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Writing無料模試・慶英会オリジナル第45セット。英文要約2題（90〜110語）、意見英作文2題（200〜240語）、誤要約修正24問と全解答を公開します。地方公共施設のサイバー演習、地域文化財の共同収蔵、雇用主の安全教育、公園の遊具点検を題材に、主張・反論・条件・提案の段階を正確に表す練習ができます。
英検1級のWritingには英文要約1題と意見英作文1題が出題され、2025年度以降の英文要約は90〜110語です（英検協会｜1級試験内容、英検協会｜要約指示）。本ページでは各2題の独自練習を提供し、公式過去問とは区別します。
次の無料教材：Writing第46セット｜英文要約2題・意見英作文2題・修正24問。初見で演習した後、正答の根拠と誤答理由を確認してください。
初見で解く4ステップ
- 要約は原文の目的、期待利益、課題、対案、今後の判断を見分ける。
- 90〜110語の要約を模範を見る前に書く。主語、時制、確実性を原文より強めない。
- 意見英作文は賛否を冒頭に示し、異なる理由と合理的な反論への応答を含める。
- 翌日、最初の答案を隠して書き直し、内容・構成・語彙・文法の観点で比較する。
英文要約1｜地方公共施設のサイバー演習と実務継続
課題：次の慶英会オリジナル英文を90〜110語で英語要約してください。自分の意見を混ぜないこと。
A fictional regional government plans to organize shared cybersecurity exercises for libraries, local clinics and other public facilities. Some of these organizations rely on small teams that handle both digital services and day-to-day operations. Supporters argue that practicing responses to a simulated computer outage could help staff identify weaknesses before a real disruption affects residents.
The proposal includes scenarios in which a booking database becomes unavailable, suspicious messages reach employees or a communications provider suffers a lengthy failure. Participants would practice securing accounts, communicating with users and maintaining essential services through alternative procedures. Organizers emphasize that buying protective software alone does not show whether staff know what to do when routine tools stop working.
However, small institutions worry about the time required for training. A clinic that sends several employees to an exercise may struggle to maintain appointments that day. Some facilities also use older equipment that cannot easily be replaced, while others depend on external contractors. A single standardized scenario might therefore miss vulnerabilities specific to each organization.
The government is considering a common introductory exercise followed by shorter sessions tailored to local needs. Independent observers would record how quickly services recover, whether users receive accurate information and which errors recur. To avoid exposing sensitive systems, participants would use simulated records and agreed limits on technical disclosure. Managers also want to assess whether exercises lead to concrete improvements, not merely count people who attend.
Before expanding the program permanently, officials will compare staff time, preparation costs, recovery performance and practical benefits for service users. The central objective is resilient public services rather than an impressive total of training certificates.
模範要約（93語）
A fictional regional government is considering shared cybersecurity exercises for small public institutions to prepare for digital outages and suspicious messages. Supporters expect better recovery procedures, but clinics and libraries worry about staffing, older equipment and different operational needs. Officials propose common introductory training followed by tailored simulations using non-sensitive records. Independent observers would assess service recovery, user communication and recurring errors. Costs and staff time will be compared with practical improvements before the program expands. The goal is reliable essential services during disruptions, not software purchases or large numbers of attendance certificates.
日本語での全体解説：架空の地方自治体は図書館・診療所などの共通サイバー演習を計画する。停電や情報システム停止時に業務を継続できる利点がある一方、小規模施設では訓練のための職員の時間、古い設備、外部委託への依存が課題。共通演習と施設別の短時間演習を組み合わせ、実際の復旧・利用者への連絡・再発防止・費用を検証する。
誤要約の修正12問と全解説
Q1 誤：All public facilities have already completed training. 修正：The regional government is considering a shared exercise program. 根拠：計画と実施を区別する。
Q2 誤：Buying security software guarantees preparedness. 修正：Staff must also practice alternative procedures. 根拠：ソフト購入と対応能力は別。
Q3 誤：Every clinic can release staff without consequences. 修正：Small clinics may struggle to cover appointments during exercises. 根拠：機会費用を保持する。
Q4 誤：Every institution uses identical systems. 修正：Facilities differ in equipment and contractors. 根拠：運用条件の違い。
Q5 誤：The proposal involves publishing real private records. 修正：Simulated records would help protect sensitive information. 根拠：情報保護の手順。
Q6 誤：Only hacking incidents would be practiced. 修正：Scenarios also include outages and communication failures. 根拠：演習対象を縮めない。
Q7 誤：One uniform exercise necessarily suits all facilities. 修正：Additional sessions tailored to local needs are proposed. 根拠：画一的な設計では不十分。
Q8 誤：Recovery speed is the only success measure. 修正：User communication and recurring errors also matter. 根拠：評価項目を保持。
Q9 誤：Independent observers are prohibited. 修正：Independent observers would review performance. 根拠：第三者確認の扱い。
Q10 誤：Officials have approved permanent nationwide expansion. 修正：Expansion depends on trial results. 根拠：試行の段階を変えない。
Q11 誤：Attendance certificates establish resilient services. 修正：Actual recovery performance is more informative. 根拠：代理指標の限界。
Q12 誤：The program is intended to replace essential public services. 修正：Its purpose is maintaining services during disruptions. 根拠：本来の目的。
英文要約2｜市立美術館の貸出収蔵庫と地域文化財の保管
課題：次の慶英会オリジナル英文を90〜110語で英語要約してください。自分の意見を混ぜないこと。
A fictional city museum is considering a shared storage facility for small community organizations that own historical artifacts but lack suitable conservation rooms. Some groups keep photographs, documents and ceremonial objects in spaces with changing temperatures and humidity. Supporters believe a professionally maintained facility could prevent avoidable deterioration and provide access to advice from trained conservators.
