The Debate Skills Scale: Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Self-Report Measure for High School Students

Abstract

We developed and validated the Debate Skills Scale (DSS), grounded in social cognitive theory, to address the lack of an instrument for assessing debate competencies among high school students, as existing measures primarily assess general critical thinking rather than debate performance. Data were collected from 389 students, and an initial 49-item pool was generated based on literature and expert input. Exploratory Factor Analysis revealed a four-factor structure explaining 50.95% of the variance and reduced the scale to 29 items. Subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) removed four items, resulting in a final 25-item scale. CFA supported this structure, with internal consistency reliability ranging from acceptable to excellent, although lower reliability was observed for the Speaking Skills subscale. Discriminative validity analyses indicated that the DSS differentiated students based on debate experience and performance. The DSS provides a psychometrically validated self-report instrument for assessing perceived debate competencies and may inform instructional planning.

Keywords

Debate Skills Scale self-report measurement debate competencies high school students psychometric validation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arung

Jumardin

(2016). Improving the students’ speaking skill through debate technique. Journal of English Education, 1(1), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.31327/jee.v1i1.85

Baketa

Kovačić

Mornar

(2023). The role of debate in cognitive development and development of civic awareness of young people: A qualitative analysis. Sociologija, 65(3), 400–417. https://doi.org/10.2298/SOC2303400B

Bandura

(2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In Pajares

Urdan

(Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. 5, pp. 307–337). Information Age Publishing.

Benli

. (2019). Klasik Türk edebiyatında münazara [Debate in classical Turkish literature] [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Istanbul University.

Bhardwaj

Zhang

Tan

Y. Q.

Pandey

(2025). Redefining learning: Student-centered strategies for academic and personal growth. Frontiers in Education, 10(February), 1518602. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1518602

Boumediene

Hamadi

N. A.

Berrahal

K. F.

(2021). Classroom debate to enhance critical thinking skills. El Bahith for Sport and Social Sciences, 4(7), 441–457.

Büyükdinç

N. F.

(2007). Osmanlı medreselerinde bir öğretim metodu olarak münâzara ve Ahmet Cevdet Paşa’nın Âdâb-ı Sedâd adlı eseri [Debate as a teaching method in Ottoman madrasas and Ahmet Cevdet Pasha's work titled Âdâb-ı Sedâd] [Unpublished master's thesis]. Marmara Üniversitesi.

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Handbook of data analysis for social sciences]. Pegem Akademi.

Büyüköztürk

Ş.

Çokluk

Ö.

Şekercioğlu

(2018). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications] (4. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

10.

Çabuk

Yeni

(2016). Okul öncesi eğitimde yeni bir teknik: Münazara. [A new technique in preschool education: Debate]. Kastamonu Education Journal, 24(5), 2439–2456.

11.

Chikeleze

Johnson

Gibson

(2018). Let’s argue: Using debate to teach critical thinking and communication skills to future leaders. Journal of Leadership Education, 18(2), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.12806/V17/I2/A4

12.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

13.

Darby

(2007). Debate: A teaching-learning strategy for developing competence in communication and critical thinking. Journal of Dental Hygiene, 81(4), 1–10.

14.

Demir

M. K.

Şahin

Ç.

Tutkun

(2016). Sosyal bilgiler dersi için sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının münazara konusu oluşturma becerilerinin değerlendirilmesi. [Evaluation of classroom teacher candidates’ ability to create a debate topic for social studies course]. Journal of Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty, 32, 51–66.

15.

DeVellis

R. F.

(2014). Ölçek geliştirme: Kuram ve uygulamalar [Scale development: Theory and applications] (T. Totan, Trans.). Nobel Academic Publishing.

16.

Elder

Paul

(2020). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (4th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.

17.

El Majidi

De Graaff

Janssen

(2023). Debate pedagogy as a conducive environment for L2 argumentative essay writing. Language Teaching Research, 30(4), 1764–1788. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231156998

18.

