Optimizing Students’ Speaking and Critical Thinking

through Students’ Reflective Practice in Socratic Circle

Speaking

Woro Kusmaryani

, Bachrudin Musthafa

and Pupung Purnawarman

Department of English Education, Universitas Borneo Tarakan, Tarakan, Indonesia

2Department of English Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung,

Indonesia

Keywords: Speaking Skill, Critical Thinking, Reflective Practice, and Socratic Method

Abstract: We investigated students’ reflective practice after Socratic circle speaking which is purposed to optimize

students’ speaking and critical thinking skill. Critical thinking cannot be separated from speaking skill.

Students’ reflective practice can help the teacher in revising teaching method, materials, classroom

management, etc. This research used descriptive qualitative design which collected documents, observation,

and interview as the data. This research was done in Speaking class at Third semester students of Borneo

University Tarakan. The data was analysed qualitatively. The result shows that students’ reflexive practice

could optimize students’ speaking and critical thinking. Speaking result shows that 23% in Excellent category,

26% in Good category, 38% in Fair category, 13% in Weak category, and 0% in Poor category. Critical

thinking result shows that 13% in Critical Thinking level 4, 36% in Critical Thinking level 3, 38% in Critical

Thinking level 2, 13% in Critical Thinking level 1, and 0% in Critical Thinking level 6 and 5. In interview,

the researcher found that teaching quality and students’ learning improved and they could prepare themselves

related to their speaking skill and critical thinking. There were some obstacles faced such as; time consuming

in analysing students’ reflection, redesigning the lesson plan and material selection.

1 INTRODUCTION

EFL speaking skill is the most difficult and gives

challenges to the students because of its fundamental

aspects in communicating and learning the language

(Alaraj, 2017). (Luoma, 2004) explains the hearth of

foreign language learning is students able to speak

and use it. The students can personalize, make self-

image, know the world’s knowledge, give reasons

and show their thoughts. The students can give their

performance orally about their ability in foreign

language. Developing students’ speaking skill is not

easy and it takes time to work with the speaking

competence. There are many things that the students

need to know such as; English phonology, the use of

vocabularies appropriately, and fluently translate the

words in English from their first language.

Thornbury (2005) adds in speaking the students

must be interactive and they have to co-operate with

their speaking partner by using speaking turn

management. Speaking is done in real situation and

time where we have limited time to work with the

detail. In this case, to make the students fluent in

speaking, they need to memorize the lexical. It cannot

be denied that the students face obstacles in learning

speaking skill. Speaking skill is a complex skill and

this skill needs other skills and other supported

knowledge. Finally (Akbari, 2015) identifies the

problems in teaching and learning EFL

speaking

skill.

There are seven problems with five crucial parts in

education system such as; the teacher, the students,

the material, teaching method, and assessment.

Curriculum and policy also influence and become the

sub-component of the problems.

Empirical studies in speaking also found that the

students face speaking obstacles such as; lack of

vocabulary, grammar mistake or error, not fluent in

speaking, incorrect pronunciation, listening problem,

Kusmaryani, W., Musthafa, B. and Purnawarman, P.

Optimizing Students’ Speaking and Critical Thinking through Students’ Reﬂective Practice in Socratic Circle Speaking.

DOI: 10.5220/0008215800002284

In Proceedings of the 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference (BELTIC 2018) - Developing ELT in the 21st Century, pages 201-209

ISBN: 978-989-758-416-9

201

shy to speak in front of public, afraid to express their

opinion, low self-confidence, make hesitation, have

problem in other skills, afraid in making mistake, less

effort, and less practice (Ansari, 2015), unacceptable

thought or desire, limited background knowledge of

certain topics, passive in participating, and mother

tongue influence their speaking (Tuan & Mai, 2015),

and it can be classified into two factors (internal and

external). Internal factors are some things which

come from the inner side of the students when they

learn English such as; how old, attitude and

behaviour, willingness, knowledge, perception, and

mother tongue. External factors are some things

which come from the outer side of the students such

as; syllabus, civilization or society, state, and

enthusiasm (Rico, 2014).

