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級語彙第22セット・無料42問です。上級名詞・形容詞の4択22問（全88選択肢）、英文言い換え12問、オリジナル長文2篇・内容一致8問を収録。全88択の意味、42問の正答・解説、段落別要点和訳を使い、語彙と読解を一度に復習できます。慶英会独自制作の非公式問題です。
英検1級Readingの短文語句補充は22問の4択です。日本英語検定協会の公式形式を参照。今回はvalidity of a conclusion、provenance of records、stringent safeguardsなど、似た語を文脈で区別する練習に重点を置きます。
解く順序と復習のポイント
- 語彙22問を初見で解き、不正解も含めた全88語の意味を確認する。
- 言い換え12問で同じ意味を英語で表し、前置詞と修飾関係を確認する。
- 長文8問は語彙力だけでなく、事実・仮説・測定した成果を区別する。
- 解答の根拠を説明できない正解は復習対象とする。
第1部｜短文語彙22問・全88択
Q1. The review questioned the ___ of the conclusion because it relied on a very small sample.
A. validity ／ B. redundancy ／ C. levity ／ D. proximity
Q2. Historians sought to establish the ___ of a collection of letters before displaying them.
A. scarcity ／ B. provenance ／ C. tenacity ／ D. volatility
Q3. The council found the proposed timetable ___ because no trained staff were available in the evenings.
A. equitable ／ B. viable ／ C. untenable ／ D. prudent
Q4. The minister asked for an ___ assessment of the program rather than a review by its own managers.
A. arbitrary ／ B. partial ／ C. perfunctory ／ D. impartial
Q5. The researchers emphasized the ___ between increased membership and improved educational results.
A. distinction ／ B. consensus ／ C. implication ／ D. convergence
Q6. A ___ lack of suitable transport had prevented several remote communities from joining the pilot.
A. trivial ／ B. persistent ／ C. illusory ／ D. ceremonial
Q7. The economic benefits were ___ on a level of demand that had not yet been confirmed.
A. independent ／ B. immune ／ C. contingent ／ D. inconsistent
Q8. Officials made an ___ claim that the reform would benefit all households equally.
A. tentative ／ B. qualified ／ C. measured ／ D. unsubstantiated
Q9. The authority struggled to provide a ___ explanation of why some applications had been rejected.
A. coherent ／ B. sporadic ／ C. incidental ／ D. obsolete
Q10. Reviewers warned that the supposed efficiency gain was ___ because equipment replacement costs had been excluded.
A. infallible ／ B. illusory ／ C. unequivocal ／ D. substantial
Q11. The administration introduced ___ safeguards after discovering inappropriate access to records.
A. token ／ B. temporary ／ C. stringent ／ D. ambiguous
Q12. A full evaluation must consider the project’s ___ costs rather than only the price paid at the beginning.
A. incidental ／ B. negligible ／ C. nominal ／ D. recurring
Q13. The commission identified a ___ difference between what was promised and what residents actually received.
A. material ／ B. cosmetic ／ C. trivial ／ D. ceremonial
Q14. The early report was ___ because it omitted people whose requests had been rejected.
A. comprehensive ／ B. misleading ／ C. decisive ／ D. exhaustive
Q15. Researchers described the method as ___ because it could be adapted to institutions with different resources.
A. inflexible ／ B. obsolete ／ C. versatile ／ D. arbitrary
Q16. The policy’s effect was ___ by simultaneous changes to local transport arrangements.
A. corroborated ／ B. clarified ／ C. guaranteed ／ D. confounded
Q17. The regulator stressed the need for ___ criteria when assessing conflicting proposals.
A. explicit ／ B. opaque ／ C. capricious ／ D. specious
Q18. A ___ improvement in service quality could be more valuable than a dramatic rise in website traffic.
A. illusory ／ B. modest ／ C. fraudulent ／ D. negligible
Q19. The findings were not ___ to regions whose climate and infrastructure differed substantially.
