the number of letter, etc.
3. Being SC in every event; making proposal, letters needed, and being responsible to everything that relates to correspondence and administration.
4. Making a data about ESo’s stuff and helping Education and Development Department in making tidy the report of tutorial program.
5. Making an archive of all ESo’s Department program and the mapping of the program in form of hard copy, soft copy, and table.
6. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Creativity and Financial Support Department
Head : Arif Proklamasi
1. Publishing Intermezzo (wall magazine and bulletin)
2. Organizing ESo’s holiday and creativity days for members each month.
3. Creating and marketing some ESo’s stuff, e.g. T-shirt, pin, stickers, etc.
4. Helping treasurer in financing the organization.
5. Fulfilling facilities of ESo’s secretariat room.
6. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Public Relation Department
Head : Rudi Hariyanto
1. Managing Website, Friendster, and Email, ESo’s Corner (containing the information of activities to do and done)
2. Initiating three monthly EC meeting.
3. Handling and looking for the information of English competition locally or nationally; including getting the invitation.
4. Being responsible to the success and the delivery of the proposal to rectorat, regency, etc.
5. Being responsible to every invitation of events conducted by ESo; meeting, competition, etc.
6. Managing invitation of a certain program from other organization.
7. Making an archive about programs to do and done.
Material Description of Tutorial Program
Daily English
Trainees are given the basics of English that is used in their daily life like how to greet, how to deliver an opinion, etc. They are conditioned as if in a conversation class. The aim of this meeting is to prepare them to actively use English if they are in ESo’s community and also to make them ready to follow the next stages of tutorial.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Kristian, Erlan, Eka, Balqis, Intan, Dimas.
Scrabble
Trainees are given the basic rules of how to play scrabble well, including the strategy to get high score and to beat their opponent. It is also aimed to train them to be ready to compete in a scrabble competition done by some English clubs around campus.
Trainer : Robby, Indah, Syauqi Wafa, Balqis, Arif, Nurkodri, Yudi, Dimas.
Story Telling
Trainees are asked to tell a story, whatever….it can be fairy tales, folk tales, jokes, etc. The training is focused on how the trainees can express and bring the story as if the story is in their real world. It is intended to prepare them mentally to follow some English competitions and to be brave speaking in front of mass. Ask them to prepare (including the property) and to learn the story one week before, then at the day of the meeting, you can just give them the strategy and ask them to practice with the story they have prepared before. It is very easy, isn’t it?
Trainer : Balqis, Madlias, Hikmah, Intan, Satria.
Speech 1
Give your trainees something about what speech is, what should be prepared in speech, how to make draft of speech, and how to deliver the speech well. We have prepared some module that you can use it later. In this Speech 1, the exercise that you have to do is to give them some themes, then ask them to present their ideas about the theme in front (2minutes or more, it’s up to you). Give them some constructive criticisms and then ask them to prepare a longer speech using the same theme at home (10 minutes). Ask them to prepare or to look for many matters or supporting information from all around the world about their speech that will be presented again in Speech 2. Perhaps you can call this speech 1 as presenting idea but just do your best and try to do this nice instruction.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Intan, Hikmah, Balqis, Masduki.
How to be good student*
This tutorial will be given only for those who have 5 weeks in November. So, this is basically only enrichment for them. What should be given to the members is the strategy to do if they want to be successful both academically and non-academically.
Trainer : Madlias, Kristian, Intan, Hikmah.
Vocabulary (Spelling Bee)
Trainees are given the morphological concept of the arrangement of a word. The activities can be in form of spelling bee drilling, paper based task, and newspaper search. The department in charge will inform you and prepare the materials needed for the activity one week before hand.
Trainer : Indah, Madlias, Satria, Balqis, Eka, Erlan, Dimas.
Speech 2
This is the continuation of speech 1 tutorial. The beginning of the lesson can be watching a video of a speech through notebook. Ask the trainees to give judgment and criticism. Then, give feedback. Let them perform and conduct peer correction. Please do make sure that all of them have already understood and good at performing speech. (Remember you already give them task before to make the draft of the speech at the first meeting)
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Intan, Hikmah, Balqis, Masduki.