El Majidi

De Graaff

Janssen

(2024). Debate as a pedagogical tool for developing speaking skills in second language education. Language Teaching Research, 28(6), 2431–2452. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211050619

19.

Ennis

R. H.

(2009). An annotated list of critical thinking tests. Retrieved May 12, 2024, from https://criticalthinking.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/An-Annotated-List-of-English-Language-Critical-Thinking-Tests.pdf

20.

Ertaş Kılıç

Şen

A. İ.

(2014). UF/EMI eleştirel düşünme eğilimi Ölçeğini türkçeye uyarlama çalışması. [Adaptation of the Critical Thinking Disposition Scale into Turkish]. Education and Science, 39(Supplement 2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.15390/eb.2014.3632

21.

Fabrigar

L. R.

Wegener

D. T.

MacCallum

R. C.

Strahan

E. J.

(1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272

22.

González-Pérez

L. I.

Ramírez-Montoya

M. S.

(2022). Components of education 4.0 in 21st century skills frameworks: Systematic review. Sustainability, 14(3), Article 1493. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031493

23.

Graefe

A. K.

(2024). Gifted high school students’ perceptions of the impact of classroom power dynamics on motivation and empowerment. Journal of Advanced Academics, 35(1), 6–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X231220414

24.

Gravetter

F. J.

Wallnau

L. B.

(2011). Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences (8th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

25.

Greco

Annovazzi

Palena

Camussi

Rossi

Steca

(2022). Self-efficacy beliefs of university students: Examining factor validity and measurement invariance of the new Academic Self-Efficacy Scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(January), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.498824

26.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

(2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed., Pearson New International Edition). Pearson Education Limited.

27.

Hayes

A. F.

Coutts

J. J.

(2020). Use Omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629

28.

S. Y.

Cowan

Bache

Nagtzaam

(2025). Beyond diplomats: Why model UNs should be for everyone—To advance education for sustainable development and build capacity for intergovernmental engagement. Sustainable Earth Reviews, 8(1), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42055-025-00111-3

29.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

30.

Iman

J. N.

(2017). Debate instruction in EFL classroom: Impacts on the critical thinking and speaking skill. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 87–108. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.1046a

31.

Karakoç

F. Y.

Dönmez

(2014). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler. [Basic principles in scale development studies]. World of Medical Education, 13(40), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.25282/ted.228738

32.

Kennedy

R. R.

(2009). The power of in-class debates. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10(3), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787409343186

33.

Kim

Ryoo

Lee

(2024). Development of a scale to measure the parental competency of science-gifted students in South Korea. Journal of Advanced Academics, 35(1), 125–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X231219277

34.

Kılıç

(2013). Sampling methods. Journal of Mood Disorders, 3(1), 44–46. https://doi.org/10.5455/jmood.20130325011730

35.

Kılıç

(2016). Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 6(1), 47. https://doi.org/10.5455/jmood.20160307122823

36.

Kline

R. B.

(2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford Press.

37.

Laia

(2019). Improving the students’ ability in speaking by using debate technique at the tenth grade of SMK Negeri 1 Aramo. Journal of English Language Teaching, 4(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.30998/scope.v4i01.4408

38.

Lawshe

C. H.

(1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x

39.

Leech

N. L.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

(2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity, 43(2), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3

40.

Lumbangaol

R. R.

Mazali

M. R.

(2020). Improving students’ speaking ability through debate technique. A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 7(2), 163–172. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v7i2.13674

41.

Malloy

J. A.

Tracy

K. N.

Scales

R. Q.

Menickelli

Scales

W. D.

(2020). It’s not about being right: Developing argument through debate. Journal of Literacy Research, 52(1), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X19896495

42.

McKenzie

J. F.

Wood

M. L.

Kotecki

J. E.

Clark

J. K.

Brey

R. A.

(1999). Establishing content validity: Using qualitative and quantitative steps. American Journal of Health Behavior, 23(4), 311–318. https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.23.4.9

43.