A. immune ／ B. hostile ／ C. generalizable ／ D. incidental
Q20. A(n) ___ reporting process allowed residents to check when their complaints had been investigated.
A. arbitrary ／ B. opaque ／ C. informal ／ D. transparent
Q21. The planners acknowledged a ___ trade-off between better access and higher operating expenses.
A. genuine ／ B. illusory ／ C. nominal ／ D. irrelevant
Q22. The court determined that the city’s decision was ___ because the required public hearing had not occurred.
A. mandatory ／ B. invalid ／ C. transparent ／ D. binding
第2部｜上級英文言い換え12問・Q23〜Q34
原文の意味を保ち、可能な限り自然な英文で書き換えてください。意味が一致すれば、模範以外の別解も成立します。
Q23. The conclusion might not be supported by sound evidence.
Q24. The researchers examined where the historical objects came from.
Q25. The plan could not be defended under existing staffing conditions.
Q26. The decision was reviewed by people without a personal interest in the result.
Q27. The service was poorly described because important details had been left out.
Q28. The program required strict measures to protect personal information.
Q29. Continuing expenses were higher than initially expected.
Q30. The two factors were difficult to distinguish because they changed together.
Q31. The criteria were clearly specified in advance.
Q32. The findings could not reliably be applied to every district.
Q33. The reporting procedure let the public understand its decisions.
Q34. The new timetable was not legally valid.
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｜独自長文2篇・内容一致8問
Passage 1：地域の飲料水給水所と公平なアクセス
Paragraph 1. The fictional municipality of Brenford opened several public drinking-water refill stations near schools, parks, and transport hubs. Supporters hoped the stations would offer free access to water and reduce the use of disposable plastic bottles. Early reports recorded many refills, and officials described the initiative as proof that single-use waste had declined substantially. An independent evaluator cautioned that the number of refills did not show how many bottles would otherwise have been purchased. Some residents may simply have refilled containers that they already used regularly.
Paragraph 2. The council began measuring maintenance costs, water quality, and whether the locations served people who lacked access to clean drinking water. Some stations were placed at popular tourist sites, where refills were frequent but demand from underserved residents was uncertain. Other neighborhoods lacked step-free access or needed more frequent maintenance because of equipment damage. The municipality adjusted its route planning and consulted groups representing people with mobility limitations. It also clarified procedures for closing stations temporarily when hygiene checks failed.
Paragraph 3. After a year, the program continued at sites where water quality and maintenance could be reliably managed. The council did not claim that more taps automatically meant better hydration or a measurable reduction in plastic waste. It recommended comparing actual bottle purchases, the needs of residents, and the cost of operation. The final goal was dependable public access to safe water, not simply an impressive counter showing how often people had used a station.
Q35. Why were refill totals not definitive proof of waste reduction?
A. Users might already have reused their own containers without replacing disposable purchases. ／ B. All refill stations had been removed. ／ C. The town had stopped distributing water. ／ D. No residents used reusable bottles.
Q36. What limitation affected the initial station locations?
A. Every site had identical accessibility. ／ B. Busy tourist areas did not necessarily serve residents with the greatest needs. ／ C. Water quality was never checked. ／ D. The stations were only located inside hospitals.
Q37. Why were hygiene checks important?
A. They guaranteed a reduction in plastic production. ／ B. They made transport free for all users. ／ C. Stations needed safe water and procedures for temporary closure. ／ D. All dispensers were privately owned.
Q38. Which conclusion did the evaluation support?
A. Every new station would automatically improve nutrition. ／ B. Refill counts were sufficient to measure all benefits. ／ C. Maintenance costs could be excluded. ／ D. Reliable water access and verified outcomes mattered more than usage counts.