News Casting
Trainees are hoped to be able to have ability in presenting news. One week before meeting, ask them to cut an article in The Jakarta Post, then to practice it at home. At the day of the meeting, give them the theory of how we should present it in front well. If possible, show them a video. Give them chance to practice using their own materials. Comment what they have done and give constructive criticism one by one. Deliver some other cut articles that you have prepared before, deliver to them and ask them to present the news once more.
Trainer : Resika, Balqis, Madlias, Hikmah, Intan.
Debate 1
What you have to do at this meeting is to explain your trainees about the basics of debating. Explain them what debate is, why debate, and how to debate (general rules and guidelines to debating, speaking order in a debate, structure of a speech, roles in a debate, and points of information). If it’s possible, you may use a video, so that it will ease you to teach them how to debate. Focus on Asian Parliamentary. After explaining, try to simulate what you have given to them. Prepare a motion and ask them to debate.
Trainer : Madlias, Masduki, Intan, Hikmah, Satria.
Inspire yourself!! (Watching Movie)
This is the same as how to be a good student’s tutorial which an additional meeting. However, it is focused on the movie that is going to be watched. Trainees are asked to watch a movie and then by the end of the movie they are hoped can make a conclusion and retell the inspiring story given.
Trainer : Kristian, Indah, Balqis.
Debate 2
This is the continuation of Debate 1. What you have to do at this meeting is to explain your trainees about basics of debating. Explain them what debate is, why debate, and how to debate (general rules and guidelines to debating, speaking order in a debate, structure of a speech, roles in a debate, and points of information). If it’s possible, you may use a video, so that it will ease you to teach them how to debate. Focus on British Parliamentary. After explaining, try to simulate what you have given to them. Prepare a motion and ask them to debate.
Trainer : Madlias, Masduki, Intan, Hikmah, Satria.
Structure (TOEFL)
This is one of the sequences of TOEFL training conducted in this tutorial program. Firstly, give the trainees structure test usually met in TOEFL test. Let them do it and then discuss it together. Try to apply problem solving techniques.
Trainer : Madlias, Kristian, Satria, Dimas,Erlan.
Essay Writing
Trainees are asked to analyze an essay and judge the essay. Let them think the structure, the content, and also the way to make an essay interesting by looking at the essay they have. Give feedback and also the theory of how to make a good essay. Then, let them make an essay in a very limited time but still has to be good. Give them homework to prepare an essay for paper presentation.
Trainer : Balqis, Satria, Intan, Madlias, Hikmah, Kristian.
Paper Presentation
The trainees will be asked to watch the trainer’s performance in presenting a paper. Then, they are asked to mention what to prepare and what aspects that should be carefully considered when they deliver their presentation. Give feedback and ask them to make a presentation.
Trainer : Balqis, Satria, Intan, Madlias, Hikmah.
Organization Management*
This tutorial will be given only for those who have 5 weeks in January. So, this is basically only enrichment for them. What should be given to the members is the history of ESo, the concept of management in general, and everything related to organization.
Trainer : Madlias, Intan, Hikmah, Masduki, Balqis.
Listening (TOEFL)
This is one of the sequences of TOEFL training conducted in this tutorial program. Firstly, give the trainees listening test usually met in TOEFL test. Let them do it and then discuss it together. Try to apply problem solving techniques and tell them some strategies that may be applied.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Dimas, Erlan.
Translation
This program will enrich the trainees in the theory of translation and interpreting both Indonesia to English and English to Indonesia. They are going to be drilled in translating 2 documents (English and Indonesia) and be given a feedback from the trainer after the strategy is given. Therefore, they are also going to practice how to be an interpreter in a very simple simulation.
Trainer : Dimas, Satria, Madlias, Syauqi, Yudi, Nurkodri.
