慶英会 塾長｜慶應義塾大学卒・英検1級
中高一貫校の学校英語・NEW TREASURE・英検対策を専門とするオンライン個別指導塾です。塾長紹介
結論：英検1級リスニングPart2の説明文を聞くときは、話者が報告した観測結果、その理由についての仮説、証拠から言える結論を区別します。was associated with / may reflect / did not establish / suggested などを聞き逃すと、選択肢の「必ず原因だった」という言い過ぎを選びやすくなります。慶英会独自の5説明文・4択10問・全文台本・全40選択肢の理由を無料公開します。
音声について：本記事に音声ファイルは付属していません。読み上げ役・端末の読み上げ機能を使い、台本を見ずに聞いて答える学習用です。英検協会の公式Part2は5説明文・10問ですが、ここに掲載した台本や設問は慶英会の独自作成で、録音の長さ・難度・出題を再現した公式問題ではありません。公式の出題形式と過去問・音源を参照してください。
以下の都市、学校、研究、水質測定、保育施策はすべて架空の例です。公的な研究の出典や実在の調査結果として引用しないでください。
観測・仮説の区別を学んだら：Why does the speaker mention…? 話者の例示の意図を問う独自5台本10問へ進めます。全選択肢の解説付きです。
Part2で因果関係を判断する4つの聞き取りポイント
- 観測された事実：reported / observed / tended to を聞き取る。
- 別の説明：however / alternatively / might be explained by が出たら、原因候補を追加する。
- 残る限界：could not exclude / insufficient / not necessarily で証拠の範囲を限定する。
- 最終の結論：研究や施策を全面否定したのか、条件付きで評価したのか確認する。
最初は設問と選択肢だけを読み、本文を隠して読み上げを1回聞きます。解答後、台本に戻り、最初の主張→批判・別の説明→研究者の最終見解を日本語一文ずつで整理します。
問題編｜慶英会独自5説明文10問
Lecture 1｜図書室の利用と学習成果
Q1：What is the main weakness in the initial survey?
- （A） It showed that no student visited the rooms.
- （B） It established that all students had identical motivation.
- （C） It did not determine whether the reading rooms themselves caused the difference in assignments.
- （D） It proved that quiet study spaces harmed learning.
Q2：What did the researchers conclude after their follow-up?
- （A） Quiet study space seemed beneficial for some students, but the evidence still had limits.
- （B） The rooms were proved useless for every learner.
- （C） Every difference between students had been removed.
- （D） The town should abolish all evening services immediately.
Lecture 2｜植樹後の気温は何によって変わったか
Q3：What did the unplanted street suggest?
- （A） Planting trees can never provide shade.
- （B） Every street had identical traffic and building conditions.
- （C） The council stopped collecting temperature readings.
- （D） Some cooling may have been related to conditions beyond the tree-planting project.
Q4：Why was the researcher cautious about claiming a precise effect?
- （A） No temperature readings existed.
- （B） Measurement locations and environmental conditions were not fully comparable.
- （C） The trees had all been removed before the summer.
- （D） The study proved that every change was caused by the trees.
Lecture 3｜オンライン研修の修了者と技能
Q5：What problem did the later evaluation identify?
- （A） No adults had completed the course.
- （B） Success on familiar tasks did not consistently transfer to unfamiliar problems.
- （C） All participants had entered with identical experience.
- （D） The training involved only physical transportation skills.
Q6：Why did researchers not regard lower scores as automatically negative?
- （A） They proved that every learner was already fully prepared.
- （B） They guaranteed improved employment outcomes.
- （C） They might reveal which skills the programme still needed to develop.
- （D） They made practical assessment unnecessary.
Lecture 4｜水質センサーの信頼性と測定地点
Q7：What did the independent tests reveal?
- （A） The device’s reliability depended on the substances present in the water.
- （B） The device never worked under any condition.
- （C） Every field sample had identical properties.
- （D） The manufacturer had stopped producing sensors.
Q8：Why is speed alone insufficient to evaluate the device?
- （A） Faster equipment must always be more expensive.
- （B） The device was designed only for office administration.
- （C） Independent testing found no measurement differences.
- （D） Fast measurements do not guarantee accuracy across different sample conditions.
Lecture 5｜保育補助金と就労機会
Q9：What is one reason the initial employment interpretation was uncertain?
- （A） No family ever received any support.
- （B） All childcare places were available at every hour.
- （C） Some families may already have intended to work longer hours before receiving support.
- （D） Officials measured an identical effect in every household.
