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
英検1級Reading第21セット・無料独自35問です。短文の語彙問題22問、長文空所補充6問、内容一致7問の計35問を、慶英会独自の英文・全140選択肢・正答と根拠・4長文の段落別要点和訳付きで掲載します。公式過去問ではありません。
英検協会が公表する1級の形式は語句補充22問＋長文空所補充6問＋長文内容一致7問です。1級の試験内容（日本英語検定協会）を参照。ReadingとWritingは合計100分です。語彙の精度に加えて、実証と予測、標本の偏り、仮説と結論の違いを見抜く力を鍛えます。
問題の解き方と弱点の診断
- Q1〜Q22の語彙は正解1語を選ぶだけでなく、ほかの3語の日本語の意味も考える。
- Q23〜Q28では前段落の根拠と次文の結論がどう結びつくか説明する。
- Q29〜Q35は正解根拠と、不正解の選択肢が本文のどこを過度に一般化しているか示す。
- 問題を初見で解いてから解答・日本語訳を確認し、7日後に再テストする。
第1部｜短文語句空所補充22問
Q1. The commission asked an independent auditor to ___ allegations that public grants had been awarded unfairly.
A. investigate ／ B. reimburse ／ C. deplete ／ D. reiterate
Q2. The city’s estimate proved ___ when hidden maintenance expenses were included in the final assessment.
A. impartial ／ B. overoptimistic ／ C. inevitable ／ D. exhaustive
Q3. The researchers tried to ___ the source of contamination by comparing samples from different stretches of the river.
A. placate ／ B. disburse ／ C. pinpoint ／ D. repudiate
Q4. A shortage of trained technicians could ___ the restoration of the region’s historic railway.
A. facilitate ／ B. substantiate ／ C. validate ／ D. hamper
Q5. The university agreed to ___ access to laboratory records when privacy conditions had been satisfied.
A. grant ／ B. impede ／ C. forfeit ／ D. defer
Q6. A new agreement sought to ___ cooperation between the two research institutions.
A. undermine ／ B. foster ／ C. evade ／ D. forestall
Q7. The panel said the results were ___ because the comparison group contained only eight participants.
A. conclusive ／ B. unanimous ／ C. inconclusive ／ D. comprehensive
Q8. The proposal would ___ unnecessary barriers to participation by offering paper and telephone applications.
A. perpetuate ／ B. exacerbate ／ C. reinstate ／ D. remove
Q9. The independent review found no evidence to ___ the claim that every resident had benefited.
A. substantiate ／ B. prolong ／ C. elicit ／ D. supersede
Q10. Officials were urged to ___ the impact of seasonal tourism before attributing all revenue growth to the new museum.
A. disregard ／ B. account for ／ C. capitalize on ／ D. phase out
Q11. The agency had to ___ its emergency procedures after a drill revealed delays in contacting volunteers.
A. rescind ／ B. commend ／ C. revise ／ D. elude
Q12. The council declined to ___ the pilot to every district until its financial sustainability was clearer.
A. curtail ／ B. reimburse ／ C. corroborate ／ D. extend
Q13. The new guidelines aim to ___ confusion about eligibility by providing concrete examples.
A. alleviate ／ B. intensify ／ C. consolidate ／ D. impose
Q14. The committee sought to ___ competing priorities involving cost, safety, and accessibility.
A. evade ／ B. reconcile ／ C. deter ／ D. divulge
Q15. Some contracts require suppliers to ___ confidential information even after the project has ended.
A. replicate ／ B. disseminate ／ C. safeguard ／ D. inflate
Q16. The original article was corrected after editors discovered that it had ___ the evidence for a causal relationship.
A. clarified ／ B. moderated ／ C. verified ／ D. overstated
Q17. The director promised to ___ the discrepancy between the published statistics and the records used to calculate them.
A. explain ／ B. conceal ／ C. magnify ／ D. dismiss
Q18. The committee considered the policy ___ because residents had no practical way to appeal incorrect decisions.
A. transparent ／ B. problematic ／ C. exemplary ／ D. sustainable
Q19. A report warned that the new system might unintentionally ___ applicants who lacked reliable internet access.
A. prioritize ／ B. subsidize ／ C. exclude ／ D. reimburse
Q20. The institute’s final recommendations were ___ on further independent measurements rather than preliminary observations alone.