Leadership Training
What should be given to the members is the history of ESo, the concept of leader in general, the way to organize an event, the way to prepare a proposal, etc.
Trainer : Madlias, Intan, Hikmah, Masduki, Balqis.
Reading (TOEFL)
This is one of the sequences of TOEFL training conducted in this tutorial program. Firstly, give the trainees reading test usually met in TOEFL test. Let them do it and then discuss it together. Try to apply problem solving techniques and tell them some strategies that may be applied. Give them another test.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Dimas, Erlan.
Internal Competition
This is as the closing of all tutorials given to the trainees. The competition will cover all the theories given. Each PIC will compete to win their group. There will be the announcement of outstanding trainee, outstanding trainer, outstanding PIC and also outstanding board of ESo.
Trainees are given the basics of English that is used in their daily life like how to greet, how to deliver an opinion, etc. They are conditioned as if in a conversation class. The aim of this meeting is to prepare them to actively use English if they are in ESo’s community and also to make them ready to follow the next stages of tutorial.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Kristian, Erlan, Eka, Balqis, Intan, Dimas.
Scrabble
Trainees are given the basic rules of how to play scrabble well, including the strategy to get high score and to beat their opponent. It is also aimed to train them to be ready to compete in a scrabble competition done by some English clubs around campus.
Trainer : Robby, Indah, Syauqi Wafa, Balqis, Arif, Nurkodri, Yudi, Dimas.
Story Telling
Trainees are asked to tell a story, whatever….it can be fairy tales, folk tales, jokes, etc. The training is focused on how the trainees can express and bring the story as if the story is in their real world. It is intended to prepare them mentally to follow some English competitions and to be brave speaking in front of mass. Ask them to prepare (including the property) and to learn the story one week before, then at the day of the meeting, you can just give them the strategy and ask them to practice with the story they have prepared before. It is very easy, isn’t it?
Trainer : Balqis, Madlias, Hikmah, Intan, Satria.
Speech 1
Give your trainees something about what speech is, what should be prepared in speech, how to make draft of speech, and how to deliver the speech well. We have prepared some module that you can use it later. In this Speech 1, the exercise that you have to do is to give them some themes, then ask them to present their ideas about the theme in front (2minutes or more, it’s up to you). Give them some constructive criticisms and then ask them to prepare a longer speech using the same theme at home (10 minutes). Ask them to prepare or to look for many matters or supporting information from all around the world about their speech that will be presented again in Speech 2. Perhaps you can call this speech 1 as presenting idea but just do your best and try to do this nice instruction.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Intan, Hikmah, Balqis, Masduki.
How to be good student*
This tutorial will be given only for those who have 5 weeks in November. So, this is basically only enrichment for them. What should be given to the members is the strategy to do if they want to be successful both academically and non-academically.
Trainer : Madlias, Kristian, Intan, Hikmah.
Vocabulary (Spelling Bee)
Trainees are given the morphological concept of the arrangement of a word. The activities can be in form of spelling bee drilling, paper based task, and newspaper search. The department in charge will inform you and prepare the materials needed for the activity one week before hand.
Trainer : Indah, Madlias, Satria, Balqis, Eka, Erlan, Dimas.
Speech 2
This is the continuation of speech 1 tutorial. The beginning of the lesson can be watching a video of a speech through notebook. Ask the trainees to give judgment and criticism. Then, give feedback. Let them perform and conduct peer correction. Please do make sure that all of them have already understood and good at performing speech. (Remember you already give them task before to make the draft of the speech at the first meeting)
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Intan, Hikmah, Balqis, Masduki.
News Casting
Trainees are hoped to be able to have ability in presenting news. One week before meeting, ask them to cut an article in The Jakarta Post, then to practice it at home. At the day of the meeting, give them the theory of how we should present it in front well. If possible, show them a video. Give them chance to practice using their own materials. Comment what they have done and give constructive criticism one by one. Deliver some other cut articles that you have prepared before, deliver to them and ask them to present the news once more.