Q10：What did the revised evaluation add?
- （A） Only the total size of the town’s annual population.
- （B） Measures of actual childcare access as well as financial support.
- （C） A guarantee that all families would work full time.
- （D） A prohibition on studying further outcomes.
読み上げ用の全文台本5本｜解答後に確認
Lecture 1｜図書室の利用と学習成果（181語）
A fictional town extended the hours of its public reading rooms after local students requested additional study space. In the first year, officials found that frequent visitors tended to finish more assignments than students who rarely used the rooms. The result was encouraging, but the initial survey did not establish why the difference existed. Students who already enjoyed studying may have been more likely to visit. Others who were having difficulty with schoolwork might also have attended more often because they needed help. Both possibilities complicate a simple explanation in which the rooms themselves cause improved grades. Researchers later compared students with similar previous school records. They reported that access to a quiet environment appeared useful for some learners. However, attendance was still voluntary, and the study could not eliminate every relevant difference between the groups. The town therefore decided to keep the additional hours at selected locations while collecting better information about access and learning. The important lesson is not that the reading rooms were ineffective. It is that a useful association and a proven causal effect are different claims.
日本語で整理：読書室を頻繁に利用する生徒は宿題を完了しやすい傾向だったが、事前の学習意欲や困難を抱えた結果の利用など、説明が一つとは限らない。図書室の価値を否定せず、因果を慎重に評価。
Lecture 2｜植樹後の気温は何によって変わったか（186語）
In a fictional city, a council planted shade trees along a busy shopping street and reported lower afternoon temperatures during the following summer. Several local newspapers praised the trees as the direct cause of the entire reduction. An independent researcher offered a more cautious explanation. Weather conditions differed between the two summers, and the city had moved some measuring instruments when it redesigned the pavement. These changes could affect the readings even if planting also provided real shade. To examine the question, researchers looked at a nearby street where no new trees had been planted. Temperatures there had also fallen, suggesting that broader weather conditions might explain part of the pattern. Still, the streets were not identical. Their buildings, traffic and exposure to sunlight differed, so the comparison could not establish the trees’ precise contribution. The researcher recommended more consistent measurements and a longer period of observation. The council decided to continue monitoring rather than announce a guaranteed amount of cooling for every street. The key distinction is between a change observed after an intervention and a change shown to have been caused by that intervention.
日本語で整理：植樹後に気温は下がったが、前年との天候差や測定地点の変更、未植樹街路でも低下した事実から植樹だけの効果は確定できない。木陰の可能な利点は否定しない。
Lecture 3｜オンライン研修の修了者と技能（200語）
A fictional community college introduced an online training programme for adults wishing to develop administrative skills. After several months, staff reported that participants who completed the course were more likely to perform well on familiar practice exercises. The organisers initially suggested that this result demonstrated the programme’s success. A later evaluation, however, found considerable variation when graduates were asked to solve unfamiliar problems. The evaluators argued that completing rehearsed exercises did not necessarily show that a learner could apply the same skills in a new workplace. Some participants had also entered the course with stronger experience than others, which might explain part of their final performance. The college therefore introduced new tasks and asked learners to explain their reasoning instead of repeating memorized procedures. Some managers were concerned that more demanding assessments would lower completion rates. Researchers replied that lower scores on unfamiliar tasks could reveal useful information about the course rather than prove that it had no value. The institution decided to measure both participation and practical application, while acknowledging that neither measure alone could establish a later improvement in employment. The lecture illustrates the difference between doing a familiar activity successfully and transferring a skill to new circumstances.
日本語で整理：練習済みの課題の出来がよくても初見課題で技能が使えるとは限らない。受講前経験の違いも考慮。修了率と技能転用、さらに雇用結果を別々に評価する。
Lecture 4｜水質センサーの信頼性と測定地点（174語）
A team working in a fictional watershed introduced a new device for monitoring water quality. Its first laboratory tests produced consistent readings from prepared samples, and the manufacturer described the device as reliable for almost any monitoring programme. Independent researchers then examined water containing different substances. Under conditions resembling those in the original test, the device performed well. However, certain materials interfered with its measurements, making some readings difficult to interpret. The researchers did not conclude that the new technology should be discarded. Instead, they proposed describing the conditions under which the device was likely to produce useful information. They also recommended comparing results with established methods and checking instruments regularly. The manufacturer pointed out that the device was faster than several alternatives. This could be a meaningful advantage, but a faster result was not necessarily an accurate one. The research team asked agencies to consider speed, calibration costs and reliability together. Its general conclusion was that a promising laboratory finding can support further investigation without guaranteeing the same performance under every field condition.