Passage 2：地方の技能実習施設と実力の証明
Paragraph 1. The fictional Hillmere College Consortium established short practical courses for adults wishing to learn safe maintenance of agricultural equipment. The program attracted people changing careers and workers seeking additional skills. After the first month, enrollment exceeded expectations, leading some officials to argue that local employment had already improved. Instructors objected that registration and interest did not demonstrate that participants could perform tasks correctly or obtain jobs. Some learners had previous technical experience, while others required much more guidance.
Paragraph 2. The consortium introduced supervised assessments involving equipment checks, written safety procedures, and carefully controlled maintenance tasks. It also tracked course completion, requests for further assistance, and the number of participants who later found relevant work. Because the early participants had volunteered, evaluators were cautious about comparing them with all job seekers. A separate local employment program had launched during the same period, which further complicated claims about the training’s effect on hiring.
Paragraph 3. After two semesters, several learners demonstrated useful practical skills, and employers welcomed clearer certificates explaining what tasks had been assessed. However, the cost of supplying training machines and qualified instructors varied across campuses. The consortium chose selective expansion, including accessible alternatives for learners with different physical needs. It concluded that credible assessment and lasting opportunities mattered more than the number of certificates issued. Further reviews would consider total costs and employment outcomes rather than promising universal success.
Q39. Why was the early employment claim premature?
A. All students had already been hired. ／ B. No one had enrolled. ／ C. The courses contained no equipment. ／ D. Enrollment did not establish skills or employment.
Q40. How did the consortium make certificates more meaningful?
A. It used supervised tasks with clearly described skills and safety criteria. ／ B. It awarded certificates for clicking every online link. ／ C. It stopped recording course completion. ／ D. It relied entirely on advertisements.
Q41. What made employment effects difficult to attribute?
A. No local employment services existed. ／ B. Participants volunteered and another jobs program ran simultaneously. ／ C. All participants had identical prior experience. ／ D. There were no employers in the region.
Q42. What did the consortium prioritize for expansion?
A. The largest possible certificate count. ／ B. Identical equipment costs at all campuses. ／ C. Verified skills, accessibility, and sustainable training costs. ／ D. Permanent guarantees of employment.
全42問の正答と詳しい解説
Q1〜Q22｜88選択肢の語義と正解
Q1：A. validity — validity of a conclusion＝結論の妥当性。標本数不足で疑義がある。
A. validity＝妥当性 ／ B. redundancy＝重複・余剰 ／ C. levity＝軽率さ・軽妙さ ／ D. proximity＝近接