Chaney & Burk (1998) explain that in speaking

we develop meaning by using symbols verbally or not

with many kinds of situations and share its meaning

to others. In second language teaching and learning,

speaking skill becomes very important since long

time ago speaking has been underestimated by

English teachers by giving the students drills such as;

repeating the teacher and dialogue making. It is

totally different nowadays that the purpose of

speaking is the ability to communicate where the

students can express their ideas based on situation in

which social and cultures influence their perspectives.

We need to provide appropriate activities which can

be implemented in ESL and EFL classroom where the

students can improve their speaking skill based on

teacher’s experience and background in teaching

speaking.

The importance of language learning success is

teaching speaking which can give the students ability

to communicate effectively in school or out of school,

their real life in society. Teaching speaking covers the

linguistic aspects such as; phonology, morphology,

syntax, semantic, etc. The students can use those

skills in speaking by seeing social context, listeners,

condition, and the issue, arrange the idea based on

logic meaning steps, function the language to show

value and judgement, and they can speak fluently and

confidently.

Interaction is the key in speaking which linguists

and ESL/EFL teachers concern on. The purpose is to

teach the language communicatively and

collaboratively by seeing speaking as real life

communication. The use of this method to ESL/EFL

learners will give chance to the students to

communicate the target language. Classroom

environment needs to be adjusted to give the students

real life situation to communicate and stimulate

speaking through authentic activities and also

meaningful task that can be done collaboratively in

groups.

The development of classroom interaction is

very important in teaching speaking skill at

language courses. Speaking studies are similar to the

other studies which use language in the field of

interdisciplinary. The study is related to the

understanding

psycholinguistic

and internal factors

which influence the production of speech, the

structure, interpretation, and the involvement of

process and the way to develop these aspects. A

description of the characteristics of speaking in a

foreign language can be approached from different

angles, but typically it is conceptualized in terms of

two interrelated facts, that is various types of

knowledge that learners possess and their expertise in

adeptly using the knowledge in real communication

(Pawlak, 2011). Richard (2008) explains that the

priority in ESL and EFL learning is the students can

master the speaking skill. As the consequence, the

students tries to assess their process in learning

language effectively based on quantity and quality of

their speaking to see the improvement of their

speaking.

There are three aspects of primer sources

problem-makers. The first is communicators focus on

speaker and listener. The second is message. The last

is the context or situation and condition

(Jamshidnejad, 2011). Communicative language

teaching is said to be one of the latest pedagogic

approach which is based on the principles of

motivation enforced learning. Khan (2013) says that

communicative language teaching incorporates the

idea of interaction considering it as essential element

of the whole process and output. The total interaction

in meaning which the students depend on and

participate will influence the success of acquisition in

target language. Of course, the contribution in

developing students’ system comes from language

input which is integrated to language output. Kanuka,

Rourke, & Laflamme (2007) add that arguments,

discussions, and debates are some communicative

activities which can be used by the students to achieve

their higher order thinking. The students are

introduced to conceptual issue and problems which

lead them to share their opinion to others, assess the

information to solve the problems, make self-

reflection and investigate their understanding which

cover their needs and make them get new

interpretation toward real life issues. Marie & Rohan

(2011) underline that interactional competence is

what students must have. The students have to co-

construct conversation with the other students’

interaction in various events and show their

BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference

202

understanding in pragmatics by using syntax talk

which involves paralinguistic, gesture, body

language, proxemics, kinesics, and gaze where the

purpose is social or institutional purpose which focus

on joint management with co-participants in the

system of turn taking and the roles are adopted from

appropriate interaction. The comprehension and

practice in designing and responding turns coherently

and in manner sequent, displaying comprehension

and commonly fixing the communication which is

treat or breakdown. Presenting relevant empathy and

engagement as well as completing the action socially

where the goals are interaction condition and social

or institutional.

