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級の長文で失点しやすいのは、語彙の難しさだけではありません。most（大半）・many（多く）・some（一部）・few（少数）・only（限定）のかかる範囲を読み違えると、文章全体が理解できても内容一致問題で誤答します。慶英会オリジナルの長文5題・四択30問を用意し、全文和訳と全問の根拠解説を掲載しました。実際の英検公式過去問ではありません。
問題の解き方｜数量表現の『母集団』を固定する
most participants は参加者の大半であり住民全員ではありません。only two districts は2地区に限定され、地域全体と同じ意味にはなりません。some と all、few と many を入れ替えた選択肢は除外します。また、not necessarily / could not establish などの表現があれば結論を確定事実に変えないことも重要です。
この教材は数量表現の読解に特化した独自演習です。英検1級の実際のリーディング全体の出題数を再現した模試ではありません。
A｜市のバス割引実験と調査の対象｜独自長文
The city of Harbridge introduced a six-month discounted bus pass to explore ways of reducing car use. Of the 800 residents who signed up, most used the pass at least once a week, but only about one-third reported driving less frequently. A small number of participants lived in neighborhoods with infrequent bus service and rarely used the pass. The city surveyed people who completed the trial; it did not question all residents or those who dropped out. Several participants praised the lower fares, whereas others said predictable schedules mattered more. The council subsequently announced an extension on just two routes, yet no decision had been made about a citywide expansion. Officials concluded that the trial suggested potential benefits, but it could not establish that cheaper fares alone had changed commuting habits.
設問（4択・各6問）
1. What did most registered residents do?
- A. Drive less often
- B. Use the pass at least weekly
- C. Complete a citywide survey
- D. Stop using cars entirely
2. What proportion reported less frequent driving?
- A. Every participant
- B. About one-third
- C. Almost nobody
- D. A majority of all residents
3. Which group was explicitly excluded from the city’s survey?
- A. People who completed the trial
- B. Residents who praised lower fares
- C. People who dropped out
- D. People using the two extended routes
4. What did the council decide?
- A. A citywide permanent expansion
- B. An extension on two routes
- C. A ban on private cars
- D. Nothing related to the trial
5. Which conclusion does the passage reject?
- A. The trial had possible benefits
- B. Some people valued schedules
- C. Fare cuts alone were proved to change commuting habits
- D. Not everyone used the pass frequently
6. Which statement about residents of poorly served areas is supported?
- A. All were frequent users
- B. None registered
- C. A small number rarely used the pass
- D. Most said routes were reliable
本文の全文和訳
ハーブリッジ市は自動車利用を減らす方法を検討するため、6か月間の割引バス定期券を導入した。登録した800人の住民の大半は週1回以上利用したが、車の運転頻度が減ったと回答したのは約3分の1だけだった。参加者のうち少数はバスの本数が少ない地区に住み、ほとんど定期券を使わなかった。市は実験を完了した人に調査を行ったが、全住民や途中離脱者全員に尋ねたわけではない。何人かは運賃の安さを評価した一方、時刻表の予測可能性を重視する人もいた。市議会は2路線だけで延長を発表したが、市全域への拡大は決定されていない。担当者は潜在的な利点が示唆されたとしつつ、運賃値下げだけが通勤行動を変えたとは立証できないと結論づけた。
解答・根拠（6問すべて）
1. 正解B｜Use the pass at least weekly most は「登録者の大半」にかかり、少なくとも週1回使ったことを指す。
2. 正解B｜About one-third only about one-third を多数・全員へ拡大しない。
3. 正解C｜People who dropped out 調査対象は完了者。途中離脱者は対象外と明記。
4. 正解B｜An extension on two routes just two routes を「全路線」と取り違えない。
5. 正解C｜Fare cuts alone were proved to change commuting habits could not establish は「証明できなかった」。
6. 正解C｜A small number rarely used the pass a small number は「少数」であり「ゼロ」ではない。
B｜学校の空気清浄機・短期改善と因果｜独自長文
A research consortium examined whether inexpensive air filters could improve indoor air quality in twenty schools. Particle levels fell in most classrooms during the first month, but only eight schools maintained a similar improvement after six months. Some schools opened windows regularly, while others relied entirely on mechanical ventilation. Because individual schools decided when to operate the filters, the researchers cautioned against treating the findings as proof that the devices alone caused the changes. Few schools recorded their energy consumption consistently, making an overall assessment of operating costs difficult. The consortium recommended further controlled trials, particularly in older buildings, rather than compulsory installation. It also emphasized that a decline in measured particles did not automatically show that students’ health had improved. The initial findings were encouraging, but they covered only the schools in the study and could not be generalized to every educational setting.
