52早稲田教育評論 第 36 巻第１号Conclusionattention, but it was beyond the scope of this study as a limitation and left the task for a future study.Secondly, Finding 3 reveals that the distress was clearly detrimental. The distress made even a diligent student hesitant about attending the class. The finding was made possible based on the weekly journal method of this study, which captured small changes （e.g., Excerpt 8） and allowed for further exploration in the interview （Excerpt 9）. Excerpt 10 showed that she was on the verge, and even a ray of sunshine could have changed her unsettled mind. This means that any adverse event for a student on the verge may easily lead the student to take an absence from the class （e.g., Kojima （2021） reports an EMI instructor threatening his students that they may fail）. Previous literature that pursued EMI students’ experience longitudinally, such as Evans & Morrison （2011, 2012）, did not cover the distress dimension when portraying their students’ struggles, so this study contributes in providing one picture.Because the focal student had the determination not to drop the class, she completed the course. A reader might wonder what happened to Satomi for the rest of the semester. This paper only focused on the distress dimension and did not explore her resilience and development. Therefore, a future paper should pursue this part of the case study. In fact, from around the tenth week, she found the classes enjoyable as she gradually began to receive positive comments from her peers during the discussions. Additionally, she gave a nearly impeccable presentation during the thirteenth week, one of the best in the class. Moreover, she could notice her language development after finishing the course. Future research should discuss what contributed to her resilience and what consequences were brought about due to being resilient in the EMI course.Finally, understanding distress by identifying its causes seems important because distress can be detrimental to EMI students’ learning and development. Thus, the dimension of distress deserves more attention in the body of literature on student support in EMI （e.g., Galloway & Ruegg, 2020; Moriya & Matsumura, 2021）. Additionally, difficulties in EMI have often been attributed to L2 English deficiency, and educators and researchers have emphasized language support. However, the findings of this study suggested that difficulty itself may not necessarily be a burden or distress （“the physical amount of work was not much of a burden” in Excerpt 2）. Instead, it explicated how difficulty induced distress by the social practices in the classroom that impacted their identity construction. In this case study, the focal participant’s belief and the quality of classroom interaction threatened her social identity, generating stressful emotions which evolved into distress. This paper uncovered students’ distress otherwise buried underneath students’ seemingly cool faces by taking a narrative-oriented approach. In illustrating students’ experience, the paper made a novel attempt to demonstrate how spontaneous L2 speaking in an EMI classroom produced emotions such as anxiety, humiliation, and embarrassment that evolved into distress. It also described how distress may bring about detrimental consequences to students’ learning by showing a diligent student’s dilemma in wishing to skip a class. Such a case underscores that distress deserves more attention in research on
元のページ ../index.html#58