The other thing which also important to be

considered besides speaking is critical thinking. As

teachers and communicators, it becomes their

responsibility to create proper atmosphere which can

improve students’ critical thinking. The students must

be motivated in asking questions to go beyond facts

rather than memorization of knowledge. Teachers

must remain open to have ideas, opinions, and beliefs

questioned critically by the students. The students

must be prepared to accept corrective critique of their

efforts.

Everyone knows the importance of critical

thinking. It cannot be separated from many aspects of

people’s life. Paul (1993) says that critical thinking is

valuable not only in school but also in the world

beyond school as well. Nowadays we see many

people in modern society face obstacles in thinking

critically to solve their daily problems. We need to

learn how to think critically because we face different

character of people and trapped in the condition

which force us to make tough decisions or choices.

Critical thinking skill gives everyone a chance to

make wise decision and choices toward the problems.

Although thinking in the language dictionary

means the process of thinking about something, ideas

or opinions about something, intelligent and able to

think seriously about things, but the interpretation

about thinking by psychologists were different. The

interpretation about thinking changed from time to

time. Reinard (1991) explains critical thinking

requires deliberate and careful efforts relate to

proposition before making a decision. What a person

has in mind is from information which already

evaluated thoughtfully such as the width of issue in

our proposition before decision is made. Many option

to react on the issue such as; acceptance, rejection, or

suspend judgement based on proposition in people’s

mind. Scientific attitude is needed in thinking

critically and push the existing issue to go to decision

making. At last, arguments lead to the judgement

Figure 1: Concept of thinking (Phillip, 1997)

Thinking is a mental process in people’s brain,

processes the information collected then gives

interpretation

about it and functions to solve problems

and makes decisions also produces behaviour and

constitutes attitude (Phillip, 1997).

The term “critical” is taken from two Greek words

etymologically from “kriticos” is the skill in

considering the decision from the conclusion which is

sensible and “kriterion” is the quality or criteria

which can be used to measure the ideas. It can be said

that etymologically the development of discerning

judgement is based on standards. It is relevant to

Webster’s dictionary “characterized by careful

analysis and judgement” and the gloss follow it,

“critical – in its strictest sense – implies an attempt at

objective judgement so as to determine both merits

and faults”. The implementation of thinking, the

concept of critical thinking is clearly thinking which

focus on the decision or the conclusion after assessing

the criteria appropriately in the purpose of

determining the truth which worth, value or merit the

issue. Elder (2007) in Paul & Elder (2008) define

critical thinking as the ability to reason which is

guided oneself in thinking with discipline that reach

the quality of thinking in the highest position fair-

mindedly. It will allow people critically and

consistently think in a rational way, able to give

reason and empathy. Intellectual equipment is used to

help people think critically in assessing and analysing

the concepts and principles where people’s thinking

skill is improved. From the explanation above, it can

be seen that critical thinking uses standard of thinking

and process in higher order thinking not only to solve

problems and make decision but also give

interpretation to the given information.

In education field critical thinking is very

important to be taught and implemented. Critical

thinking skill is developed from knowledge and

guidance to understand written information. It builds

and fluids based on their knowledge. It is not just

memorize knowledge and comprehend the lesson

without asking the questions. Critical thinking gives

opportunity to the students to think critically by

Optimizing Students’ Speaking and Critical Thinking through Students’ Reﬂective Practice in Socratic Circle Speaking

203

making hypotheses questions, finding alternative

hypotheses, and assessing the hypotheses based on

the facts found. We do not say that memorizing fact

is not good. Memorization can help students to solve

their problems, use their logic, give argument and

clear the confusion.

There are many ways to optimize students’

speaking and critical thinking. This paper tries to

present the research result in optimizing students’

speaking and critical thinking through students’

reflective practice in Socratic circle speaking.