A. immune ／ B. hostile ／ C. irrelevant ／ D. contingent
Q21. The court decided to ___ the previous authorization after finding serious procedural violations.
A. revoke ／ B. ratify ／ C. reimburse ／ D. commend
Q22. Researchers could not ___ their findings to communities with very different geographic conditions.
A. confine ／ B. generalize ／ C. belittle ／ D. reiterate
第2部｜長文空所補充2篇・6問
Passage 1｜公共施設の屋根緑化と都市の気温
Paragraph 1. The fictional city of Alderhaven launched a program to install vegetation on selected public-building roofs. Planners hoped that the plants would provide shade, improve rainwater retention, and help moderate indoor temperatures. A computer model estimated potential energy savings, and some officials urged immediate installation throughout the city. Building engineers cautioned that roof structures, drainage, and local climate differed substantially. They argued that the model provided a starting hypothesis rather than a guarantee of savings at every site.
Paragraph 2. The council began a pilot at three facilities with recently inspected roofs. Electricity consumption fell at one building during the first month, but the building had also been closed to visitors for several weeks. The evaluators noted that (23) ____. They began tracking occupancy, weather, maintenance, and the energy required to irrigate the roof plants. The team also checked whether vegetation created any additional structural loads that needed attention.
Paragraph 3. An early press release emphasized the total area covered by plants as evidence of success. Researchers responded that installed area did not reveal how much energy was saved or whether the vegetation remained healthy over time. The cost of repairs, waterproofing, and access for maintenance also mattered. (24) ____, the council adopted separate indicators for roof performance, overall costs, and changes in building temperatures.
Paragraph 4. After a year, several roofs showed promising temperature effects during certain seasons, but the results varied by orientation and construction type. Alderhaven authorized additional trials at suitable facilities while postponing installations where safety or upkeep remained uncertain. The council concluded that roof greening could be useful, (25) ____.
Q23. What fits (23)?
A. reduced occupancy could partly explain the lower electricity use ／ B. the pilot had established equal effects in every building ／ C. irrigation and roof maintenance had no costs ／ D. all three buildings had identical roof structures
Q24. Which transition best fits (24)?
A. Nevertheless ／ B. Consequently ／ C. Similarly ／ D. For example
Q25. What best completes (25)?
A. because all future maintenance was unnecessary ／ B. even if roofs were structurally unsafe ／ C. provided results and costs were evaluated separately at each site ／ D. and therefore had to be installed on every public building
Passage 2｜公共の夜間相談窓口とサービス格差
Paragraph 1. The fictional district of Penwick introduced evening advice sessions for residents needing help with housing and employment paperwork. Officials hoped that people working during normal office hours could obtain guidance without taking time off. Appointments filled quickly, and the administration announced that access had improved across the district. A community group questioned this interpretation. Many bookings were made by people who already used daytime services, while residents in distant neighborhoods still faced transport barriers.
Paragraph 2. The district recorded completed consultations, canceled bookings, travel difficulties, and the types of forms residents found confusing. It also asked people who had never used the service about their reasons. The original pilot office was located near a train station, so evaluators cautioned that (26) ____. They recommended testing alternative venues and telephone support before requiring a uniform schedule in every neighborhood.
Paragraph 3. A revised trial included a smaller community center and a telephone appointment service. Some people found the new options helpful, but staff training and security arrangements raised additional costs. The district also discovered that the number of consultations did not necessarily indicate whether residents had successfully completed their applications. (27) ____, evaluators began tracking whether paperwork was resolved and whether people needed repeated appointments.
Paragraph 4. At the end of the trial, Penwick retained evening services at selected locations but did not close its daytime offices. Officials concluded that flexible hours could make support more accessible (28) ____. The report emphasized that meaningful access meant successfully obtaining the assistance needed, not simply making more bookings.
Q26. What fits (26)?
A. everyone in the district had equal transport access ／ B. results at this convenient location might not apply to more remote areas ／ C. every resident preferred online advice ／ D. the trial had already resolved all paperwork problems
Q27. Which transition best fits (27)?
A. In contrast ／ B. For example ／ C. Therefore ／ D. Meanwhile
Q28. Which ending best fits (28)?