設問（4択・各6問）
7. How many schools maintained similar improvements after six months?
- A. All twenty
- B. More than half
- C. Eight
- D. Only one
8. What explains the researchers’ caution about causation?
- A. Filters were never operated
- B. Schools controlled operation timing
- C. All windows were closed
- D. No particles were measured
9. What do the words ‘Few schools’ imply?
- A. Most schools kept consistent records
- B. Only a small minority kept consistent records
- C. All schools published cost data
- D. Half the schools recorded nothing
10. What did the consortium recommend?
- A. Mandatory installation everywhere
- B. Abandoning the research
- C. Further controlled trials
- D. Closing older buildings
11. Which inference is not supported?
- A. Particle levels fell initially in many rooms
- B. Health outcomes were proved to improve
- C. Operating costs remained difficult to assess
- D. The findings had limited generalizability
12. To which settings can the findings be safely generalized?
- A. Every school worldwide
- B. Only settings identical in every detail
- C. Not automatically to all educational settings
- D. Only schools with closed windows
本文の全文和訳
研究者団体は、安価な空気清浄フィルターが20校の室内空気質を改善できるかを調べた。最初の1か月には大半の教室で粒子濃度が下がったが、6か月後にも同程度の改善が続いたのは8校だけだった。定期的に窓を開ける学校もあれば、機械換気だけに頼る学校もあった。フィルターの運転時期を各校が決めていたため、研究者は変化の原因が機器だけだと証明されたと考えないよう注意した。電力使用量を一貫して記録した学校は少なく、運転費用全体の評価は難しかった。団体は設置義務化ではなく、とくに古い校舎での統制された追加試験を勧めた。また粒子量の減少が、そのまま生徒の健康改善を示すわけではないと強調した。初期結果は有望だが、調査対象校に限られ、すべての教育現場へ一般化はできない。
解答・根拠（6問すべて）
7. 正解C｜Eight only eight は20校中8校であり、多数とは書かれていない。
8. 正解B｜Schools controlled operation timing 運転条件が統一されていないため、機器単独の因果効果は確定できない。
9. 正解B｜Only a small minority kept consistent records few は少数しか～しないという否定的数量。
10. 正解C｜Further controlled trials 追加の統制試験を提案。義務化は推奨していない。
11. 正解B｜Health outcomes were proved to improve 粒子量と健康成果は別の指標。健康改善は実証されていない。
12. 正解C｜Not automatically to all educational settings not … every setting を守り、全世界へ一般化しない。
C｜湿地再生・洪水リスク・限定条件｜独自長文
A coastal region restored salt marshes in five districts after decades of shoreline development. Most of the planted vegetation survived the first winter, and several bird species returned to two of the sites. However, only two districts had completed their planned drainage upgrades, so officials said it was too early to claim that the restoration had reduced flooding throughout the region. Some landowners supported the project because restored marshes might absorb stormwater; others feared restrictions on agricultural use. Very few residents had seen the monitoring reports, which had been distributed mainly through technical meetings. The regional agency therefore proposed publishing simplified maps and holding public workshops before expanding the program. The budget covered a limited second phase, not restoration of every damaged wetland. Experts argued that marsh recovery and flood protection should be measured separately, even when they appeared to be related.