Reflective practice is a process where learners

consider the incidents

critically

in their learning based

on their background and continuously process as self-

reflection. This concept is proposed by Schon (1987)

who says that reflective practice consider students’

own background in implementing what they know

into practice thoughtfully and the professionals in the

discipline will coach this. His argument shows that

the goal of learning is to prepare the students facing

the world where practice should be appropriate to the

fast changing world by filling the knowledge through

professional training model. Reflection will give the

students and the novice opportunity to develop and

improve themselves by practicing the reflection itself.

There are so many concepts of word “reflection”

based on its context. Meditation of thought is

commonly used to define it. In education especially

learning context, Rowntree (1988) explains reflection

as serious self-conversation or critically think about

the subjects, the methods, and learning tasks after the

class over. The steps are preparation, learning

process, and the reflection. Fade (2005) explains that

in reflection we need to describe, assess our ideas,

opinions, point of views or perspectives, the theories

which support, and the process of learning. It is

divided into three categories. The first is prospective

reflection which focus on seeing forward. The second

is spectative reflection which focus on seeing what

we are doing now. The third is

retrospective

reflection

which focus on seeing back after learning. Reflection

task will help the students to evaluate their activities

during learning process such as the material which

related to reality context. The reflection is done

personally and the evaluation comes from one’s

individual. Every student has different evaluation on

what they noticed, concerned, focused, and did in the

class. The reflection gives the students chance to

assess what they got in learning process.

Socratic circle speaking means that in

optimizing students’ speaking and critical thinking,

the teacher used Socratic Method in the form of

Socratic circle speaking. The concept of Socratic

Method is familiar among professional educators

especially teaching methodologies in legal studies.

Socrates focused on continuous questions to find the

truth or what we call as a dialectic method of inquiry

(Pang, 2008). Schiller (2008) says that the students’

learning can be encouraged by using a method

which has guided question pedagogy, using

dialogue and refutation to make the students

assess their understanding critically about certain

issues. Fahim (2012) understands that organized

series and systematic questions are what Socrates

proposed to make students assess their thinking and

avoid the students to make wrong concepts and

conclusion. Socratic questioning method is far from

memorizing information from textbook in teaching.

Philosophically this method aims to optimizing

students’ thinking where the students are asked with

no definitive answer so the students keep thinking to

evaluate the given issue. Socrates thought that

teaching the students were not effective by lecturing

method. Socratic seminars are proposed to evaluate

students’ knowledge and comprehension related to

the given issue about people or others which lead to

students’ understanding the thoughts by continuously

asking question. The students’ reasoning can be

stimulated to be more rational and logic (Byrne,

2011).

Figure 2. Socratic circle concept

Socratic questioning method is also can be said as

transformative learning, the process where creative

composition is brought to the opposites. The

individual is created socially during it is generated.

The teaching and learning process includes person

from group community. The main focus in this

process is a deep understanding from the students

individually or collectively (Formenti & Dirkx,

2014). The implementation of Socratic questioning

method can be done in good environment classroom

which accompany the students to get knowledge and

make them critically think about the material given

and they can create positive and constructive manner

engagement with other students (Bodinet, 2016).

BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference

204

Socratic method is relevant to EFL classroom

because question-asking is one of the most common

techniques used by language teachers (Al-darwish,

2012). Socratic questioning first proposed by

Socrates, one of the great philosophers in Greek who

engaged the questions with his students in seeking the

truth by asking continuously his students and

colleagues’

perspectives which exposed contradiction

where fallacies and assumptions were proved. In this

this strategy, the method of learning is helping teacher

in relating material with real condition of the students

and supporting them to make relation between their

own knowledge with the implementation in daily

activities. With this strategy, the students are

expected to understand the importance of the study,

the advantages, and how they reach it. Socratic

questioning method is a method where questions take

place in teaching and learning. It will make the

students understand the content or issue to increase

their thinking level through their deep thinking on the

concept and value from written text. Socratic Method

pushes the students to think by continuously asking

questions and selecting the questions’ types to

develop discussion where discipline and responsible

manner intellectually are required. In learning

process, questioning is considered as teacher’s

activity to support, guide, and evaluate students to dig

information, analyse, and explore the ideas

(Copeland, 2005; Paul, 2006).

