英検1級Writing無料模試【第11セット】｜英文要約2題・意見英作文2題・模範4本と独自24問

英検1級Writing無料模試・第11セットです。慶英会が独自作成した英文要約2題、意見英作文2題と模範英文4本に、全文和訳・12問の要点確認・12問の誇張表現訂正を付けました。模範要約は90〜110語、英作文は200〜240語を検算済みです。

英検1級の公式Writingは英文要約1題（90〜110語）と意見英作文1題（200〜240語）です。ReadingとWritingで100分。英検協会・1級公式形式。本教材に登場する地名・行政・試験の事例は創作であり、公式過去問や実在の調査を転載していません。

Writingの次の初見模試：英検1級第12セット・独自英文要約2題と意見英作文2題、模範4本・全訳・訂正24問も無料で学べます。前回と異なる題材で原文の論理を忠実にまとめる練習です。

要約と英作文で失点を防ぐ4原則

• 要約では筆者が述べた目的、結果、限界、最終判断を残す。
• 観測件数が増えたことと、最終的な効果が証明されたことを区別する。
• 意見英作文では立場を明示し、異なる3つの理由で論証する。
• 語数だけを満たすために、原文にない数字や推測を追加しない。

Set A｜英文要約：公共施設での補助器具貸出と安全性

Read the original passage below and summarize it in English between 90 and 110 words.

Paragraph 1：In the fictional city of Greymere, several community centers began lending basic mobility aids to residents recovering from temporary injuries. The equipment included adjustable walking sticks and simple supports intended for use after professional advice. Officials hoped the program would reduce the need for people to purchase items needed only briefly. The centers also provided printed instructions and contact details for local rehabilitation services. During a six-month trial, the number of loans increased, and many borrowers said that the collection was convenient.

Paragraph 2：Administrators initially claimed that the program had substantially reduced household spending. An independent evaluator challenged that conclusion. Some borrowers had already owned similar items, while others would have received equipment through existing health services. Loan totals did not show how much money people had actually saved or whether the aids were used appropriately. The evaluator recommended recording unique borrowers, documented equipment needs, returns, maintenance costs, and safety concerns separately rather than treating every loan as a successful outcome.

Paragraph 3：The trial raised difficulties concerning hygiene and individual suitability. Equipment had to be cleaned and inspected between uses, and a walking aid suitable for one person might be unsafe for another. Staff were instructed not to offer medical assessments beyond their training. Instead, residents requiring specific adjustments were referred to qualified professionals. Some people also struggled to visit during ordinary opening hours, so the centers tested appointment-based collection in the evening. These changes were intended to make the program safer and more accessible without replacing clinical guidance.

Paragraph 4：After another review, the council authorized a limited continuation while comparing costs with alternative assistance. It postponed expansion to every community center until sufficient information about equipment condition, actual use, and unmet needs became available. The final report stated that sharing basic aids might be useful under appropriate conditions but that high borrowing figures were not proof of financial savings or improved health.

Set A｜意見英作文TOPIC

Should cities preserve more publicly owned spaces for community use? Give THREE reasons for your opinion. Write approximately 200–240 words.

Set B｜英文要約：災害時の配送用ドローンと地方医療の現実

Read the original passage below and summarize it in English between 90 and 110 words.

Paragraph 1：The fictional island region of Eastcliff considered using small delivery drones to transport selected medical supplies when ferries were delayed. Emergency planners hoped that lightweight packages could reach clinics more quickly during some disruptions. A trial carried nonurgent sealed supplies between two facilities with suitable landing areas. Several deliveries arrived sooner than conventional shipments, and local officials praised the technology as a promising addition to existing transport options.

Paragraph 2：Medical staff warned against treating the faster deliveries as proof that drones could replace the usual supply chain. Bad weather could also prevent flights, the aircraft had limited carrying capacity, and refrigerated goods required equipment that was not part of the first trial. Moreover, many essential items needed careful handling and documentation. An independent review separated delivery speed, reliability, cargo suitability, and total operating expenses instead of using average travel time as the sole success measure.

Paragraph 3：The project also raised questions about safety, privacy, and equitable access. Aircraft had to follow approved routes and avoid sensitive locations, while remote clinics without suitable landing space could not participate. Some residents worried about noise near homes. The regional authority consulted communities and proposed designated flight paths, procedures for reporting incidents, and alternative transport for places the drones could not serve. Staff stressed that urgent medical decisions remained the responsibility of qualified professionals.

Paragraph 4：Following the review, the region continued a limited trial for appropriately packaged supplies and postponed a regionwide expansion. It required comparisons with improved ferry scheduling and other existing delivery methods. Officials concluded that small drones might be useful for particular routes, but a few faster journeys did not establish universal cost savings, equal access, or dependable delivery during every emergency.