Trainer : Resika, Balqis, Madlias, Hikmah, Intan.
Debate 1
What you have to do at this meeting is to explain your trainees about the basics of debating. Explain them what debate is, why debate, and how to debate (general rules and guidelines to debating, speaking order in a debate, structure of a speech, roles in a debate, and points of information). If it’s possible, you may use a video, so that it will ease you to teach them how to debate. Focus on Asian Parliamentary. After explaining, try to simulate what you have given to them. Prepare a motion and ask them to debate.
Trainer : Madlias, Masduki, Intan, Hikmah, Satria.
Inspire yourself!! (Watching Movie)
This is the same as how to be a good student’s tutorial which an additional meeting. However, it is focused on the movie that is going to be watched. Trainees are asked to watch a movie and then by the end of the movie they are hoped can make a conclusion and retell the inspiring story given.
Trainer : Kristian, Indah, Balqis.
Debate 2
This is the continuation of Debate 1. What you have to do at this meeting is to explain your trainees about basics of debating. Explain them what debate is, why debate, and how to debate (general rules and guidelines to debating, speaking order in a debate, structure of a speech, roles in a debate, and points of information). If it’s possible, you may use a video, so that it will ease you to teach them how to debate. Focus on British Parliamentary. After explaining, try to simulate what you have given to them. Prepare a motion and ask them to debate.
Trainer : Madlias, Masduki, Intan, Hikmah, Satria.
Structure (TOEFL)
This is one of the sequences of TOEFL training conducted in this tutorial program. Firstly, give the trainees structure test usually met in TOEFL test. Let them do it and then discuss it together. Try to apply problem solving techniques.
Trainer : Madlias, Kristian, Satria, Dimas,Erlan.
Essay Writing
Trainees are asked to analyze an essay and judge the essay. Let them think the structure, the content, and also the way to make an essay interesting by looking at the essay they have. Give feedback and also the theory of how to make a good essay. Then, let them make an essay in a very limited time but still has to be good. Give them homework to prepare an essay for paper presentation.
Trainer : Balqis, Satria, Intan, Madlias, Hikmah, Kristian.
Paper Presentation
The trainees will be asked to watch the trainer’s performance in presenting a paper. Then, they are asked to mention what to prepare and what aspects that should be carefully considered when they deliver their presentation. Give feedback and ask them to make a presentation.
Trainer : Balqis, Satria, Intan, Madlias, Hikmah.
Organization Management*
This tutorial will be given only for those who have 5 weeks in January. So, this is basically only enrichment for them. What should be given to the members is the history of ESo, the concept of management in general, and everything related to organization.
Trainer : Madlias, Intan, Hikmah, Masduki, Balqis.
Listening (TOEFL)
This is one of the sequences of TOEFL training conducted in this tutorial program. Firstly, give the trainees listening test usually met in TOEFL test. Let them do it and then discuss it together. Try to apply problem solving techniques and tell them some strategies that may be applied.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Dimas, Erlan.
Translation
This program will enrich the trainees in the theory of translation and interpreting both Indonesia to English and English to Indonesia. They are going to be drilled in translating 2 documents (English and Indonesia) and be given a feedback from the trainer after the strategy is given. Therefore, they are also going to practice how to be an interpreter in a very simple simulation.
Trainer : Dimas, Satria, Madlias, Syauqi, Yudi, Nurkodri.
Leadership Training
What should be given to the members is the history of ESo, the concept of leader in general, the way to organize an event, the way to prepare a proposal, etc.
Trainer : Madlias, Intan, Hikmah, Masduki, Balqis.
Reading (TOEFL)
This is one of the sequences of TOEFL training conducted in this tutorial program. Firstly, give the trainees reading test usually met in TOEFL test. Let them do it and then discuss it together. Try to apply problem solving techniques and tell them some strategies that may be applied. Give them another test.
Trainer : Madlias, Satria, Dimas, Erlan.