2 METHOD

Descriptive qualitative is the design of this research.

The purpose of this design is investigating the

implementation of students’ reflective practice in

optimizing students’ speaking skill and critical

thinking skill in Socratic circle speaking. The

implementation was done at English department of

Borneo University Tarakan in academic year

2017/2018..

Subject of the research was third semester

students. The researcher used closed observation. In

the observation activities, the researcher acted as non-

participant observer it means that the researcher did

not participate and interfere the process of teaching

and learning. Some aspects observed were the

implementation of students’ reflective practice in

optimizing students’ speaking skill and critical

thinking skill in Socratic circle speaking. In this

research, the researcher observed the running process

of Socratic circle speaking, analysed students’

reflection, saw the progress of students’ speaking and

critical thinking after reflection practice. The

researcher recorded the activities in the classroom. In

interview session, the researcher asked questions

which related to the implementation of students’

reflective practice.

Qualitative data analysis was used in this

research. The data was coded (open, selective,

axial) by looking for themes related to the research

focus. In analysing the data, the researcher used

Miles & Huberman (1984) interactive model for

component data analysis.

3 RESULTS

Students’ Speaking Resuls

The result shows that students’ reflexive practice

could optimize students’ speaking and critical

thinking.

Speaking

result shows that 23% in Excellent

category, 26% in Good category, 38% in Fair

category, 13% in Weak category, and 0% in Poor

category.

Chart 1. Students’ Speaking Result

Excellent category covers the criteria such as; in

fluency students are very fluent in speaking, almost

no doubt, rich in vocabularies, and perfect in voice

tone in pronouncing the words, and accent students

are in excellent and good effort at accent, in

vocabulary students are excellent in controlling the

language features and have a wide range of well-

chosen vocabulary, in grammar students do accuracy

and variety of grammatical structures, and in details

students are excellent in describing and give

additional details beyond the required.

Good category covers the criteria such as; in

fluency students are very fluent in speaking, some

doubt, looking for few words, and some words are

unheard in pronouncing the words and accent

students are in good effort at accent, in vocabulary

students are in good power in directing the language,

well space, well selected vocabularies, for grammar

students did grammatical errors in structure because

of various grammar function, and details students are

Optimizing Students’ Speaking and Critical Thinking through Students’ Reﬂective Practice in Socratic Circle Speaking

205

giving clear description including the information

which is required.

Fair category covers the criteria such as; in

fluency students are fluent enough in speaking, doubt

sometimes, paraphrase make students unbalanced by

looking for some words and hesitating voice tone in

pronouncing, a non-native accent sometimes some

efforts, in the aspect of vocabulary students gave

adequate language control and vocabulary range is

lacking, in grammar students did errors more often

but not influence the idea and limited styles in

grammar, and in detail students give enough

explanation and add some detail information.

Weak category covers the criteria such as;

speaking is often doubt with uncomplete sentences

left, very low voice tone in pronouncing, limited and

difficult to comprehend and for native accent no

attempt, in the aspect of vocabulary students are

weak,

directing

the language and use task which is not

equal to the vocabulary used, error in grammar more

often although in simple grammar which influence

understanding, and limited details critically which is

hard for the listener to catch the point.

Poor category covers the criteria such as; in

fluency students’ speaking is not fluent, doubt and

only in short phrase memorization, hard to think how

to speak continuously, cannot be heard, in

pronouncing the words, it is limited and difficult to

know and for native accent there is no attempt, in the

aspect of vocabulary students are weak in directing

the language and the task is not fit to the vocabulary

used in speaking, in grammar students did errors more

often and influence the meaning and also limited

information which the listener cannot get the point.

Students’ Critical Thinking Result

Critical thinking result shows that 13% in Critical

Thinking level 4, 36% in Critical Thinking level 3,

38% in Critical Thinking level 2 and 13% in the first

level of critical thinking.