日本語で整理：水質センサーは管理された実験条件で良好だったが、妨害物質のある試料では不安定。高速であることと正確さは別で、条件に応じた評価・校正が必要。
Lecture 5｜保育補助金と就労機会（190語）
In a fictional district, a municipality offered childcare subsidies to eligible families. Officials observed that some recipients later increased their working hours, and a press release suggested that the financial support had made employment easier. An independent evaluator argued that the evidence was encouraging but incomplete. Some families may already have been planning to increase working hours, while others lacked access to suitable childcare places despite qualifying for financial assistance. A second study compared families with similar work histories and examined whether available childcare hours matched their schedules. It found that affordability and service availability both mattered. Yet because families had chosen whether to apply for support, differences between applicants and nonapplicants could remain. The results did not justify promising the same employment effect for every household. The council revised its evaluation framework to include waiting lists, opening hours and practical access, in addition to subsidy payments. The researchers supported this more complete approach and encouraged further observation. Their position was neither that subsidies were useless nor that spending alone guaranteed increased employment. Financial support could contribute to opportunity, but its actual effect depended on the wider conditions families faced.
日本語で整理：補助金受給と就労時間の増加の関連があっても、元々の就業計画・保育枠・開園時間・申請者の自己選択を考慮すべき。補助金の価値は否定せず就労効果を保証しない。
Part2独自10問の正解一覧
Q1（C）／Q2（A）／Q3（D）／Q4（B）／Q5（B）／Q6（C）／Q7（A）／Q8（D）／Q9（C）／Q10（B）
全10問・40選択肢の詳しい解説
Q1｜正解（C）
正解内容：It did not determine whether the reading rooms themselves caused the difference in assignments.
- （A）誤答：頻繁な利用者が存在する。
- （B）誤答：意欲には差があり得る。
- （C）正解：tended to finish moreに対し why the difference existed 未確認。
- （D）誤答：害が実証されたとは述べない。
Q2｜正解（A）
正解内容：Quiet study space seemed beneficial for some students, but the evidence still had limits.
- （A）正解：appeared useful for some / voluntary attendance leaves limits。
- （B）誤答：有用性の可能性を認める。
- （C）誤答：全差異は除去できない。
- （D）誤答：一部で延長開館を維持する。
Q3｜正解（D）
正解内容：Some cooling may have been related to conditions beyond the tree-planting project.
- （A）誤答：木陰の便益は否定しない。
- （B）誤答：両街路の条件は異なる。
- （C）誤答：継続モニタリングを選ぶ。
- （D）正解：unplanted street also cooledは広域天候要因の手がかり。
Q4｜正解（B）
正解内容：Measurement locations and environmental conditions were not fully comparable.
- （A）誤答：読取値は報告された。
- （B）正解：weather and sensor moves and differences across streets limit causal isolation。
- （C）誤答：植樹撤去の話はない。
- （D）誤答：全面的な因果は確証なし。
Q5｜正解（B）
正解内容：Success on familiar tasks did not consistently transfer to unfamiliar problems.
- （A）誤答：修了者は存在する。
- （B）正解：graduates struggled with unfamiliar tasks。
- （C）誤答：経験に差がある可能性。
- （D）誤答：事務技能の研修である。
Q6｜正解（C）
正解内容：They might reveal which skills the programme still needed to develop.
- （A）誤答：完全な準備の証明ではない。
- （B）誤答：雇用への効果は不明。
- （C）正解：demanding assessments reveal useful information。
- （D）誤答：初見課題の評価を続ける。
Q7｜正解（A）
正解内容：The device’s reliability depended on the substances present in the water.
- （A）正解：interfering materials changed consistency。
- （B）誤答：元の条件ではよく機能した。
- （C）誤答：試料に差があった。
- （D）誤答：製造停止は示されていない。
Q8｜正解（D）
正解内容：Fast measurements do not guarantee accuracy across different sample conditions.
- （A）誤答：費用の必然関係はない。
- （B）誤答：水質測定器である。
- （C）誤答：条件で測定に差があった。
- （D）正解：speed and accuracy and calibration are separate。
Q9｜正解（C）
正解内容：Some families may already have intended to work longer hours before receiving support.
- （A）誤答：補助金利用者は存在する。
- （B）誤答：保育枠や時間に障壁がある。
- （C）正解：pre-existing plans could explain part of observed hours。
- （D）誤答：効果は各家庭で異なる。
Q10｜正解（B）
正解内容：Measures of actual childcare access as well as financial support.