However, storage is not simply a matter of finding additional shelves. Different materials need different environmental conditions, and frequent handling can create damage. A uniform temperature setting might suit paper but be unsuitable for certain other objects. The museum would need clear procedures for documenting condition, tracking who handles each item and responding when equipment fails.
Community representatives have also asked who would control access to their collections. An organization might consent to secure storage without authorizing public display, photography or online distribution. Some artifacts carry cultural restrictions that need to be discussed with relevant custodians. The museum has therefore proposed separate agreements on preservation, research access and publication, rather than treating all permissions as interchangeable.
Financial arrangements remain unsettled. If fees are based solely on storage volume, groups with fragile but small collections may require more professional attention than larger owners. The city is exploring proportionate charges, limited subsidies and partnerships with regional institutions. Critics warn that an elaborate new building could create high maintenance costs, especially when existing facilities might be adapted instead.
A pilot will compare object condition, access arrangements, staffing needs, energy expenses and the usefulness of conservation advice. The city wants to support local heritage responsibly, not maximize the number of boxes stored or assume that shared custody transfers ownership of the objects.
模範要約（98語）
A fictional city museum is considering shared conservation storage for community groups whose historical objects face damaging conditions. Professional facilities could protect collections, but different materials require appropriate environments, careful handling and contingency procedures. Community representatives also stress that permission to store an object does not automatically authorize exhibition or online publication. Officials are exploring separate access agreements, proportionate fees and alternatives to constructing an expensive new building. A pilot will assess object condition, conservation support, access rights, staffing and energy costs. The aim is responsible protection of local heritage, not merely maximizing stored items or transferring ownership.
日本語での全体解説：架空の市立美術館は小規模団体の文化資料を共同収蔵する施設を検討する。保管の安定や保存専門家の支援は有益だが、紙・写真・工芸品などで温湿度や取扱いが異なる。保存許可は公開・複製許可と同義ではなく、権利を別に整理する必要がある。新築コストや公平な利用料を考慮し、文化財の状態、費用、支援の実用性を試行で評価する。
誤要約の修正12問と全解説
Q13 誤：The museum has already taken ownership of every object. 修正：The museum is considering shared storage without assuming ownership. 根拠：保管と所有権を区別。
Q14 誤：All artifacts require identical temperature settings. 修正：Different materials may need different conditions. 根拠：素材による違いを保持。
Q15 誤：More shelves alone provide conservation. 修正：Condition records, careful handling and contingency plans are also necessary. 根拠：設備と管理の違い。
Q16 誤：Permission to store includes permission to publish. 修正：Storage and publication require separate authorization. 根拠：権利の別個性。
Q17 誤：Community custodians have no role in access decisions. 修正：Relevant representatives have requested control over access. 根拠：当事者の意見を残す。
Q18 誤：Every artifact may be photographed without restriction. 修正：Some objects may be subject to cultural restrictions. 根拠：公開の例外。
Q19 誤：The city has finalized one fee for all groups. 修正：Different charging models remain under consideration. 根拠：料金は未決定。
Q20 誤：Small collections always cost less to conserve. 修正：Fragile items may require intensive specialist care. 根拠：体積と保管費は同じでない。
Q21 誤：Only a new building could work. 修正：Adapting existing facilities is also being considered. 根拠：代替案がある。
Q22 誤：Energy costs are excluded from evaluation. 修正：The pilot will measure energy and staffing expenses. 根拠：維持費を含む。
Q23 誤：Success means maximizing the number of boxes. 修正：The city will evaluate preservation quality and practical access. 根拠：本来の成果。
Q24 誤：The project guarantees that no artifact will deteriorate. 修正：The objective is to reduce avoidable risks through proper care. 根拠：保証を創作しない。
意見英作文1｜Should employers provide regular paid time for staff to learn cybersecurity skills?