Chart 2: Students’ Critical Thinking Result

Critical thinking level 6 or the highest level covers

the criteria such as; facts, arguments, charts,

questions are interpreted accurately, students

recognize claim and reason in salient arguments,

agree or disagree are analysed and evaluated to give

point of view which can give explanation as

alternative of phenomena or event where the students

describe opinion and the cause fair-mindedly based

on facts that the reason in ethical judgment making.

Critical thinking level 5 covers the criteria such

as; facts, arguments, charts and questions are

interpreted accurately, identification of relevant

argument based on reason and claim in thinking the

issue in positive or negative side, assess and analyse

various points as alternative ideas to describe the

event or phenomena, describe the arguments, facts

and reasons are thought fair-mindedly.

Critical thinking level 4 covers the criteria such

as; events, people and places are described by adding

the source details, make relation to not only the

sources but also personal analytic which show

students’ basic skill in analysing, interpreting,

formulating inferences or statement which involves

multi-perspectives in literature discussion,

background knowledge and others’ perspectives are

challenged through questions and saying

understanding and guessing by giving limited facts to

think twice on others’ belief.

Critical thinking level 3 covers the criteria such

as; answer by showing events and evidence

grammatically

that makes individual connect with the

limited sources, start to give effective fact to support

opinion in literature discussion, background

knowledge, factually or literally relay to the sources

which involves limited or no fact to respond the

dualistic thoughts and demonstrate unwell

organization and uneven thinking.

Critical thinking level 2 covers the criteria such

as; misconception in facts, arguments, charts and

questions, cannot identify the argument which is

strong and relevant to the issue and fall in giving

conversation, limited justification in procedure and

result, reasons are explained rarely and also to the

facts and arguments, self-interest and preconception

are maintained by perspectives.

Critical thinking level 1 or the lowest level covers

the criteria such as; facts, arguments, charts and

questions are interpreted with bias in information on

others’ perspectives, cannot identify the counter

argument which is strong and relevant to the issue and

missed in assessing the alternative perspective and

give arguments based on wrong facts and reasons and

the claim cannot be justified in not only the procedure

or result but also closed-mindedly reasons.

BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference

206

Students’ Reflection in Socratic Circle Speaking

Students’ speaking and critical thinking result

above are optimized by using students’ reflection in

Socratic circle speaking where the student in speaking

class used Socratic method and after class students

were asked to make self- reflection on students’

performance and content. The following pictures are

the examples of student’s self-reflection.

Figure 3. Student’s Reflection on Performance

Figure 4. Student’s Reflection on Content

Reflective assignments make students think about

the reality context based on their practice on how the

content implemented in their learning. Reflection is

very individual and personal where the opinion comes

individually. Every student will do different

reflection in noticing, observing or doing things in

teaching and learning process. The reflection gives

the students chance to evaluate what they have got in

the class. Experience is learning will give benefit to

the students by reflecting the lesson, for example in

the science class. Continuous reflection can improve

students’ performance in speaking by evaluating the

strengths and weaknesses they had, recognize their

problems and how to solve those problems for future

improvement. Their task can be done by choosing

appropriate strategy or approach based on their

learning experience especially which gives positive

result to them.

Research result conducted by Lerch, Bilics, &

Colley (2006) is similar to this research where

effective learners are influenced by their ability to

think critically, self-evaluation on their learning, and

metacognitive thinking in their reflective practice.

Students can analyse their problems, challenges, and

obstacles in learning to find alternative solutions

where they can optimize their skill.

Reflective practice is a process of deep

evaluation on teaching and learning which already

done (Herod, 2002). It is totally different with non-

reflective learning which focuses on memorization

of material without stimulating students’ critical

thinking. The purpose of reflective learning is the

engagement among the teacher, the students, the

material, teaching method, learning assessment, and

classroom management to achieve the language

target guiding the students’ knowledge and

experience meet the real situation. The learning

concept is connected to their schoolwork through

reflection. Students’ experience replace where the

task is just material memorization.

