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・慶英会独自第43セット。英文要約2題（各90〜110語）、意見英作文2題（各200〜240語）、誤った要約の修正24問と全解答を無料公開します。地下水の塩水化、古い橋の点検、自動化された公共判断、ニュースの統計を題材に、根拠のある主張と過度の断定の違いを身につけます。
公式の1級Writingは英文要約1題・意見英作文1題です。要約の指示は2025年度から90〜110語と明記されています。英検協会｜1級試験内容、要約指示文の公式通知をご確認ください。本文と模範回答は慶英会が新たに作成した非公式教材です。
続きの無料教材：Writing第44セット｜要約2題・英作文2題・修正24問。初見で解き、解答根拠・誤答理由まで確認してください。
答案作成の4手順
- 冒頭の主張、期待できる効果、制約、反対意見、今後の検証を箇条書きせず自分で整理する。
- 要約では実施済みと検討中、原因と単なる関連を区別し、90〜110語でまとめる。
- 意見英作文は冒頭で立場、性質の異なる2〜3理由、合理的な反論への対応、結論を書く。
- 模範を見る前に語数と事実関係を自己点検し、翌日にもう一度独力で書く。
英文要約1｜地下水の塩水化と農村の井戸管理
問題：次の独自英文を読んで、90〜110語の英文要約を書いてください。
A fictional coastal farming district has begun examining whether seawater is entering its underground freshwater supplies. Farmers have reported that some wells taste saltier during dry seasons, and a preliminary survey found higher salt concentrations at several monitoring points. Officials initially suggested installing more powerful pumps to secure enough water for irrigation.
Hydrologists warned that increased pumping could worsen the problem if it drew salty water farther inland. The effect would vary according to the structure of underground layers, rainfall and how much water was removed. A low salt reading in one well would not prove that neighboring wells were safe. Specialists therefore proposed a wider monitoring network and tests that distinguished natural seasonal changes from the effects of human activity.
The district also considered improving irrigation efficiency, collecting rainwater during wet periods and limiting extraction in particularly vulnerable locations. These measures might require investment or changes to farming practices, and some growers feared reductions in crop production. Rather than impose the same restriction everywhere, officials planned to consult farmers and compare alternative approaches.
A pilot will track water levels, salinity, irrigation costs and agricultural outcomes across several seasons. The district will also examine whether emergency water supplies are available when droughts occur. Its goal is reliable freshwater access without unintentionally accelerating the intrusion it is trying to prevent.
模範英文要約（99語）
A fictional coastal farming district is investigating increasing salinity in some wells. Officials initially considered stronger pumps to secure irrigation water, but hydrologists warned that greater extraction could draw seawater farther inland. Because underground conditions vary, isolated readings cannot establish the safety of surrounding wells. The district is comparing wider monitoring, efficient irrigation, rainwater collection and restrictions on pumping in vulnerable locations. Farmers are concerned about costs and crop production, so officials plan consultation rather than uniform controls. A multi-season pilot will assess water levels, salinity, irrigation expenses and agricultural outcomes to identify a reliable solution without worsening intrusion.
日本語の全体解説：架空の沿岸農地では井戸水の塩分が増えたが、取水を強めると塩水の侵入を促す可能性がある。地層・降雨・取水量による違いを調べ、灌漑の効率化・雨水貯留・脆弱地の制限を比較する。農家の費用負担も考慮し、複数季節にわたって水位、塩分、費用、収穫結果を評価する。
内容を変えない英文修正12問
Q1 誤：The district has proved that all wells are unsafe. 修正：Only some monitoring points showed increased salinity. 理由：全地域の断定を避ける。
Q2 誤：Officials have already installed stronger pumps. 修正：They initially suggested stronger pumps. 理由：提案と実行済みを区別する。
Q3 誤：Higher pumping always improves groundwater quality. 修正：Pumping may draw salty water inland. 理由：影響の方向を保持する。
Q4 誤：All underground layers respond identically. 修正：Geological conditions vary between locations. 理由：地層の違いを残す。
Q5 誤：One safe well proves surrounding wells are safe. 修正：A single reading cannot establish conditions elsewhere. 理由：標本の過大な一般化。
Q6 誤：Rainfall has no influence on the problem. 修正：Rainfall is one factor affecting salinity. 理由：要因を省略しない。
Q7 誤：The district rejected water conservation. 修正：Efficient irrigation is among the options. 理由：比較対象を残す。
Q8 誤：Farmers face no economic risks. 修正：Some growers worry about costs and production. 理由：利害関係者の懸念。
Q9 誤：Uniform pumping restrictions have been imposed. 修正：Officials plan consultation and comparisons. 理由：未実施の規制を創作しない。
Q10 誤：Water conditions will be judged in one afternoon. 修正：The pilot covers several seasons. 理由：評価期間の重要性。
Q11 誤：Only water salinity will be measured. 修正：Water levels, costs and agriculture will also be assessed. 理由：複数指標を保持する。
Q12 誤：The aim is to maximize water extraction. 修正：The aim is reliable access without worsening saltwater intrusion. 理由：目的を正確に記述。
英文要約2｜地域の古い橋梁の点検データと修繕優先順位
問題：次の独自英文を読んで、90〜110語の英文要約を書いてください。
A fictional regional transportation authority manages hundreds of small bridges, some of which were constructed several decades ago. Inspectors record visible cracks, corrosion and signs of movement, but the authority has limited staff and cannot repair every structure immediately. A new software system has been proposed to rank bridges according to the urgency of further examination.
