高等学校における英語ディベート大会の地域間格差の実情と要因分析

抄録

Debate, understood as evidence-based advocacy aimed at persuading third-party adjudicators, has long been recognized for fostering critical thinking, communication competence, and civic engagement. In the context of second language acquisition, debate also promotes authentic language use, fluency, and persuasive discourse skills. Yet its diffusion in Japanese high schools shows marked regional disparities. This study employs a mixed-methods approach to examine such inequities in competitive English debate. Quantitative analysis of ten years of national tournament outcomes (HEnDA, 10th–19th) demonstrates that a small cluster of prefectures consistently outperformed expectations, while the majority never placed within the top eight. To investigate underlying factors, semi-structured interviews with expert coaches were analyzed using SCAT. Three themes emerged: (1) practice design emphasizing structured speech drills and rapid feedback, (2) inter-school networks providing access to training and coaching know-how, and (3) parental engagement supplying financial and logistical support. These findings highlight how communicative practices and institutional conditions jointly shape educational outcomes. Implications are offered for teacher development, school–community partnerships, and equitable access to debate education.