There are many aspects of teaching and

learning which can be connected to make both the

teacher and the students realize their strengths and

weaknesses in order to achieve the effectiveness in

teaching and learning. In education field,

experience teaches us. We grow the personal

reflection based on experience which develop our

skill more cognizant. Continuous reflection will

make the teacher realize and recognize the strengths

and weaknesses of his/her teaching. It also makes

the teacher evaluate teaching to find alternative

solution and final decision for the future.

Situational analysis will help teacher develop

his/her teaching skill. Decision making is the end

of this reflection and it requires critical thinking

skill

Meaningful teaching and learning process can

be done by designing reflective practice which

covers clear and realistic purpose to give reflection

a chance to improve the quality of teaching and

learning. The structured reflection has

opportunity to transform reality learning from

learning task (Amulya, 2003). Continuous

reflection can be done daily, weekly, to biweekly

or after finishing each lesson unit where the focus is

evaluate teaching and learning activities regularly.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Students’ reflective practice can optimize students’

speaking and critical thinking in Socratic circle

speaking. The key point of reflection is willingness

from both teacher and the students to evaluate their

strengths and weaknesses and also the quality and

effectiveness of teaching and learning process.

Optimizing Students’ Speaking and Critical Thinking through Students’ Reﬂective Practice in Socratic Circle Speaking

207

Problems in teaching and learning process can be

solved by the teacher through continuous

reflection. The quality of teaching and learning can be

evaluated by recognizing the strengths and

weaknesses of preparation, process, assessment,

material selection, teaching method, etc. the teacher

can avoid and anticipate what will happen to the next

teaching.

Reflection

can help teacher not only to solve

problems in teaching but also improve the quality of

his/her teaching. Reflection also helps students to

optimize their learning. Reflective practice makes the

students evaluate critically what they learned which

can improve their skill in speaking and critical

thinking. Reflective practice will motivate the teacher

and the students to do self-correction in teaching and

learning.

EFL speaking skill should focus on bringing real

life context in teaching and learning process. It can be

done by designing appropriate curriculum or syllabus

which can explore functional speaking and express

ideas toward global issues. The students can talk their

opinions, arguments, data or evidence, clarification,

viewpoints or perspectives implications and

consequences until questioning the given issues. The

students are guided to improve fluency, aware on

pronunciation, enrich vocabulary, well-arranged

structure or grammar, and provide detail information

relate to issue being discuss in the class.

Philosophically, critical thinking is defined as

cognitive skill which is very complex and focus on

problem solving where innovation and intellectual

consideration are required. In critical thinking people

evaluate the information they got quantitatively and

qualitatively to the end of new perspectives and belief

to be used to problem solving and decision making.

REFERENCES

Moore, R., Lopes, J., 1999. Paper templates. In

TEMPLATE’06, 1st International Conference on

Template Production. SCITEPRESS.

Smith, J., 1998. The book, The publishing company.

London, 2

edition.

Akbari, Z. (2015). Current Challenges in Teaching /

Learning English for EFL Learners : The Case of

Junior High School and High School. Procedia -

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 394–401.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.524

Alaraj, M. M. (2017). EFL Speaking Acquisition :

Identifying Problems , Suggesting Learning

Strategies and Examining Their Effect on Students ’

Speaking Fluency. The International Journal of Social

Sciences and Humanities Invention, 4(1),3215–

3221. http://doi.org/10.18535/ijsshi/v4i1.05

Al-darwish, S. (2012). The Role of Teacher Questions and

the Socratic Method In EFL Classrooms in Kuwait.

World Journal of Education, 2(4), 76–85.

http://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v2n4p76

Amulya, J. (2003). What is reflective practice? Retrieved

September 3, 2017, from www.learningfor

innovation.com

Ansari, M. S. (2015). Speaking Anxiety in ESL / EFL

Classrooms : A Holistic Approach and Practical

Study. International Journal of Educational

Investigations, 2(4), 38–46.