Supporters argue that consistent rankings could help officials distribute inspection resources. However, engineers note that photographs may not reveal internal deterioration, and data from different years may have been collected using different methods. A bridge carrying emergency vehicles may also be more consequential to local residents than one with similar physical defects but several convenient alternative routes.
The authority is considering combining structural observations with traffic loads, available detours and the consequences of closure. It would require trained engineers to review unusual cases and allow them to override a software recommendation with a recorded explanation. Some officials fear that detailed reviews will slow decisions, while local groups argue that speed should not come at the expense of public safety.
Before expanding the system, the authority plans a trial comparing missed defects, inspection time, staff workload and the reliability of repair priorities. It also intends to publish understandable criteria without releasing details that would create security risks. The objective is to improve safety decisions when resources are scarce, not to replace professional judgment with a single unexplained score.
模範英文要約（102語）
A fictional transportation authority is considering software to prioritize inspections of aging bridges because repair resources are limited. Consistent rankings could improve planning, but photographs may miss internal damage and older records may use different methods. Engineers also emphasize traffic, emergency access and alternative routes when judging consequences. The proposed system would combine structural data with local conditions, while trained specialists could override recommendations and record their reasons. A trial will evaluate missed defects, inspection time, workload and the quality of repair priorities. The aim is more reliable safety decisions under resource constraints rather than replacing engineering judgment with an unexplained score.
日本語の全体解説：架空の地方交通当局は古い橋の点検順位をソフトで支援したい。写真からは内部劣化が分からず、過年度の点検方法も異なり得る。傷みが同程度でも救急車の通行や迂回路によって社会的影響が違うため、技術者の上書き判断を残し、欠陥見逃し・作業時間・優先順位の質を評価する。
内容を変えない英文修正12問
Q13 誤：The authority has repaired every bridge. 修正：It has limited resources and cannot repair all bridges immediately. 理由：資源制約を保つ。
Q14 誤：The software has replaced all inspectors. 修正：The software is proposed as a decision-support tool. 理由：技術導入の段階。
Q15 誤：Photographs show every kind of damage. 修正：Internal deterioration may be invisible in photographs. 理由：観測方法の限界。
Q16 誤：All inspection years used identical methods. 修正：Records may have been gathered differently. 理由：比較可能性。
Q17 誤：Structural defects are the sole criterion. 修正：Traffic and closure consequences also matter. 理由：評価の複数軸。
Q18 誤：Emergency routes are unimportant. 修正：Their loss can greatly affect communities. 理由：社会的影響を残す。
Q19 誤：Engineers are forbidden to disagree with software. 修正：Specialists may override recommendations with reasons. 理由：人間の責任を明示。
Q20 誤：Every official supports additional review. 修正：Some fear it will slow decisions. 理由：反対意見の正確性。
Q21 誤：The pilot will measure publicity. 修正：It will examine defects, time, workload and priority quality. 理由：成果指標を保持。
Q22 誤：All security-sensitive information will be released. 修正：Criteria will be published with appropriate security limits. 理由：公開と安全のバランス。
Q23 誤：The trial guarantees perfect decisions. 修正：It will test whether decisions improve. 理由：検証結果を創作しない。
Q24 誤：The aim is to maximize computer rankings. 修正：The aim is dependable safety decisions with limited resources. 理由：手段と目的の区別。
意見英作文1｜Should governments require independent evaluation before expanding automated public-service decisions?