200〜240語で立場、理由、反論への応答と結論を述べてください。
模範英作文（223語）
Employers should provide regular paid time for essential cybersecurity training, particularly when staff use systems that handle sensitive information. Security cannot depend exclusively on purchasing protective software, because everyday decisions by employees can affect an organization’s resilience.
First, training can reduce preventable errors. Workers may receive convincing messages requesting passwords or urgent payments. Practical exercises help them recognize warning signs and use reporting channels instead of improvising under pressure. Such preparation should be relevant to their actual duties rather than a generic presentation that is quickly forgotten.
Second, paid training can make participation fairer. If employees must learn complex procedures during their personal time, those with caring responsibilities or multiple jobs may be disadvantaged. Scheduling training as part of work recognizes that maintaining safe operations benefits the organization as well as individuals.
Third, regular practice supports continuity when systems fail. Staff should know how to contact colleagues, protect records and maintain essential tasks through approved backup procedures. A short exercise can expose unclear responsibilities before a genuine incident occurs.
Critics reasonably worry about costs and the time employees spend away from other work. Programs should therefore use targeted modules, realistic drills and evidence of changed behavior rather than reward attendance alone.
In conclusion, proportionate paid training is a sensible investment when it demonstrably reduces risk and strengthens the ability to operate during disruptions.
日本語の論理構成：企業はサイバー安全の訓練を勤務時間内に有給で行うべきである。偽メールへの対応、家庭事情による学習機会の差、停電や情報障害時の継続業務に役立つ。ただし時間と費用の負担を考慮し、出席数より実務での対応力で効果を判断する。
意見英作文2｜Should cities require independent inspections of aging public playground equipment?
200〜240語で立場、理由、反論への応答と結論を述べてください。
模範英作文（210語）
Cities should require regular independent inspections of aging public playground equipment, with inspection frequency based on credible risk. Public spaces offer valuable opportunities for children to play, but visible popularity does not establish that structures remain safe.
First, professional inspections can identify damage that ordinary users may not notice. Corrosion, weakened connections and deteriorating surfaces may develop gradually. Waiting for a serious accident before investigating such problems would be an irresponsible approach to maintaining public assets.
Second, independent checks can strengthen accountability. When an external specialist records what was examined and which repairs are needed, managers can prioritize work and explain decisions to residents. Public reporting should distinguish urgent hazards from defects that can be addressed through routine maintenance.
Third, systematic maintenance can support long-term financial planning. Repairing small defects may cost less than replacing entire structures after years of neglect. However, some equipment may be too damaged or outdated to retain safely, so inspection results must guide the choice between repair and replacement.
Critics argue that inspections cost money and can temporarily close facilities. That concern deserves attention, but proportionate schedules and clear procedures can reduce unnecessary disruption.
Overall, independent assessment is justified when it helps children use public playgrounds safely while making repair costs and responsibilities more transparent.
日本語の論理構成：古い公園遊具には独立した専門家による点検を定期的に実施すべきである。隠れた腐食の発見、管理責任の説明、長期修理費の抑制に役立つ。閉鎖や検査費用はあるため、危険度に応じた頻度と修理・交換の判断を行う。
自己校閲で直す5つの誤り
- 検討中の試行を実施・成功済みへ書き換える。
- 保存と公開など異なる権限を混同する。
- 登録数・参加数の増加を、成果や安全性の確定と捉える。
- 費用や人的制約を無視して万能の解決策と断定する。
- 比較する場合に別案の利点・課題の片側だけを残す。
よくある質問
英検1級の英文要約は何語ですか？
2025年度からの英検協会の指示文は90〜110語です。原文の主張と重要な留保を保つことが優先です。
意見英作文は反対意見の記述が必須ですか？
一定の型が唯一の正解というわけではありません。意見、筋の通った理由、説得力のある具体例が重要です。反論への応答は論理を深める一つの方法です。
模範要約と異なる言い回しでもよいですか？
適切な別表現も可能です。原文の事実関係・因果・可能性の強さが変わらないよう確認します。
次に取り組む無料教材
参考公式情報
英文・設問・模範解答・解説は慶英会が独自制作した非公式教材です。登場する公的機関や事業は学習用の架空設定で、実在の成果を表しません。
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