Internal Competition
This is as the closing of all tutorials given to the trainees. The competition will cover all the theories given. Each PIC will compete to win their group. There will be the announcement of outstanding trainee, outstanding trainer, outstanding PIC and also outstanding board of ESo.
Rabu, 12 November 2008
November Events
1. Socialization of Tutorial Program and Getting to Know Each Other
This event was held on Saturday, November 1, 2008. The aim of the event is to socialize the tutorial program that will be done for next three months. Everything was nice, at least finally some of new members know what UKM-ESo is, the story of UKM-U ESo, the tutors, the boards, and the programs to do in ESo for this year. PIC: Kristian Adi Putra & Balqis Nur Kemala Sari
2. Training of Scrabble and Debate
The training of scrabble was given by Robi on Saturday, November 8, 2008, one of the members of ESo who always win in many competition. We were given how to win a scrabble competition including the rules and the tricks. We had simulation then, and finally Tiya and Riska became the winner. Unfortunately, there was no price besides congratulation from Mr. Kristian. After battling in scrabble simulation competition, Mr. Madlias came and taught all of us debate. It was nice. we therefore were also asked to practice and you of course knew the result. We're like doing "Kusir Debate" hehe. We were all happy. PIC: Kristian Adi Putra & Hendra Putra Turnip
3. SMAN 1 Kotagajah Debate Competition
A very nice competition to start learning how a debate competition is held and organized. It is done on Saturday, November 15, 2008. The members who will go there are Kristian, Hendra, Satria, Efelin, Ma'ruf, Myra, Mei, Dies, Berlinda. They will get different tasks. How crazy Kak Kristian is giving us many jobs this month!!! PIC: Kristian Adi Putra & Hendra Putra Turnip
4. The celebration of the third English Society Birthday in ESo's Homebase
It will be held on the 22nd of November, 2009. So please all ESoers, kindly note that all of us have to bring food that the price of the food is at least Rp. 5000. Wear black t-shirt and casual shoes. What we will do there is following some competition like Cap Guricap, Makan Kerupuk, Tarik Tambang, Watching Movie, etc. Keep contact with us. PIC: Umi and Resika.
5. New Member Selection
It will be done on Saturday, November 28, 2008 starting from 10:00 A.M. to 17:oo P:M. The materials of the test will be interview, written test, and performance test. All new members will be involved in the process of selection. PIC: Indah
This event was held on Saturday, November 1, 2008. The aim of the event is to socialize the tutorial program that will be done for next three months. Everything was nice, at least finally some of new members know what UKM-ESo is, the story of UKM-U ESo, the tutors, the boards, and the programs to do in ESo for this year. PIC: Kristian Adi Putra & Balqis Nur Kemala Sari
2. Training of Scrabble and Debate
The training of scrabble was given by Robi on Saturday, November 8, 2008, one of the members of ESo who always win in many competition. We were given how to win a scrabble competition including the rules and the tricks. We had simulation then, and finally Tiya and Riska became the winner. Unfortunately, there was no price besides congratulation from Mr. Kristian. After battling in scrabble simulation competition, Mr. Madlias came and taught all of us debate. It was nice. we therefore were also asked to practice and you of course knew the result. We're like doing "Kusir Debate" hehe. We were all happy. PIC: Kristian Adi Putra & Hendra Putra Turnip
3. SMAN 1 Kotagajah Debate Competition
A very nice competition to start learning how a debate competition is held and organized. It is done on Saturday, November 15, 2008. The members who will go there are Kristian, Hendra, Satria, Efelin, Ma'ruf, Myra, Mei, Dies, Berlinda. They will get different tasks. How crazy Kak Kristian is giving us many jobs this month!!! PIC: Kristian Adi Putra & Hendra Putra Turnip
4. The celebration of the third English Society Birthday in ESo's Homebase
It will be held on the 22nd of November, 2009. So please all ESoers, kindly note that all of us have to bring food that the price of the food is at least Rp. 5000. Wear black t-shirt and casual shoes. What we will do there is following some competition like Cap Guricap, Makan Kerupuk, Tarik Tambang, Watching Movie, etc. Keep contact with us. PIC: Umi and Resika.