A. even if applicants could not reach any office ／ B. because no staff training was necessary ／ C. only after every daytime office had closed ／ D. when practical alternatives and completed assistance were considered
慶英会 塾長｜慶應義塾大学卒・英検1級
塾長の経歴・指導方針
中高一貫校の英語・定期テスト・英検の学習状況を整理し、必要な復習の優先順位を考えたい方は、無料体験・学習相談のご案内をご確認ください。最大1か月完全無料体験の対象・回数・担当講師は、お申し込み時にご案内します。
友だち追加後、学年・教材・困っていることと「学習相談希望（ブログ・記事中盤）」をお送りください。LINEを開くだけでは受付は完了しません。LINEを利用できない方はメールでの学習相談も可能です。料金・無料体験の期間と条件はコース・料金・無料体験のご案内でご確認ください。
第3部｜長文内容一致2篇・7問
Passage 1｜再現研究への資金配分と科学的信頼
Paragraph 1. The fictional Norland Research Council considered creating a dedicated fund for scientists who attempted to repeat influential experimental findings. Several university leaders supported the proposal, arguing that the reliability of research could improve when published results were independently examined. Others worried that focusing on replication would reduce opportunities for entirely new discoveries. An early survey of scientists showed strong interest in the fund, and some officials treated the favorable response as proof that it would improve scientific quality. The council’s advisers cautioned that support for a policy did not establish its effects.
Paragraph 2. To test the idea, the council financed a small number of carefully selected replication projects. Teams were required to publish their methods in advance and specify which outcomes they would use to compare results. Some repeated the original findings under similar conditions, while others obtained different outcomes. Evaluators noted that a difference did not automatically prove that the first study was fraudulent or worthless: equipment, samples, and experimental conditions might vary in important ways. Likewise, a matching result in one repetition could not establish universal validity.
Paragraph 3. The pilot revealed practical complications. Researchers sometimes needed specialist instruments unavailable at smaller institutions, and obtaining original data could require permission. Several studies had initially reported only statistically significant outcomes, leaving other measurements difficult to interpret. To encourage more informative reporting, the council asked replication teams to disclose unsuccessful attempts and uncertainties, subject to appropriate confidentiality safeguards. Some critics claimed that the fund should count every repeated experiment as an achievement. The evaluators argued that completion totals were less meaningful than the quality of methods and what could be learned from the comparisons.
Paragraph 4. After two years, the council expanded the fund selectively, prioritizing fields where replication was feasible and scientifically informative. It continued supporting new research rather than treating the two activities as rivals. The final report stated that independent repetition could strengthen confidence in findings, but only when questions were well specified and methods transparent. The program’s success would be judged through the credibility of evidence and improvements in research practices rather than the number of grants awarded.
Q29. Why did advisers reject the early claim about scientific quality?
A. Strong support for the fund did not demonstrate that its effects were beneficial. ／ B. The council had no researchers willing to participate. ／ C. All experiments in the region were identical. ／ D. The original survey had been legally prohibited.
Q30. What did evaluators say about conflicting replication results?
A. They always established misconduct. ／ B. Differences could arise from samples, equipment, or experimental conditions. ／ C. They proved every original claim correct. ／ D. They made transparent methods unnecessary.
Q31. Why did the council encourage reporting unsuccessful attempts?
A. To eliminate the need for experiments. ／ B. To guarantee favorable outcomes. ／ C. They could reveal limitations and improve interpretation of the evidence. ／ D. To avoid asking permission for private data.
Q32. What is the final purpose of the funding scheme?
A. Maximizing the number of experiments without assessing methods. ／ B. Replacing all original research with repetition. ／ C. Guaranteeing that every finding is replicated. ／ D. Improving the credibility of evidence and research practice.
Passage 2｜沿岸遺跡のデジタル展示と地域住民の権利
Paragraph 1. The fictional coastal town of Bellwick planned to build a digital archive of artifacts uncovered during harbor repairs. Historians expected the collection to help schools examine how trade and daily life had changed over centuries. An initial exhibition attracted many visitors, and officials proposed uploading every photograph and note immediately. Curators warned that several descriptions remained tentative because some artifacts had not been dated reliably. They also noted that the physical ownership of an object did not always confer permission to distribute images or personal records connected with it.
Paragraph 2. The town established a review group that included historians, rights specialists, and representatives of local communities. Some documents were published with notes identifying uncertain interpretations, while sensitive details received restricted access. Researchers also compared older excavation records with newer measurements. On several occasions, information in early notes turned out to be incomplete rather than demonstrably false. The group argued that careful correction and appropriate disclosure were more useful than either absolute secrecy or unqualified publication.