Bodinet, J. C. (2016). Pedagogies of the Futures : Shifting

the Educational Paradigms. Springer - European

Journal of Futures Research, 4(21), 1–12.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s40309-016-0106-0

Byrne, G. (2011). Using Socratic Circles to Develop

Critical Thinking Skills. Journal of Practically

Primary, 16(2), 13–16.

Chaney, A. L., & Burk, T. L. (1998). Teaching Oral

Communication in Grades K-8. Boston: Allyn &

Bacon.

Copeland, M. (2005). Socratic Circles: Fostering Critical

and Creative Thinking in Middle and High School.

Portland, MN: Stenhouse.

Fade, S. (2005). Learning and assessing through reflection:

A practical guide. Retrieved September 3, 2017,

from university of ulster

Fahim, M. (2012). Fostering Critical Thinking through

Socrates ’ Questioning in Iranian Language Institutes.

Journal of Language Teaching and Research,

3(6), 1122–1127.

http://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.6.1122-1127

Formenti, L., & Dirkx, J. (2014). A Dialogical Reframing.

SAGE Journal of Transformative Education, 12(2),

123–133. http://doi.org/10.1177/1541344614554508

Herod, L. (2002). Glossary of terms. Retrieved September

3, 2017, from www.nald.ca

Jamshidnejad, A. (2011). An Innovative Approach to

Understanding Oral Problems in Foreign Language

Learning and Communication. Journal of Academic

and Applied Studies, 1(1), 3–21.

Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The

Influence of Instructional Methods on the Quality of

Online Discussion. British Journal of Education

Technology, 38(2), 260–271.

http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00620.x

Khan, I. A. (2013). Speaking Skills and Teaching

Strategies : the Case of an EFL Classroom.

Educational Technology Journal, 58, 14557–14560.

Lerch, C., Bilics, A., & Colley, B. (2006). Using reflection

to develop higher order processes. In American

education research association.

Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing Speaking. UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Marie, A., & Rohan, B. (2011). Using Conversational

Analysis in the Second Language Classroom to Teach

Interactional Competence. SAGE Journal of Language

BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference

208

Teaching Researc, 15(4), 479–507.

http://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811412878

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative

data analysis: A source book of new methods.

Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Pang, K. (2008). Sophist or Socratic Teaching Methods in

Fostering Learning in US Graduate Education. The

International Journal of Learning, 15(6), 197–201.

Paul, R. W. (1993). Critical Thinking: What every person

needs to survive in a rapidly changing world (J.

Willson). Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical

Thinking.

Paul, R. W. (2006). Thinker’s Guide to the Art of Socratic

Questioning. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for

Critical Thinking.

Paul, R. W., & Elder, L. (2008). The Miniature Guide to

Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools. California: The

Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Pawlak, M. (2011). Speaking and Instructed Foreign

Language Acquisition. Bristol, Bufalo, Toronto:

Multilingual Matters.

Reinard, J. C. (1991). Foundation of Argument: Effective

communication for critical thinking. Dubuque, Iowa:

WM. C Brown Publisher.

Richard, J. C. (2008). Teaching Listening and Speaking:

From Theory to Practice. USA: Cambridge

University Press.

Rico, L. J. A. (2014). Identifying Factors Causing

Difficulties to Productive Skills among Foreign

Language Learners. Open Writing Doors Journal,

11(1), 65–86.

Rowntree, D. (1988). Learn how to study: A realistic

approach (3rd edition). London: Macdonald & Co.Ltd.

Schiller, N. (2008). Finding a Socratic Method for

Information Literacy Instruction. Routledge Journal of

College & Undergraduate Libraries, 15(1-2), 39–56.

Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner.

San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Thornbury, S. (2005). How to Teach Speaking. UK:

Pearson, Longman.

Tuan, N. H., & Mai, T. N. (2015). Factors Affecting

Students’ Speaking Performance at Le Thanh Hien

High School. Asian Journal of Educational Research,

3(2), 8–23.

Optimizing Students’ Speaking and Critical Thinking through Students’ Reﬂective Practice in Socratic Circle Speaking

209