This paper explores the role of structured debating as an academic tool in higher education, arguing that it fosters holistic and critical thinking skills essential for academic and professional success. Through a review of literature, case studies, and empirical evidence, the paper demonstrates how integrating debating into curricula provides a dynamic approach to student development. Debating requires students to engage deeply with complex issues, often exploring multiple perspectives to construct and defend arguments. This process develops critical thinking by pushing students to analyze information, evaluate evidence, and separate emotion from objective reasoning. Arguing both for and against a proposition, regardless of personal beliefs, further cultivates intellectual humility, allowing students to appreciate opposing viewpoints. Moreover, debating enhances holistic thinking by encouraging students to draw from diverse disciplines, preparing them for real-world problem-solving where multifaceted solutions are often required. Communication skills, both oral and written, also improve, as students learn to articulate ideas clearly and persuasively under time constraints, mirroring professional environments. In contrast to passive, lecture-based learning, debating promotes active engagement. Students not only retain knowledge better but also develop lifelong learning skills, becoming adept at research, analysis, and synthesis. This interactive approach fosters independent thinking and a questioning mindset, preparing students to navigate complex global challenges. Ultimately, this paper argues that incorporating debating into higher education curricula can create a more engaging, student-centered environment that equips students with 21st-century skills. As institutions seek innovative methods to enhance learning, debating stands out as a valuable pedagogical strategy for fostering holistic and critical thinking in higher education.
Alwi, N. H., & Duffy, K. (2021). The effectiveness of online debates for promoting critical thinking in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 42-53.
Barnett, R. (1997). Higher education: A critical business. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 241-266.
Goodwin, J. (2003). Students' perspectives on debate. Argumentation and Advocacy, 40(2), 88-100.
Hansen, D. T. (2011). The teacher and the world: A study of cosmopolitanism as education. Routledge.
Khan, S. A., Omar, H., Babar, M. G., & Toh, C. G. (2012). Utilization of Debate as an Educational Tool to Learn Health Economics for Dental Students in Malaysia. Journal of Dental Education, 76(12), 1675–1683. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.0022-0337.2012.76.12.tb05431.x
Kennedy, R. (2007). In-class debates: Fertile ground for active learning and the cultivation of critical thinking and oral communication skills. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(2), 183-190.
Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. (2012). In Prime Minister’s Office. Retrieved August 13, 2024, from https://www.pmo.gov.my/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Malaysia-Education-Blueprint-2013- 2025.pdf
Mitchell, G. (1998). Pedagogical possibilities for argumentative agency in academic debate. Argumentation and Advocacy, 34(3), 134-150.
Omae, E., Gachahi, M. W., & Maina, J. W. (2019). Enhancing student engagement through debates: A case study at Kenyatta University. International Journal of Education and Research, 7(3), 1-15.
Rasyid, A., & Namrullah, Z. (2021). Asian Parliamentary Debate Simulation in EFL Classroom. Scientia. https://doi.org/10.51773/asels2021.v1i1.5
Staff, T. G. (2024, March 18). Malaysia’s TalentCorp allocates $6.36M for internship matching grant for SMEs and start-ups. TNGlobal. https://technode.global/2024/03/18/malaysias-talentcorp-allocates-6-36m- for-internship-matching-grant-for-smes-and-start-ups/
Yong, W. Z. (2024, March 17). ‘Focus on research impact, not quantity.’ The Star. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2024/03/17/focus-on-research-impact-not-quantity
Amin, R. I., Aziz, A. S. A., Paul, M. E., Arham, A. F., Hassan, N. H., Anuar, N. A., Jamil, M. S. M., Othman, N. K., Khaidzir, M. F. S., Rahim, A. A., & Salleh, A. R. (2024). Debating as an Academic Tool: Fostering Holistic and Critical Thinking in Higher Education. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(4), 1722–1730.
Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