Q2：B. provenance — provenance of artifacts＝資料の由来と所有・伝来の履歴。
A. scarcity＝希少性 ／ B. provenance＝由来・来歴 ／ C. tenacity＝粘り強さ ／ D. volatility＝変動性
Q3：C. untenable — untenable timetable＝職員を確保できず実行できない計画。
A. equitable＝公平な ／ B. viable＝実行可能な ／ C. untenable＝維持できない ／ D. prudent＝慎重な
Q4：D. impartial — impartial assessment＝利害関係から独立した公平な評価。
A. arbitrary＝恣意的な ／ B. partial＝偏った ／ C. perfunctory＝おざなりの ／ D. impartial＝公平で利害に左右されない
Q5：A. distinction — distinction between A and B＝参加者数と学習成果は別。
A. distinction＝区別 ／ B. consensus＝合意 ／ C. implication＝含意 ／ D. convergence＝収束
Q6：B. persistent — persistent lack＝一時的でない恒常的な欠乏。
A. trivial＝些細な ／ B. persistent＝長期に続く ／ C. illusory＝幻の ／ D. ceremonial＝儀礼的な
Q7：C. contingent — contingent on demand＝需要が前提条件。
A. independent＝独立した ／ B. immune＝影響されない ／ C. contingent＝条件付きの ／ D. inconsistent＝一貫性がない
Q8：D. unsubstantiated — unsubstantiated claim＝根拠未確認の断定。
A. tentative＝暫定的な ／ B. qualified＝留保付きの ／ C. measured＝慎重な ／ D. unsubstantiated＝証拠で裏づけられていない
Q9：A. coherent — coherent explanation＝論理的に一貫した説明。
A. coherent＝筋の通った ／ B. sporadic＝散発的な ／ C. incidental＝付随的な ／ D. obsolete＝時代遅れの
Q10：B. illusory — illusory gain＝追加費用を考えると実体のない改善。
A. infallible＝誤りのない ／ B. illusory＝見かけだけの ／ C. unequivocal＝明白な ／ D. substantial＝相当な
Q11：C. stringent — stringent safeguards＝不正アクセス防止の厳格な対策。
A. token＝形式的な ／ B. temporary＝一時的な ／ C. stringent＝厳格な ／ D. ambiguous＝曖昧な
Q12：D. recurring — recurring costs＝保守・職員などの継続費。
A. incidental＝付随的な ／ B. negligible＝無視できる ／ C. nominal＝名目上の ／ D. recurring＝継続的な
Q13：A. material — material difference＝評価を左右する実質的な相違。
A. material＝重大な・実質的な ／ B. cosmetic＝外観だけの ／ C. trivial＝些細な ／ D. ceremonial＝儀礼的な
Q14：B. misleading — rejected group omitted → misleading conclusions。
A. comprehensive＝包括的な ／ B. misleading＝誤解を招く ／ C. decisive＝決定的な ／ D. exhaustive＝完全網羅的な
Q15：C. versatile — versatile method＝異なる施設へ柔軟に応用できる。
A. inflexible＝柔軟性がない ／ B. obsolete＝旧式の ／ C. versatile＝多様な用途に適用できる ／ D. arbitrary＝恣意的な
Q16：D. confounded — confounded by another change＝因果の特定が難しくなる。
A. corroborated＝裏づけられた ／ B. clarified＝明確化された ／ C. guaranteed＝保証された ／ D. confounded＝別の要因と混同された
Q17：A. explicit — explicit criteria＝評価基準をはっきり示す。
A. explicit＝明示的な ／ B. opaque＝不透明な ／ C. capricious＝気まぐれな ／ D. specious＝もっともらしいが誤った
Q18：B. modest — modest but real improvement＝規模は小さくても現実的な改善。
A. illusory＝見かけ上の ／ B. modest＝控えめ・小規模な ／ C. fraudulent＝不正な ／ D. negligible＝無視できる
Q19：C. generalizable — generalizable to other regions＝他地域にも推論を適用できる。
A. immune＝影響されない ／ B. hostile＝敵対的な ／ C. generalizable＝一般化できる ／ D. incidental＝付随的な
Q20：D. transparent — transparent process＝進捗と判断基準が見える。
A. arbitrary＝恣意的な ／ B. opaque＝不透明な ／ C. informal＝非公式な ／ D. transparent＝透明性の高い
Q21：A. genuine — genuine trade-off＝アクセスと費用の間の実際の利害調整。
A. genuine＝現実に存在する ／ B. illusory＝見かけだけの ／ C. nominal＝名目上の ／ D. irrelevant＝関係のない
Q22：B. invalid — procedure missing -> decision invalid。
A. mandatory＝義務の ／ B. invalid＝無効な ／ C. transparent＝透明な ／ D. binding＝拘束力がある
Q23〜Q34｜言い換え12問の模範英文
Q23：The validity of the conclusion was uncertain. — validity。