5. New Member Selection
It will be done on Saturday, November 28, 2008 starting from 10:00 A.M. to 17:oo P:M. The materials of the test will be interview, written test, and performance test. All new members will be involved in the process of selection. PIC: Indah
Selasa, 11 November 2008
The Profile of Our Leader
The first impression that you will get when you meet him is that he is born as a natural and real javanese. He is not like someone that we think as the boss. He likes being among us, knowing each of us and caring each individual as his own brother or sister. "An absolutely down to earth president", it's perhaps the most appropriate term that we can give to him. But anyway, this is no wonder I guess since he is the only child in his family, so he tries to find his sister and brother by himself rather than asking his parents to make it for him.
His full name is Kristian Adi Putra. Some of us usually call him "Kak Kristian", but sometimes "Kak Tian." But anyway he likes being called "Dear, My handsome leader." Later finally all of us know that this is the first knowledge that we get from this organization that we if already become ESo members are not allowed to be humble, low profile, and kind. Oh, how crazy it is! But we understand all of these are correct. We like listening to the way he is speaking because even if he has tried hard to speak in British and American Dialect, we will still know he is a javanese. Haha
Kak Kristian was born in gadingrejo, June 17, 1987. Even though his name is Krisian but actually he is a moslem. He also does not know why his name is Kristian. He still lives with his parents who work as an elementary school teacher. Without explaining that his parents are from java, I guess you already know that. Sometimes, we even see that he still speaks javanese in our beloved home base. And he promises us to give us the training of javanese for gobalization era. hehe, I do not want to come actually, but in order to make him happy, I will try to come even if I can not imagine how it will be.
He is actually a very ordinary man. We can see from the way he dresses. His hair is messy. His skin is an absolutely nice dark. Moreover, he is thin and tall. he is a very not good looking guy. yupz, now I guess you understand why in every ESo letter he always writes "Your handsome leader." Haha. He tries to praise himself because nobody does. Anyway we also finally try to do so, so that he will be happy and keep being among us.
Even if he is ordinary, he has many experiences and achievement that we need to know and learn. Anyway, he is great and like a room warmer for us when we're cold and an AC when we're feeling hot. Let's see his curriculum vitae.
PERSONAL DATA
1. Full Name : Kristian Adi Putra
2. Surname : Kristian
3. Date of Birth : Gadingrejo, June 17, 1987
4. Mailing Address : Jln. Pramuka No. 116 Komplek SDN 6 Gadingrejo
Kabupaten Tanggamus, Lampung 35372
5. HP :-
6. Email : -
7. Nationality : Indonesian
8. Gender : Female
9. Religion : Islam
EDUCATION BACKGROUND
1. SD Negeri 9 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (1993-1999)
2. SMP Negeri 1 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (1999-2002)
3. SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu, Kabupaten Tanggamus (2002-2003)
4. SMA Negeri 1 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (2003-2005)
5. S1 English Study Program at Language and Arts Department of the Teacher’s Training and Education Faculty of Lampung University (2005-now)
6. Intensive English Short Course at the Department of English as a Second Language of the University of Arizona, the United States of America (January 12, 2009-March 12, 2009)
WORK EXPERIENCE
1. English Teacher at SD Negeri 6 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (January 2006-July 2008)
2. English Teacher at IEC Way Halim, Bandar Lampung (January 2007-July 2008)
3. English Teacher at SMA Negeri 1 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (November 2007-July 2008)
4. English Teacher and Translator at Darma Bangsa International School, Bandar Lampung (August 2007-now)
TRAINING, COURSE AND SEMINAR
1. The Participant of A Day Training of Research Paper Writing by UKM-F Natural of Mathematics and Scientifics Faculty of Lampung University. (December 23, 2006)