MoNE [Ministry of National Education]. (2024a). Ortaokul Türkçe dersi öğretim programı: Türkiye Yüzyılı Maarif Modeli. [Secondary school Turkish language curriculum: Türkiye century education model]. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.

44.

MoNE [Ministry of National Education]. (2024b). Ortaöğretim Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Öğretim Programı (Hazırlık, 9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar): Türkiye Yüzyılı Maarif Modeli. [Secondary education Turkish language and literature curriculum (Preparatory, Grades 9–12): Türkiye century education model] Millî Ankara: Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.

45.

Örün

Ö.

Sever

(2025). Cognitive flexibility: An educational approach. In Erdem

Kaya

(Eds.), Resilience, adaptability, and cultural awareness within the educational landscape (pp. 179–208). Springer.

46.

Özensoy

A. U.

(2011). Eleştirel okumaya göre düzenlenmiş sosyal bilgiler dersinin eleştirel düşünme becerisine etkisi. [The effect of social studies course organized according to critical reading on critical thinking skills]. Mersin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(2), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.31172

47.

Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2019). Battle for kids. Retrieved May 12, 2024, from https://www.battelleforkids.org/insights/p21-resources/

48.

Phuti

Koloi-Keaikitse

Tsheko

G. N.

Oppong

(2023). Developing and validating a soft skills assessment scale for psychoeducational assessment. SAGE Open, 13(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231218066

49.

Rodriguez-Dono

Hernández-Fernández

(2021). Fostering sustainability and critical thinking through debate—A case study. Sustainability, 13(11), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116397

50.

Romero-Díaz de la Guardia

J. J.

García-Garnica

Chacón-Cuberos

Expósito-López

(2022). Psychometric validation of a teamwork skills scale in a vocational training context. SAGE Open, 12(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221103256

51.

Rosyid

Hidayati

I. N.

(2019). Thinking critically through debating: Promoting students’ HOTS and speaking competence. The 10th AISOFOLL, 78–88.

52.

Schueler

B. E.

Larned

K. E.

(2025). Interscholastic policy debate promotes critical thinking and college-going: Evidence from Boston public schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 47(1), 108–134. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231200234

53.

Shum

K. Z.

Suldo

S. M.

Shaunessy-Dedrick

O’Brennan

L. M.

(2024). A qualitative exploration of the facilitators and barriers of cognitive engagement among ninth-grade students in accelerated curricula. Journal of Advanced Academics, 35(1), 89–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X231223760

54.

Thornhill-Miller

Camarda

Mercier

Burkhardt

J. M.

Morisseau

Bourgeois-Bougrine

Vinchon

El Hayek

Augereau-Landais

Mourey

Feybesse

Sundquist

Lubart

(2023). Creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration: Assessment, certification, and promotion of 21st century skills for the future of work and education. Journal of Intelligence, 11(3), Article 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11030054

55.

Walker

Kettler

(2020). Developing critical thinking skills in high ability adolescents: Effects of a debate and argument analysis curriculum. Talent, 10(1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.46893/talent.758473

56.

Wang

Y. Y.

Chuang

Y. W.

(2024). Artificial intelligence self-efficacy: Scale development and validation. Education and Information Technologies, 29(4), 4785–4808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11967-0

57.

Woo

Cumming

T. M.

O’Neill

S. C.

(2024). South Korean University lecturers’ opinions about initial teacher education in gifted education. Journal of Advanced Academics, 35(3), 482–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X241230712

58.

Worthington

R. L.

Whittaker

T. A.

(2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127

59.

Zhang

Wang

(2025). The development and validation of a scale on student AI literacy in L2 writing: A domain-specific perspective. Journal of Second Language Writing, 69(September), 101227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2025.101227

60.

Zare

Othman

(2015). Students’ perceptions toward using classroom debate to develop speaking skills. Asian Social Science, 11(9), 158–170. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n9p158