200〜240語で立場と理由を組み立ててください。模範は唯一の正解ではありません。
模範答案（209語）
Governments should require independent evaluation before expanding automated systems that influence important public services. Such technology may improve consistency and efficiency, but a rapid decision is not necessarily a fair or reliable one.
First, external assessment can identify problems that developers overlook. A system trained on past records may reproduce gaps in access when some communities have historically been underserved. Independent reviewers can test outcomes across different groups and investigate whether missing information produces misleading recommendations.
Second, scrutiny strengthens accountability. Residents should understand the broad reasons behind consequential decisions and have a practical way to challenge mistakes. If officials cannot explain why a recommendation was accepted, responsibility may become unclear even though the system was purchased with public funds.
Third, limited trials can protect budgets. Software licenses, data management, maintenance and staff training all create costs that initial procurement estimates may miss. Evaluators should compare actual service outcomes with these expenses before recommending permanent expansion.
Critics argue that formal reviews may delay useful improvements or expose sensitive technical information. These concerns deserve proportionate solutions, such as focused audits and protected access for qualified assessors rather than complete secrecy.
Overall, independent evaluation should help governments use automation responsibly, ensuring that faster processing translates into more accessible, accurate and accountable services.
日本語での論理構成：重要な公的サービスの自動判断には拡大前の独立検証を求める。過去データの格差を引き継ぐ危険、判断の説明責任、ライセンスと職員訓練を含む費用を検証するためである。迅速化の利点は認めつつ、独立監査の範囲を合理的に設計する。
意見英作文2｜Should schools devote more time to teaching students how to evaluate statistics in the news?
200〜240語で立場と理由を組み立ててください。模範は唯一の正解ではありません。
模範答案（221語）
Schools should dedicate more time to teaching students how to interpret statistics reported in the news. Numerical claims influence decisions about health, education and public policy, yet a precise-looking figure can conceal uncertainty or misleading comparisons.
First, students need to recognize the difference between totals and rates. A rise in the number of reported incidents may reflect increased reporting or a larger population rather than a change in individual risk. Comparing appropriate denominators can prevent mistaken conclusions.
Second, pupils should learn that association does not automatically establish causation. An educational program might coincide with higher examination scores, but differences in student backgrounds or participation could also affect the outcome. Asking what was measured and what else changed is a useful habit.
Third, statistical literacy supports constructive debate. Students who understand sampling, uncertainty and the limits of graphs can question claims without dismissing all evidence. The goal is careful judgment, not cynicism about every number.
Critics point out that school schedules are crowded and that advanced statistics may overwhelm younger learners. That concern is reasonable. Teachers can start with accessible examples and integrate basic comparisons into mathematics, science and language lessons rather than add an entirely separate demanding course.
In conclusion, practical statistical reasoning belongs in general education because it helps students make responsible decisions in a world filled with numerical information.
日本語での論理構成：報道の数値を解釈する学習を学校で強化すべきである。総数と割合の違い、相関と因果、標本と不確実性を理解すれば誤解を避けられる。難しい専門統計を一気に教えるのでなく既存科目で実例に基づき学ぶ。
要約で失点しないための5つの確認
- 検討中の政策を実施済みと書き換えない。
- たまたま同時に起きた変化を因果関係に変えない。
- 調査対象の範囲を超えて全地域に一般化しない。
- 原文にない数字や固有名詞を創作しない。
- 費用・安全・公平性など重要な留保を一方的に削らない。
よくある質問
英検1級の英文要約は90〜110語で必須ですか？
英検協会が2025年度から使用する指示文は90〜110語と明記しています。まず内容の正確性を保ち、その範囲にまとめてください。
模範要約とは別の英文でもよいですか？
可能です。情報の主体・時制・限定・結論が維持され、自然な英語になっているかで確認します。
意見英作文に事実のない数字は必要ですか？
必要ありません。作り話の統計を追加するより、理由と具体的な仕組みを説明することが重要です。
関連する英検1級無料教材
参考公式情報
すべての英文・問題・答案・解説は慶英会独自制作の非公式教材です。地名や施策、調査は架空の教育用事例です。
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