Paragraph 3. After the website opened, download counts increased steadily. Teachers reported that students found the material engaging, but evaluators avoided treating access numbers as proof of accurate historical understanding. The archive added explanatory activities, invited corrections, and kept records of revisions. Some users could not easily access the website, so the museum maintained printed guides and in-person consultations. The final recommendation was to measure the usefulness and reliability of the resource alongside respect for contributors and the communities portrayed.
Q33. Why did the curators oppose publishing every record immediately?
A. Some descriptions and publication permissions were not yet verified. ／ B. The town had decided to destroy every artifact. ／ C. No local schools were interested. ／ D. Every photograph was already fully licensed.
Q34. How did the review group approach uncertain information?
A. It erased all records permanently. ／ B. It marked limitations and restricted sensitive details when appropriate. ／ C. It treated all early accounts as fraudulent. ／ D. It published every personal detail without permission.
Q35. Why were download counts not considered sufficient?
A. They were always technically inaccurate. ／ B. The website contained no educational materials. ／ C. They did not prove understanding or the reliability of interpretation. ／ D. Every reader already knew the historical facts.
全35問の正答と解説・選択肢140択の意味
語彙Q1〜22｜全88択の日本語と解説
Q1：A. investigate — investigate allegations＝不正・不公平の申し立てを調査する。
A. investigate＝調査する ／ B. reimburse＝払い戻す ／ C. deplete＝枯渇させる ／ D. reiterate＝繰り返す
Q2：B. overoptimistic — 予想外の費用が判明したため、当初の試算は楽観的すぎた。
A. impartial＝公平な ／ B. overoptimistic＝楽観的すぎる ／ C. inevitable＝避けられない ／ D. exhaustive＝網羅的な
Q3：C. pinpoint — pinpoint the source＝原因の発生場所を特定する。
A. placate＝なだめる ／ B. disburse＝支払う ／ C. pinpoint＝正確に特定する ／ D. repudiate＝否認する
Q4：D. hamper — hamper restoration＝修復に支障を来す。
A. facilitate＝容易にする ／ B. substantiate＝裏付ける ／ C. validate＝妥当と確認する ／ D. hamper＝妨げる
Q5：A. grant — grant access＝アクセスを認める。条件付きで閲覧権を与える。
A. grant＝認める・与える ／ B. impede＝妨げる ／ C. forfeit＝失う ／ D. defer＝延期する
Q6：B. foster — foster cooperation＝協力関係を育てる。
A. undermine＝損なう ／ B. foster＝促進する ／ C. evade＝回避する ／ D. forestall＝未然に防ぐ
Q7：C. inconclusive — 比較群が極端に小さく、有力な結論は得られない。
A. conclusive＝決定的な ／ B. unanimous＝全員一致の ／ C. inconclusive＝結論を出せない ／ D. comprehensive＝包括的な
Q8：D. remove — 複数の申請方法で参加障壁を除く。
A. perpetuate＝継続させる ／ B. exacerbate＝悪化させる ／ C. reinstate＝再導入する ／ D. remove＝取り除く
Q9：A. substantiate — substantiate a claim＝主張を証拠によって裏付ける。