設問（4択・各6問）
13. What survived the first winter?
- A. All wildlife populations
- B. Most planted vegetation
- C. Only two plants
- D. Every restored coastline
14. Why did officials avoid a regionwide flooding claim?
- A. Flooding had been eliminated
- B. Only two districts had finished drainage upgrades
- C. No marshes survived
- D. All landowners opposed the project
15. Which description of landowners is accurate?
- A. All supported the project
- B. All opposed agricultural restrictions
- C. Their views were mixed
- D. Only farmers were consulted
16. What does ‘Very few residents’ suggest?
- A. Most residents read the reports
- B. Almost no residents read the reports
- C. Every household attended meetings
- D. No reports were produced
17. What did the second-phase budget include?
- A. Every damaged wetland
- B. No additional work
- C. Only a limited expansion
- D. The entire coastal region
18. Which two outcomes should be assessed separately?
- A. Farming and tourism
- B. Vegetation color and bird names
- C. Marsh recovery and flood protection
- D. Agricultural use and workshops
本文の全文和訳
沿岸地域では、何十年もの海岸開発の後、5地区で塩性湿地を再生した。植え付けた植生の大半は最初の冬を越え、いくつかの鳥類が2か所の現場へ戻ってきた。しかし計画済みの排水設備改良を終えたのは2地区だけだったため、担当者は地域全体で洪水が減ったと主張するには早すぎると述べた。湿地が雨水を吸収する可能性を理由に賛成する地主もいれば、農業利用への制約を恐れる地主もいた。監視報告書を読んだ住民はごく少数で、主に専門家会議で配られていた。そのため行政機関は、拡大前に分かりやすい地図を公開し住民向け説明会を開くことを提案した。予算が対象としたのは限定的な第2段階であり、損傷したすべての湿地の再生ではなかった。専門家は、湿地の回復と洪水防止は関連するように見えても別々に測定するべきだと主張した。
解答・根拠（6問すべて）
13. 正解B｜Most planted vegetation most of the planted vegetation に限定する。
14. 正解B｜Only two districts had finished drainage upgrades 排水改良が完了したのは2地区だけ。地域全体の効果は未確認。
15. 正解C｜Their views were mixed some … others … は賛否が分かれていることを示す。
16. 正解B｜Almost no residents read the reports very few は「ごく少数」であり、ゼロと断言しない。
17. 正解C｜Only a limited expansion limited second phase は全湿地の再生ではない。
18. 正解C｜Marsh recovery and flood protection 関連して見えても一方の改善だけで他方を立証しない。
D｜図書館のデジタル窓口・利用者の偏り｜独自長文
Public libraries in several towns began offering help with online government forms. Many visitors asked for assistance with identity verification, yet only a minority used the service for job applications. Most sessions took less than twenty minutes, although some complicated cases required repeated visits. The libraries recorded the number of completed sessions, but few collected follow-up data on whether applications were eventually approved. Consequently, the managers could describe demand for assistance but not the long-term success rate of the applications. Some librarians believed the program broadened access; others worried that technical assistance would displace reading activities. A regional review recommended maintaining in-person services while developing clearer referral procedures for complex cases. It did not recommend replacing every traditional library service with digital support. The reviewers noted that greater usage was not necessarily evidence of better outcomes.
設問（4択・各6問）
19. What did many visitors request help with?
- A. Reading novels
- B. Identity verification
- C. Job interviews
- D. Library memberships
20. How frequently was the service used for job applications?
- A. By all visitors
- B. By a majority
- C. By only a minority
- D. By no one
21. What do managers lack sufficient data to determine?
- A. Number of completed sessions
- B. Demand for help
- C. Long-term application approval rates
- D. Whether libraries had staff
22. Which statement about session length is correct?
- A. Most took under twenty minutes
- B. All took exactly twenty minutes
- C. None needed a return visit
- D. Every case was complicated
23. What did the review recommend?
- A. Replacing all physical services
- B. Keeping in-person service while improving referrals
- C. Ending digital support
- D. Using only automated systems
24. What does increased service usage NOT necessarily prove?
- A. That some people used the libraries
- B. That demand existed
- C. That outcomes improved
- D. That help was requested
本文の全文和訳
複数の町の公共図書館が、行政のオンライン申請書を手伝うサービスを始めた。多くの来館者は本人確認について支援を求めたが、求職申請に利用した人は少数派にすぎなかった。ほとんどの相談は20分未満で終わったものの、複雑な事例では繰り返し来館が必要だった。図書館は対応件数を記録したが、最終的に申請が承認されたかを追跡した館は少なかった。そのため管理者は支援需要を説明できても申請の長期的な成功率を示すことはできなかった。サービスが利用機会を広げると考えた司書もいれば、読書活動が圧迫されると心配する司書もいた。地域の検証では、対面サービスを維持しながら複雑な案件の紹介手続きを明確にすることが勧められた。従来のすべての図書館サービスをデジタル支援に置き換える勧告ではなかった。利用件数の増加は必ずしも成果改善の証拠ではないと指摘された。
解答・根拠（6問すべて）
19. 正解B｜Identity verification many は本人確認支援を求めた人を表す。
20. 正解C｜By only a minority only a minority は少数派にすぎない。
21. 正解C｜Long-term application approval rates 追跡調査の不足により承認率は分からない。
22. 正解A｜Most took under twenty minutes most <20 minutes と some repeated visits の両方を保持。
23. 正解B｜Keeping in-person service while improving referrals maintaining in-person と clearer referral の併記が重要。
24. 正解C｜That outcomes improved not necessarily を削らない。利用数と成果は異なる。
E｜職業訓練制度・修了率と雇用成果｜独自長文
A regional training program offered evening courses in data analysis and communication. Nearly all applicants met the formal entry requirements, but only about sixty percent were admitted because classrooms had limited capacity. Most admitted participants completed the first module; fewer completed the entire course, particularly those working irregular shifts. Several employers said they valued the curriculum, yet few had committed to hiring graduates. The program tracked attendance and test results, not changes in wages or employment status. Its directors therefore warned against presenting course completion as proof of improved career prospects. Some graduates nevertheless reported feeling more confident in interviews, and a small group formed a study circle that continued after the course. The regional council approved scholarships for a limited number of applicants in the next intake, while postponing any decision on a permanent expansion until outcome data became available.