- （A）誤答：人口だけの評価ではない。
- （B）正解：waiting lists and hours + payments。
- （C）誤答：全家族への約束はしない。
- （D）誤答：追加追跡を推奨。
発展15判断｜観測と原因を切り分ける
発展1：More library visits prove higher academic achievement.
発展2：A quiet environment may support some students.
発展3：Lower temperatures after planting demonstrate an effect entirely attributable to trees.
発展4：A comparison with an unplanted street could help examine regional weather effects.
発展5：Completion of a training course guarantees practical skills in unfamiliar situations.
発展6：Pre-existing experience may influence final performance.
発展7：A fast measuring device is necessarily accurate in all water conditions.
発展8：A controlled laboratory result can justify more testing.
発展9：Subsidy recipients may differ from nonrecipients before receiving support.
発展10：Financial support guarantees equal employment outcomes for all families.
発展11：An observed relationship may prompt further investigation.
発展12：A study’s uncertainty automatically means that the intervention has no value.
発展13：A useful programme must benefit every single participant equally.
発展14：Appropriate evaluation should consider what was actually measured.
発展15：A speaker who says ‘might’ has definitively established a universal claim.
発展15判断の全解答
発展1：不適切。出席者の意欲などが関係し得る。
発展2：適切。限定された便益は否定されない。
発展3：不適切。天候・設置環境の影響がある。
発展4：適切。比較対象の観測が別の説明を検討できる。
発展5：不適切。練習済み課題と初見課題は別。
発展6：適切。講座への参加前の経験差。
発展7：不適切。妨害物質の有無で性能差があり得る。
発展8：適切。有望でも普遍化の前に検証を要する。
発展9：適切。申請者の自己選択に着目。
発展10：不適切。就労時間・保育枠など条件差がある。
発展11：適切。相関は研究の出発点となる。
発展12：不適切。不確実性と無価値は別の判断。
発展13：不適切。一部への価値と効果の個人差は両立。
発展14：適切。測定対象を明示する原則。
発展15：不適切。mightは可能性を示す。
7日間のリスニング復習
- 1日目：Lecture1を1回聞き、意欲・利用・課題達成の関係を説明。
- 2日目：Lecture2を聞き、気象要因と植樹効果を区別。
- 3日目：Lecture3を聞き、研修課題と初見技能の違いを整理。
- 4日目：Lecture4を聞き、測定の速さと正確さを分ける。
- 5日目：Lecture5を聞き、補助金と就労の間の追加条件を整理。
- 6日目：発展15判断と5台本の誤答を説明する。
- 7日目：英検協会の未使用公式Part2音源で初見の聞き取りを測る。
よくある質問
Part2の英語を聞き取れないとき、台本だけ読めばよいですか？
台本を読むと論理構成の理解を確認できますが、音声の連結・話速の処理は別の技能です。端末などの読み上げと公式過去問の音源を組み合わせてください。
5説明文10問がそのまま本番に出ますか？
いいえ。本記事は慶英会の独自問題です。公式Part2と同じ説明文5本・10問という学習用の数量にしてありますが、試験問題・放送速度・難度を保証するものではありません。
話者がある研究を批判すると、結論は研究全体の否定ですか？
必ずしもそうではありません。測定方法や一般化の範囲を見直す批判でも、有用な結果が一部残ることがあります。最後の段落まで聞いて判断します。
次の慶英会無料教材
慶英会の最大1か月無料体験・学習相談では、台本が読めるのに音声で聞き取れない、内容の言い過ぎで失点するなどの課題を確認できます。
参考にした公式情報：1級の試験形式、英検協会の公式過去問・音源。台本・設問・全解説は慶英会の独自制作であり、録音ファイルは付属しません。
最大1か月完全無料体験・学習相談受付中
最大1か月の完全無料体験をご案内
学校教材・学力・目標に合わせた個別指導
入塾前に授業の進め方や講師との相性をお確かめください。
学校英語・定期テスト・英検の学習相談にも対応します。
保護者様の教育相談も無料で承ります。
1.学年 2. 学習目標 3.体験ご希望をお送りください。
体験の期間・回数・担当講師・日程は、ご希望と受付状況を確認してご案内します。
慶英会 塾長｜慶應義塾大学卒・英検1級。中高一貫校の学校英語・NEW TREASURE・英検対策を専門としています。塾長の経歴・指導方針を確認する