Set B｜意見英作文TOPIC

Should governments require independent assessments before using automated decisions in essential public services? Give THREE reasons for your opinion. Write approximately 200–240 words.

独自24問｜要点を正確に抽出・誤った表現を修正

Q1：貸出事業の主な目的は？

Q2：貸出件数だけでは家計の節約を証明できないのはなぜ？

Q3：職員が医療的判断を行わない理由は？

Q4：器具の安全性に必要な管理は？

Q5：通常時間に来られない人への対応は？

Q6：議会は全施設での導入を承認した？

Q7：ドローン事業の想定目的は？

Q8：通常の物流を全面代替できない理由は？

Q9：地域間のアクセス格差は？

Q10：地域住民の懸念を一つ挙げよ。

Q11：事業の比較対象として推奨されたものは？

Q12：全域拡大と節約は確定した？

Q13：Borrowing many aids proved that all users had saved money.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q14：Any walking aid was suitable for every resident.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q15：Community staff could replace medical professionals.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q16：Cleaning equipment was unnecessary for the service.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q17：The program was expanded to all centers immediately.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q18：Evening collection appointments were not considered.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q19：The drone trials proved that ordinary medical transport was obsolete.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q20：Weather conditions could never interrupt drone flights.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q21：All clinics were equally able to receive drone deliveries.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q22：Every kind of medicine was included in the first trial.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q23：Drone delivery had been proven cheaper in every situation.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Q24：The region immediately made drone transport mandatory everywhere.　原文に合う英文に直してください。

Set A｜原文全文和訳と模範要約

Paragraph 1の和訳：架空のグレイミア市では一時的なけがの回復期に使う基本的な歩行補助具を地域センターで貸し出した。専門家の助言を受けた後に使う杖などを用意し、短期間しか使わない物を購入する必要を減らす狙いだった。説明書とリハビリ支援の連絡先も提供。半年間で貸出が増え、多くの利用者は便利と答えた。

Paragraph 2の和訳：管理者は家計負担が大幅に減ったと主張したが第三者は疑問視した。もともと同等の補助具を持っていた人や医療機関を通じて借りられた人もいたため、貸出件数だけでは実際の節約額や適切な利用を測れない。実利用者数、器具の必要性、返却、保守費、安全上の問題を別々に記録するよう勧告した。

Paragraph 3の和訳：衛生と適合性にも課題があった。器具は毎回清掃・点検が必要で、ある人に合う杖が別の人には危険な場合もある。職員は訓練外の医療評価をせず、個別調整が必要なら有資格者へ案内した。通常時間に来られない人向けに夜間予約受取も試した。これは専門家による医療助言の代替ではない。

Paragraph 4の和訳：議会は代替の支援方法との費用比較を続けながら限定継続を承認した。器具の状態、実利用、未充足需要が分かるまでは全センターへの拡大を延期。適切な条件では役立ち得るが、貸出数だけで財政的節約や健康改善を証明できないとした。

模範要約（100語）

A city tested lending basic mobility aids through community centers to reduce purchases of equipment needed temporarily. Borrowing increased, but independent reviewers warned that loan totals did not establish household savings or appropriate use, as some residents had other sources of equipment. Hygiene, inspection, and individual suitability also required attention. Staff referred users needing specialized adjustments to qualified professionals and introduced evening collection appointments. The council continued the limited program while comparing costs and monitoring safety, actual use, and unmet needs. It postponed wider expansion, concluding that convenience and high borrowing figures were insufficient evidence of financial or health benefits.

Set A｜意見英作文模範（222語）と全文和訳

Introduction：Cities should preserve useful public spaces for community activities instead of automatically selling them whenever land values rise. Development is necessary, but public facilities can provide benefits that are difficult to measure through immediate financial returns. I support protecting appropriate spaces for three reasons: access, community resilience, and long-term flexibility.

日本語訳：都市は地価が上がるたびに公有地を自動的に売却せず、有用な公共空間を保全すべきだ。開発も必要だが、即時の売却益だけでは測れない価値がある。理由は利用の公平性、地域の強靭性、長期的な柔軟性。

Reason 1：First, shared spaces provide opportunities for people who cannot afford private facilities. Libraries, recreation rooms, and meeting halls can support study, social activities, and practical assistance. Their value depends on accessibility and actual use rather than the size of the building alone.

日本語訳：第一に共同空間は民間施設を借りられない人にも機会を提供する。図書館や集会室は学習・交流・実務支援に使えるが、建物の大きさより実際の利用とアクセスが重要。

Reason 2：Second, community facilities may help residents cooperate during difficult circumstances. A familiar public center can offer information, temporary services, or a place for organized volunteers. However, its effectiveness requires maintenance and clear plans; merely keeping a building open does not guarantee resilience.