2. The Participant of Teacher’s Training held by Sekolah Darma Bangsa, Bandar Lampung. (June 23-July 5, 2008)
3. The Participant of Computer Training held by B.Be.C Widya Yahya in cooperation with SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu and SMA Negeri 1 Gadingrejo. (2002-2005)
ACHIEVEMENT
1. C Grade Adjudicator of the 10th Indonesian varsities English Debate at the University of Jenderal Sudirman, Purwokerto, Central Java. (February 2-6, 2007)
2. The Semifinalist and the 6th Best Speaker of National University English Debating Contest held by DIKJEN DIKTI and the University of Indonesia, Jakarta. (April 23-25, 2008)
3. One of the debaters of Lampung University at Asian Universities Debating Championship held by the Technology Institute of Bandung. (May 9-17, 2007)
4. The First Winner of Scrabble Competition at the 42nd DIES NATALIS UNILA held by Lampung University. (September 5, 2007)
5. The Outstanding Teacher Award during matriculation classes at Darma Bangsa International School. (June 2-14, 2008)
PARTICIPATION
1. The Deputy Tournament Director and the Adjudicator of the 3rd National Universities English Debating Championship at the 20th PIMNAS held by Lampung University. (July 18-21, 2007)
2. The School Manager of Darma Bangsa International School in Teknokrat English Competition 2008. (March 1-2, 2008)
3. The Tournament Director and the Adjudicator of Debate Contest at the 10th SEPC of Language and Arts Students Association of FKIP of Lampung University. (September 8-9, 2007)
4. The Adjudicator of Debate at the 7th EEC in Action (EIA) Southern Sumatra Regional English Competition 2008. (February 9-10, 2008)
ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE
1. General Secretary of Student Executive Board, Junior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
2. General Leader of Student Executive Board, Junior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
3. Head of Youth Red Cross, Junior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
4. Head of Youth Moslem Organization, Senior High School 1 Pringsewu, Tanggamus Regency
5. General Secretary of Human Resources Development Department, Student Executive Board, Senior High School 1 Pringsewu, Tanggamus Regency
6. Head of Football Organization, Senior High School 1 Pringsewu, Tanggamus Regency
7. Advisor Board of Student Executive Board, Senior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
8. Head of Education Department of Moslem English Club of English Study Program, Lampung University
9. Advisory Board of HMJ Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, FKIP, Lampung University
10. The president of UKM-U English Society of Lampung University
PERSONAL SKILLS & COMPETENCE
1. Computer : Office Program, Internet, Graphic Design, and Web Design.
2. TOEFL : 578 (TOEFL ITP taken on June 21, 2008 at IIEF Jakarta)
PERSONAL DATA
1. Full Name : Kristian Adi Putra
2. Surname : Kristian
3. Date of Birth : Gadingrejo, June 17, 1987
4. Mailing Address : Jln. Pramuka No. 116 Komplek SDN 6 Gadingrejo
Kabupaten Tanggamus, Lampung 35372
5. HP :-
6. Email : -
7. Nationality : Indonesian
8. Gender : Female
9. Religion : Islam
EDUCATION BACKGROUND
1. SD Negeri 9 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (1993-1999)
2. SMP Negeri 1 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (1999-2002)
3. SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu, Kabupaten Tanggamus (2002-2003)
4. SMA Negeri 1 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (2003-2005)
5. S1 English Study Program at Language and Arts Department of the Teacher’s Training and Education Faculty of Lampung University (2005-now)
6. Intensive English Short Course at the Department of English as a Second Language of the University of Arizona, the United States of America (January 12, 2009-March 12, 2009)
WORK EXPERIENCE
1. English Teacher at SD Negeri 6 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (January 2006-July 2008)
2. English Teacher at IEC Way Halim, Bandar Lampung (January 2007-July 2008)
3. English Teacher at SMA Negeri 1 Gadingrejo, Kabupaten Tanggamus (November 2007-July 2008)
4. English Teacher and Translator at Darma Bangsa International School, Bandar Lampung (August 2007-now)
TRAINING, COURSE AND SEMINAR