A. substantiate＝立証する ／ B. prolong＝長引かせる ／ C. elicit＝引き出す ／ D. supersede＝取って代わる
Q10：B. account for — account for another factor＝因果推定において別要因を考慮する。
A. disregard＝無視する ／ B. account for＝考慮に入れる ／ C. capitalize on＝利用する ／ D. phase out＝段階的に廃止する
Q11：C. revise — 手順に遅延があり改訂が必要になった。
A. rescind＝撤回する ／ B. commend＝称賛する ／ C. revise＝改訂する ／ D. elude＝逃れる
Q12：D. extend — extend a pilot＝試行をほかの地区へ広げる。
A. curtail＝縮小する ／ B. reimburse＝償還する ／ C. corroborate＝裏付ける ／ D. extend＝拡張する
Q13：A. alleviate — alleviate confusion＝混乱を和らげる。
A. alleviate＝軽減する ／ B. intensify＝強める ／ C. consolidate＝統合する ／ D. impose＝課す
Q14：B. reconcile — reconcile competing priorities＝相反する優先事項を調整。
A. evade＝回避する ／ B. reconcile＝調整して両立させる ／ C. deter＝思いとどまらせる ／ D. divulge＝漏らす
Q15：C. safeguard — safeguard confidential information＝機密を守る。
A. replicate＝複製する ／ B. disseminate＝広める ／ C. safeguard＝保護する ／ D. inflate＝膨らませる
Q16：D. overstated — overstate evidence＝証拠の強さを誇張する。
A. clarified＝明確化した ／ B. moderated＝和らげた ／ C. verified＝検証した ／ D. overstated＝過大に述べた
Q17：A. explain — explain discrepancy＝数値差の原因を説明する。
A. explain＝説明する ／ B. conceal＝隠す ／ C. magnify＝拡大する ／ D. dismiss＝退ける
Q18：B. problematic — 異議申し立ての方法がなくproblematicが適切。
A. transparent＝透明な ／ B. problematic＝問題のある ／ C. exemplary＝模範的な ／ D. sustainable＝持続可能な
Q19：C. exclude — ネット環境がない人を参加から排除する。
A. prioritize＝優先する ／ B. subsidize＝補助する ／ C. exclude＝排除する ／ D. reimburse＝払い戻す
Q20：D. contingent — be contingent on＝独立した測定が実施されることを条件とする。
A. immune＝影響されない ／ B. hostile＝敵対する ／ C. irrelevant＝無関係な ／ D. contingent＝条件付きの
Q21：A. revoke — revoke authorization＝認可を取り消す。
A. revoke＝取り消す ／ B. ratify＝追認する ／ C. reimburse＝払い戻す ／ D. commend＝評価する
Q22：B. generalize — generalize findings to＝他の集団にも適用できると主張する。
A. confine＝制限する ／ B. generalize＝一般化する ／ C. belittle＝軽んじる ／ D. reiterate＝繰り返す
長文空所Q23〜28｜段落別の要点和訳・全解答
公共施設の屋根緑化と都市の気温
段落1：架空のオルダーヘイブン市は公共建築物の屋根に植物を植えて日陰・雨水保持・室温調整を図った。試算は有望だったが、屋根の強度、排水、気候が建物ごとに違うため、全施設で同じ節電が可能とは限らなかった。
段落2：3施設の試行で1施設の電力購入量が減ったが、同時期に数週間閉館しており、利用者減による消費量低下も考慮すべきだった。在館人数、天候、維持費、屋根の灌水電力や追加荷重も追跡した。
段落3：広報は緑化面積を成功の証拠としたが、設置面積だけでは節電や植物の生存を示せない。防水や保守の費用も含む。そこで屋根の性能・総費用・温度変化を別の指標とした。
段落4：一定季節には有望な効果が見られたが向きと建物構造によって異なった。安全と維持の条件に合う施設で追加試行し、緑化が効果を持つとしても場所ごとの検証が必要と結論した。
Q23：A. reduced occupancy could partly explain the lower electricity use — 休館期間による需要変化が交絡要因となる。
Q24：B. Consequently — 面積は効果を示さない。だから別指標を設定した、という因果関係。
Q25：C. provided results and costs were evaluated separately at each site — 効果を肯定しつつ施設ごとの条件を残す。
公共の夜間相談窓口とサービス格差
段落1：架空のペンウィック地区は住宅・雇用書類の相談を夜間にも受けられるようにした。予約は増えたが、すでに昼間のサービスを使う住民の予約も多く、遠い地域の人には移動障壁が残った。
段落2：受診に当たる相談完了、キャンセル、交通、分かりにくい書類などを測定し、利用したことのない人にも調査した。最初の窓口は駅近くで、交通条件の違うほかの地区を代表するとは限らない。電話や別会場の試行が必要だった。