日本語訳：第二に困難な状況で住民が協力する場所になり得る。情報や臨時サービス、ボランティア活動に役立つが、保守と計画がなければ建物があるだけでは強靭性は生まれない。

Reason 3：Third, preserving flexible spaces allows future residents to respond to needs that planners cannot currently predict. A facility used for education today might later support different activities. Once valuable land is sold or built over, reversing that decision may be difficult.

日本語訳：第三に今は予測できない将来の用途へ転用しやすい。一度売却・開発すると元に戻すのが難しい場合がある。

Conclusion：Nevertheless, cities must consider housing shortages, operating costs, and safety. An underused, deteriorating building should not receive unlimited subsidies simply because it is publicly owned. Decisions should compare realistic alternatives and invite community participation. I favor evidence-based preservation where the lasting public benefits justify the resources required.

日本語訳：住宅不足、維持費、安全も重要で利用の少ない危険な建物に無期限の補助をすべきではない。代替案を比較し住民が参加する根拠に基づく保全を支持する。

Set B｜原文全文和訳と模範要約

Paragraph 1の和訳：架空のイーストクリフ離島地方はフェリーが遅れたときの医療用品配送に小型ドローンを使うことを検討した。軽い荷物を早く届ける狙いで、適切な着陸場所のある2施設の間で緊急性の低い密封用品を試験輸送した。一部の配送は従来便より早く、自治体は有望な補助手段と評価した。

Paragraph 2の和訳：医療職は配送時間だけで通常の輸送網を代替できると考えないよう警告。悪天候では飛べず積載量に限りがあり、冷蔵品向けの設備は試験に含まれていなかった。丁寧な取扱いと記録が必要な物品もある。第三者は速さ、信頼性、積荷の適合性、全運営費を分けて評価した。

Paragraph 3の和訳：安全、プライバシー、公平な利用も問題となった。機体は認可された経路を飛び、敏感な場所を避け、着陸施設のない診療所は対象外だった。住宅付近の騒音懸念もあり、住民協議のうえ指定経路、事故通報、使えない地域の代替輸送を検討した。緊急医療判断は有資格者の責任である。

Paragraph 4の和訳：地方は適切に梱包された物品への限定試行を続け全域拡大は延期。フェリーの時刻改善など現行方式との比較を求めた。特定ルートでは役立ち得るが、数回の速い配送では全域の費用節減・公平なアクセス・どんな緊急時にも確実な輸送を証明できないとした。

模範要約（95語）

An island region tested drones for transporting selected medical supplies during ferry delays. Some deliveries were quicker, but staff cautioned that weather, limited cargo capacity, and the absence of refrigeration prevented the technology from replacing ordinary transport. Safety rules, unsuitable landing areas, and residents’ concerns also limited access. Officials proposed approved routes, incident procedures, and alternatives for clinics the aircraft could not serve. The region continued restricted trials while comparing costs and reliability with existing deliveries. It concluded that faster journeys on selected routes did not prove universal savings or dependable service during every emergency.

Set B｜意見英作文模範（208語）と全文和訳

Introduction：Governments should require independent assessments before automated systems make or strongly influence decisions about essential public services. Software can process information efficiently, but errors or unfair assumptions may have serious consequences. I support independent review for three reasons: accuracy, fairness, and accountability.

日本語訳：政府は重要な公共サービスで自動システムが決定する、または決定へ大きく影響する前に独立した評価を求めるべきだ。ソフトは効率的だが誤りや不公平が重大な結果につながる。理由は正確性、公平性、説明責任。

Reason 1：First, automated decisions can depend on incomplete or outdated records. A program that incorrectly classifies an applicant may delay necessary assistance. Independent testing can examine representative cases and establish procedures for correcting mistakes before the system is used widely.

日本語訳：第一に記録が不完全・古い場合があり、申請者の誤分類が必要な支援を遅らせ得る。独立したテストで代表例を検証し、広く使う前に訂正手順を作る。

Reason 2：Second, people are affected differently by data quality and access barriers. Individuals with unusual circumstances may be poorly represented in the examples used to design a system. Evaluators should examine who experiences errors and whether meaningful human review remains available.

日本語訳：第二にデータの質やアクセス障壁が人によって異なる。特別な事情のある人が設計時の事例に含まれない場合があるため、誰に誤りが多いか、人間の再審査が利用できるか調べる。

Reason 3：Third, public institutions must be able to explain important decisions. Residents should know which information influenced an outcome and how to challenge it. Clearly documented responsibilities can also help officials correct failures without blaming software as though it were an independent authority.