設問（4択・各6問）
25. Why were only about sixty percent of applicants admitted?
- A. Most failed entry requirements
- B. Classroom capacity was limited
- C. Employers rejected them
- D. The course was canceled
26. Which comparison is supported?
- A. More completed the full course than the first module
- B. Most admitted learners completed the first module, but fewer finished all modules
- C. All irregular-shift workers dropped out
- D. No one completed the program
27. What had few employers done?
- A. Praised the curriculum
- B. Operated classrooms
- C. Committed to hiring graduates
- D. Reviewed course materials
28. Which outcome was not tracked?
- A. Attendance
- B. Test scores
- C. Employment-status changes
- D. Module completion
29. Why were directors cautious about career claims?
- A. The course was free
- B. Completion alone did not prove better career prospects
- C. All graduates found jobs
- D. Scholarships were rejected
30. What did the council authorize?
- A. Permanent expansion immediately
- B. Scholarships for a limited number of applicants
- C. Guaranteed jobs for graduates
- D. Unlimited course places
本文の全文和訳
地域の職業訓練制度はデータ分析とコミュニケーションの夜間講座を提供した。応募者のほぼ全員が形式上の条件を満たしたが、教室定員に限りがあったため受講を認められたのは約60%だけだった。入講者の大半は最初の科目を終えたが、全課程を修了した人はそれより少なく、とくに勤務時間が不規則な人に顕著だった。数社の雇用主はカリキュラムを評価したが、修了者の採用を約束した企業はほとんどなかった。制度が追跡したのは出席と試験成績で、賃金や雇用状況の変化ではなかった。そのため責任者は修了を職業上の将来性改善の証拠とみなさないよう警告した。それでも面接への自信が高まったと述べる修了者もおり、小集団は課程終了後も勉強会を続けた。地域議会は次期募集で少数の応募者向け奨学金を承認した一方、恒久的な拡大は成果データが出るまで決定を延期した。
解答・根拠（6問すべて）
25. 正解B｜Classroom capacity was limited 要件不適合ではなく定員制限による入講人数。
26. 正解B｜Most admitted learners completed the first module, but fewer finished all modules most と fewer を比較し、全課程修了者の方が少ないと読む。
27. 正解C｜Committed to hiring graduates few committed は採用約束がほぼなかったこと。
28. 正解C｜Employment-status changes 出席と試験成績のみ。雇用変化の追跡なし。
29. 正解B｜Completion alone did not prove better career prospects 修了率を賃金・雇用成果と混同しない。
30. 正解B｜Scholarships for a limited number of applicants limited scholarships は恒久拡大と異なる。
復習ドリル｜選択肢の数量を書き換える
各長文の正答を確認したら、誤答選択肢の数量表現に印を付け、どの母集団や割合が変わっているかを説明してください。例：most participants を all residents に言い換えると対象の範囲と割合の双方が変わります。正解を覚えるより、本文のどの語が根拠になるかを指させる状態を目標にします。
発展・独自長文｜回答者の過半数と対象者全体を混同しない6問
慶英会制作の創作英文です。実在の調査ではありません。百分率は正確でも母集団を変えると結論が変わるため、分母・非回答者・抽出方法を確認してください。
Paragraph 1
An education department invited 200 registered participants in an after-school program to complete a survey about extending library opening hours. Of these, 120 returned questionnaires. Seventy-five respondents supported longer hours, while 45 opposed the proposal. The department initially announced that a majority of respondents favored the extension. That statement was correct for those who answered, but some local reports mistakenly described the result as a majority of all registered participants.
Paragraph 2
The distinction matters because 80 registered participants did not reply. The views of those nonrespondents are unknown. The 75 supporters represent 62.5 percent of respondents, but only 37.5 percent of everyone invited. Neither figure establishes what a majority of all local residents thinks. In a separate consultation, 42 of 60 people interviewed at the library said they would use evening services. That figure describes the people interviewed there, not necessarily people who rarely visit the building.