段落3：地域センターと電話を加えたが人員研修・警備の費用が増えた。また相談件数は書類が正しく完成したことを意味しないため、完了率や繰り返し来所を調べた。
段落4：夜間相談は一部地域で継続し、昼の窓口も維持した。予約数ではなく必要な支援を実際に受けられたかで成果を判断する。
Q26：B. results at this convenient location might not apply to more remote areas — 駅近くの立地は遠い地区の代表ではない。
Q27：C. Therefore — 相談件数だけでは完了がわからない。ゆえに成果を追跡する。
Q28：D. when practical alternatives and completed assistance were considered — アクセスと完了した支援を条件に評価する。
内容一致Q29〜35｜段落別の要点和訳・全解答
再現研究への資金配分と科学的信頼
段落1：架空のノーランド研究評議会は影響力のある実験を独立して再検証する基金を検討した。再現性を高める期待がある一方、新規発見への資金が減る懸念もある。研究者の支持率は高かったが、それ自体は政策の有効性を証明しない。
段落2：少数の再現研究を支援し、事前に手法と判定指標を明示した。原研究と同じ結果も違う結果も得られたが、違いは直ちに捏造を意味せず、同じ結果も普遍的な正しさを保証しない。装置、標本、条件が違う場合がある。
段落3：研究機器の不足や原データへの権限が障壁となった。原研究に一部の有意な結果だけが掲載されていることもあり、否定的結果や不確実性を含めて公開するよう求めた。再実験件数より、手法と比較から得られる知見の質が重要だった。
段落4：基金は実現可能で情報価値の高い分野に限定拡大し、新しい研究への支援も続けた。繰り返しの回数より、独立した検証の信頼性と研究実務の改善を評価する。
Q29：A. Strong support for the fund did not demonstrate that its effects were beneficial. — 政策支持と結果の因果関係を区別。
Q30：B. Differences could arise from samples, equipment, or experimental conditions. — 再現の相違は直ちに捏造を意味しない。
Q31：C. They could reveal limitations and improve interpretation of the evidence. — 否定的・失敗結果も方法上の知見をもたらす。
Q32：D. Improving the credibility of evidence and research practice. — 研究の信頼性と方法改善が目標。
沿岸遺跡のデジタル展示と地域住民の権利
段落1：架空の港町ベルウィックは港湾工事で見つかった遺物の電子資料館を計画した。展示への関心は高かったが、年代が未確認な遺物の説明もあり、所有する物品の画像を無条件にネット公開できるとは限らない。
段落2：歴史家、権利の専門家、地域の代表が審査し、不確実な解釈を明示した説明文を公開しつつ、機微情報の詳細は制限した。初期の記録は不完全で、必ずしも完全な虚偽ではないこともあった。全面秘匿か全面公開かの二者択一を避けた。
段落3：サイト閲覧・ダウンロード数は増加したが、歴史理解の正確さを証明しない。学習課題と訂正受付を整え、インターネットが苦手な人向け印刷資料も維持した。資料の信頼性と提供者の権利を守って評価する。
Q33：A. Some descriptions and publication permissions were not yet verified. — 年代と権利が未確認。
Q34：B. It marked limitations and restricted sensitive details when appropriate. — 不確実性の表示と段階的なアクセス管理。
Q35：C. They did not prove understanding or the reliability of interpretation. — 利用数と理解・信頼は別。
7日間の復習で実力を定着
- 初日：35問を初見で解き、語彙・空所・内容一致の正答率を別々に計測する。
- 2日目：間違えた語彙だけでなく4択すべての語義と前置詞を確認する。
- 3日目：屋根緑化の長文で閉館期間と電気使用量の関係を図解する。
- 4日目：夜間相談の長文で予約数と書類解決を区別する。
- 5日目：再現研究の長文で結果の不一致と不正を区別する。
- 6日目：遺物の電子展示の長文で不確実な年代と公開権限を整理する。
- 7日目：正答根拠を説明しながら誤答した問題を再解答する。
FAQ
英検1級Readingの問題数は何問ですか？
現行の協会公表形式は短文語句空所22問、長文空所6問、内容一致7問の合計35問です。この教材も同じ構成で慶英会が独自作成しました。
長文の全訳はありますか？
段落ごとの要点和訳を掲載しています。一語一句の対訳ではありません。初見では訳を見ず、答え合わせで因果と条件を照合してください。
続けて解く英検1級無料教材
新作・続編の無料教材：Reading第22セット｜独自35問・140択・要点和訳と解説。前回セットを復習した後、初見問題に取り組んで理解を深めてください。慶英会が独自制作した非公式教材です。
英検1級の語彙・読解・Writingの弱点は慶英会の個別指導で確認できます。最大1か月無料体験・学習相談はこちら。
公式の出題形式：日本英語検定協会・英検1級の試験内容。本文・設問・選択肢・要点和訳・解説は慶英会の独自作成です。
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