日本語訳：第三に行政は重要な判断を説明すべきだ。住民は使用された情報と異議申立ての方法を知る必要があり、ソフト自身へ責任を転嫁せず担当者の役割を明らかにする。

Conclusion：However, assessment requirements should be proportionate. Simple administrative tools need not face the same scrutiny as systems affecting healthcare or basic benefits. Governments should balance careful testing with timely services. In my view, independent evaluation and accessible appeals are essential safeguards for consequential automated decisions.

日本語訳：審査は危険の程度に比例させる。単純な事務補助と医療・重要給付に関する判断を同じ扱いにせず、迅速なサービスと安全を両立させる。

全24問の模範回答・解説

Q1

模範英語回答：To reduce purchases of mobility aids needed only temporarily. 理由：一時的な利用が目的。

Q2

模範英語回答：Some borrowers already owned similar aids or had other sources. 理由：代替入手経路がある。

Q3

模範英語回答：Suitability assessments may require qualified professionals. 理由：職員の職務範囲を超えるため。

Q4

模範英語回答：Cleaning and inspection between uses. 理由：清掃・点検が不可欠。

Q5

模範英語回答：Evening appointments for collection. 理由：アクセス改善。

Q6

模範英語回答：No. It continued a limited trial and postponed expansion. 理由：限定継続と全域導入の違い。

Q7

模範英語回答：To transport certain supplies more quickly when ferries were delayed. 理由：限定された物品と輸送状況。

Q8

模範英語回答：Weather, payload limits, and unavailable refrigeration. 理由：能力と環境の制約。

Q9

模範英語回答：Some clinics had no suitable landing space. 理由：着陸場所による制限。

Q10

模範英語回答：Noise or safety and privacy concerns. 理由：安全と生活への配慮。

Q11

模範英語回答：Improved ferry schedules and existing delivery methods. 理由：新方式と現実的な代替を比べる。

Q12

模範英語回答：No. Expansion was postponed and universal savings remained unproven. 理由：試行結果を一般化しない。

Q13

訂正例：High loan totals did not establish savings for every user. 解説：数と節約額を区別。

Q14

訂正例：Equipment suitability differed among residents. 解説：個別に適合性が異なる。

Q15

訂正例：Staff referred specialized needs to qualified professionals. 解説：医学的判断の限界。

Q16

訂正例：Equipment required cleaning and inspection between uses. 解説：衛生管理を残す。

Q17

訂正例：The council continued a limited trial and postponed wider expansion. 解説：限定試行と全面導入を区別。

Q18

訂正例：Evening appointments were tested to improve access. 解説：利用可能性の改善。

Q19

訂正例：Drones could supplement, not universally replace, conventional transport. 解説：補完と全面代替を区別。

Q20

訂正例：Adverse weather could prevent flights. 解説：天候による制約。

Q21

訂正例：Clinics without suitable landing areas could not participate. 解説：設備によるアクセス格差。

Q22

訂正例：The trial involved selected sealed supplies without refrigeration. 解説：物品の範囲を守る。

Q23

訂正例：Universal cost savings had not been demonstrated. 解説：費用効果の未確定性。

Q24

訂正例：The region continued a limited trial and postponed broad expansion. 解説：政策段階を区別。

7日間の復習順序

• 1日目：Set A原文の論旨と留保を整理。
• 2日目：Set A要約を自力で90〜110語にする。
• 3日目：Set A英作文で3理由の違いを確認。
• 4日目：Set Bの原文を読み初見で要約。
• 5日目：Set B英作文の因果と具体例を点検。
• 6日目：独自24問を解き、誇張や因果の逆転を修正。
• 7日目：模範を見ずに別の表現で両要約を書き直す。

よくある質問

英検1級の英文要約は何語ですか？

現行形式は90〜110語の間です。受験時の設問に従ってください。

1級英作文の理由はいくつですか？

3つの理由で意見を支持する形式です。

模範と違う語句は使えますか？

原文の意味、主体、留保を守る自然な言い換えは可能です。

この事例は実在する行政事業ですか？

いいえ。練習のために作成した架空の事例です。

英検公式過去問ですか？

いいえ。慶英会の独自制作問題です。

関連する英検1級無料教材

• Writing第10セット
• Reading第11セット
• 英検1級無料教材一覧

慶英会の無料体験・学習相談

英検1級の英文要約・意見英作文で、要点の抜けや3理由の重複がある場合は答案から改善点を見つけることが重要です。慶英会の最大1か月無料体験・学習相談をご利用ください。

参考公式情報：日本英語検定協会・1級の公式試験形式、1級の過去問・試験内容。2026年10月29日確認。全英文・課題・解説は慶英会の独自制作です。

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。

公式LINEで無料体験・学習相談Webフォームで無料体験・学習相談料金・無料体験の条件を確認する

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