Q24：The researchers investigated the provenance of the objects. — provenance。
Q25：The plan was untenable given the staffing constraints. — untenable。
Q26：The decision received an impartial review. — impartial。
Q27：The description was misleading because it omitted key details. — misleading。
Q28：The program required stringent privacy safeguards. — stringent safeguards。
Q29：Recurring costs exceeded the initial estimate. — recurring。
Q30：The effects were confounded by simultaneous changes. — confounded。
Q31：The criteria were explicit and published in advance. — explicit。
Q32：The findings were not generalizable to all districts. — generalizable。
Q33：The reporting procedure was transparent. — transparent。
Q34：The new timetable was invalid. — invalid。
Q35〜Q42｜長文の要点和訳・解答根拠
地域の飲料水給水所と公平なアクセスの段落別要点訳
第1段落：架空のブレンフォード市は学校・公園・駅の近くに無料の給水所を設置した。給水回数は増加したが、もともと水筒を持つ人が利用した可能性もあり、使い捨て容器がどれだけ減ったかは分からない。
第2段落：市は水質・維持費・水へのアクセスが悪い住民への到達を測定した。観光地では利用数が多いが本当に困る住民へ届いたか不確かで、段差や破損なども問題となった。衛生点検に不合格の場合の停止基準も設けた。
第3段落：水質と維持を確保できる地点で継続し、給水の回数だけで水分補給の改善やプラスチックごみ削減を断言しなかった。実際の使い捨て容器購入と住民ニーズ、運営費を比較することを勧めた。
Q35：A. Users might already have reused their own containers without replacing disposable purchases. — refills do not equal avoided purchases。
Q36：B. Busy tourist areas did not necessarily serve residents with the greatest needs. — placement bias toward high traffic。
Q37：C. Stations needed safe water and procedures for temporary closure. — safe water and closure when checks fail。
Q38：D. Reliable water access and verified outcomes mattered more than usage counts. — actual access and net impact。
地方の技能実習施設と実力の証明の段落別要点訳
第1段落：架空のヒルミア大学連合は農業機器の安全保守を学ぶ短期講座を実施した。入学者は多かったが、登録者数は実技の習得や就職の成果を証明しない。経験がある人と初心者で必要な指導が違った。
第2段落：監督付きで機器点検、安全手順、保守課題を実施し、修了・支援依頼・その後の就職を調べた。初期参加者は自発的に参加しているため失業者全体を代表しない。同時期の別の就職支援も影響する可能性があった。
第3段落：一部の受講生は実用的な技能を示し、何を評価したか明らかな資格証明が雇用主に歓迎された。機器と専門教員の費用は校舎ごとに異なるため、別の身体条件にも対応しながら選択的に拡大。資格発行数より技能と実際の就業機会を重視した。
Q39：D. Enrollment did not establish skills or employment. — registration not jobs。
Q40：A. It used supervised tasks with clearly described skills and safety criteria. — demonstrated skills and standards。
Q41：B. Participants volunteered and another jobs program ran simultaneously. — self-selection and confounding。
Q42：C. Verified skills, accessibility, and sustainable training costs. — quality and total costs。
7日間の反復復習
- 初日：語彙22問を解き、根拠のない正答も記録する。
- 2日目：全88択の意味と、正答語の目的語を確認する。
- 3日目：英文言い換え12問を白紙に書く。
- 4日目：給水所の長文で利用件数と実際のアクセスの違いを説明。
- 5日目：技能講座の長文で登録・実技評価・就職の違いを説明。
- 6日目：誤答語を使った新しい英文を作る。
- 7日目：全42問を再テストし、正答理由を日本語で説明する。
FAQ
英検1級の上級語句はどう暗記しますか？
単語の和訳だけでなく、validity of a conclusion、fundamental flaw、financial viabilityのように前後の語を含めたまとまりで覚えましょう。
この問題は英検の公式過去問ですか？
いいえ。慶英会独自の英文・4択・解答・解説を使用した非公式教材です。
関連する英検1級無料教材
続編の独自無料教材：語彙第23セット｜上級22問・言い換え12問・読解8問。前回の誤答と根拠を復習してから新しい初見問題へ進みましょう。すべて慶英会による非公式の独自問題です。
慶英会では英検1級の上級語彙、長文読解、英文要約を個別に指導しています。最大1か月無料体験・学習相談はこちら。
試験形式出典：日本英語検定協会「1級の試験内容」。本文・問題・語義・要点和訳・解答は慶英会独自作成です。
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