1. The Participant of A Day Training of Research Paper Writing by UKM-F Natural of Mathematics and Scientifics Faculty of Lampung University. (December 23, 2006)
2. The Participant of Teacher’s Training held by Sekolah Darma Bangsa, Bandar Lampung. (June 23-July 5, 2008)
3. The Participant of Computer Training held by B.Be.C Widya Yahya in cooperation with SMA Negeri 1 Pringsewu and SMA Negeri 1 Gadingrejo. (2002-2005)
ACHIEVEMENT
1. C Grade Adjudicator of the 10th Indonesian varsities English Debate at the University of Jenderal Sudirman, Purwokerto, Central Java. (February 2-6, 2007)
2. The Semifinalist and the 6th Best Speaker of National University English Debating Contest held by DIKJEN DIKTI and the University of Indonesia, Jakarta. (April 23-25, 2008)
3. One of the debaters of Lampung University at Asian Universities Debating Championship held by the Technology Institute of Bandung. (May 9-17, 2007)
4. The First Winner of Scrabble Competition at the 42nd DIES NATALIS UNILA held by Lampung University. (September 5, 2007)
5. The Outstanding Teacher Award during matriculation classes at Darma Bangsa International School. (June 2-14, 2008)
PARTICIPATION
1. The Deputy Tournament Director and the Adjudicator of the 3rd National Universities English Debating Championship at the 20th PIMNAS held by Lampung University. (July 18-21, 2007)
2. The School Manager of Darma Bangsa International School in Teknokrat English Competition 2008. (March 1-2, 2008)
3. The Tournament Director and the Adjudicator of Debate Contest at the 10th SEPC of Language and Arts Students Association of FKIP of Lampung University. (September 8-9, 2007)
4. The Adjudicator of Debate at the 7th EEC in Action (EIA) Southern Sumatra Regional English Competition 2008. (February 9-10, 2008)
ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE
1. General Secretary of Student Executive Board, Junior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
2. General Leader of Student Executive Board, Junior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
3. Head of Youth Red Cross, Junior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
4. Head of Youth Moslem Organization, Senior High School 1 Pringsewu, Tanggamus Regency
5. General Secretary of Human Resources Development Department, Student Executive Board, Senior High School 1 Pringsewu, Tanggamus Regency
6. Head of Football Organization, Senior High School 1 Pringsewu, Tanggamus Regency
7. Advisor Board of Student Executive Board, Senior High School 1 Gadingrejo, Tanggamus Regency
8. Head of Education Department of Moslem English Club of English Study Program, Lampung University
9. Advisory Board of HMJ Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, FKIP, Lampung University
10. The president of UKM-U English Society of Lampung University
PERSONAL SKILLS & COMPETENCE
1. Computer : Office Program, Internet, Graphic Design, and Web Design.
2. TOEFL : 578 (TOEFL ITP taken on June 21, 2008 at IIEF Jakarta)
Senin, 10 November 2008
What is UKM-U English Society of Lampung University?
English Society is the only university scoped English organization in Lampung University. English Society was established on November 24, 2005 by some UNILA’s students who were interested in English. ESo’s establishment was also based on the coordination and consolidation among English Club in Lampung University There are 4 departments within our organization, they are Education and Development Department, Public Relation and Financial Department, Administration and Homeland Security Department, Creativity and Art Department.
So far, English Society has made three reorganization, and the current organization structure is:
President : Kristian Adi Putra
Vice President : Balqis Nur Kemala Sari
Secretary : Eka
Secretary : Eka
Treasurer : Indah
Head of Education and Development Department : Erlan Heryanto
Head of Public Relation and Financial : Rudi
Head of Art & Creativity: Arif Proklamasi
Head of Administration and Homeland Security : Hendra Putra
Head of Education and Development Department : Erlan Heryanto
Head of Public Relation and Financial : Rudi
Head of Art & Creativity: Arif Proklamasi
Head of Administration and Homeland Security : Hendra Putra
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)