Paragraph 3
Officials therefore proposed a follow-up survey that would contact a wider range of residents, including those who currently have difficulty reaching the library. The aim is to estimate likely demand without treating voluntary respondents as a random sample of the entire community. Meanwhile, the department can report the existing numbers accurately, including how many people were invited, how many answered, and how the questions were asked.
独自内容一致6問（各4択）
Which statement about the program survey is supported?
- Most of the 200 registered participants supported the extension.
- Most of the 120 respondents supported the extension.
- Exactly half of all local residents supported the extension.
- Every nonrespondent opposed the extension.
What percentage of the registered participants explicitly supported longer hours?
- 37.5 percent
- 45 percent
- 62.5 percent
- 75 percent
Why cannot the views of the nonrespondents be inferred?
- They were all too young to use the library.
- The questionnaire had no question about opening hours.
- Their views were not collected by the survey.
- The survey found they all disagreed.
What is the limitation of the separate 60-person consultation?
- Its respondents were selected randomly from all households.
- It measured only the views of people outside the city.
- It proved that no one wanted evening hours.
- It interviewed people already present at the library.
What would the proposed follow-up survey try to improve?
- The representativeness of the people whose views are collected.
- The speed at which the library books are catalogued.
- The number of hours in a calendar day.
- The reliability of unrelated weather forecasts.
Which title most accurately reflects the evidence?
- A Majority of Residents Demand Longer Library Hours
- All Program Members Back Library Expansion
- Most Respondents in a Limited Survey Supported Longer Hours
- The New Library Schedule Has Already Improved Attendance
原文全文和訳
第1段落：教育部局は放課後プログラムに登録した200人に、図書館の開館時間延長についてアンケートを依頼した。120人が回答し、75人が賛成、45人が反対した。担当部局は当初、回答者の過半数が賛成と発表した。これは回答者については正しいが、一部の地元報道は登録者全体の過半数が支持したと誤って表現した。
第2段落：80人の登録者は回答していないため、その意見は不明である。賛成75人は回答者120人の62.5％だが、依頼対象200人の37.5％にすぎない。どちらの数値からも地元住民全体の過半数の意見は分からない。別の調査では図書館で聞き取りを受けた60人中42人が夜間利用すると答えたが、あまり図書館へ来ない人の意見も反映しているとは限らない。
第3段落：そこで当局は、現状では図書館へ行きにくい人も含む幅広い住民に連絡する追加調査を提案した。目的は自発的な回答者を地域全体の無作為標本とみなさずに需要を推定することだ。同時に、依頼人数・回答人数・質問方法を示して既存結果を正確に報告できる。
全6問の正答・各選択肢の誤りの理由
- 正解B：B。75/120=62.5％なので回答者の過半数。75/200=37.5％で登録者全体の過半数とは言えず、住民全体や無回答者の意見も不明。
- 正解A：A。明示的賛成者75÷依頼対象200×100＝37.5％。62.5％は回答者120を分母にした割合。
- 正解C：C。80人から回答を得ていない。反対・賛成のどちらかを推測したり、属性を作ったりしない。
- 正解D：D。図書館に来ている人の意向であり、来館が難しい人を十分に代表するとは限らない。
- 正解A：A。住民をより広く対象にし、現状の非利用者の意見も含めて代表性を高めることが目的。
- 正解C：C。『限定的な調査の回答者の過半数』までが裏づけられる。A・Bは対象集団を拡大し、Dは実施後の実績を捏造している。
復習では「75/120＝62.5％」と「75/200＝37.5％」を別々に書き、どの対象についてなら言える結論かを一文で答えてください。英検公式のReading問題数・出題形式は英検協会の試験内容で確認できます。英文要約の無料教材／慶英会の学習相談。
よくある質問
Q. most は必ず半数超ですか？ A. 一般に『大部分』を表しますが、実際の具体的な割合まで勝手に固定しないでください。数量の基準集団を先に読み取ることが重要です。
Q. few と a few は同じですか？ A. few は『ほとんどない』という少なさを強調し、a few は『少しはある』という存在を強調します。数量が少ない点は共通でも含意が異なります。
Q. これで英検1級の長文対策は十分ですか？ A. 数量表現の基礎訓練です。実際の長文では論旨・因果・対比・筆者の評価も同時に読む必要があります。
関連教材と公式情報
英検1級英文要約90〜110語の独自教材｜英検1級総合教材ガイド｜英検協会・1級の公式試験内容
慶英会のオンライン個別指導：本文根拠を説明できない、時間内に読解できない場合は、最大1か月完全無料体験・学習相談で課題を整理できます。
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