英検準2級プラスの長文読解練習｜オリジナル英文と4択5問

2026年10月2日 ／ 士心塾 オンライン校

英検準2級プラスの長文読解に向けて、この教材では315語のオリジナル英文と4択5問で、答えの根拠を本文から見つける練習をしましょう。人物・時間・理由を整理し、選択肢の意味を本文と照らします。

英検の単語テスト（無料・4択）：5級／4級／3級／準2級／2級／準1級

出典：日本英語検定協会「準2級プラスの試験内容」。引用：「パッセージの内容に関する質問に答える。」https://www.eiken.or.jp/eiken/exam/grade_p2plus/solutions.html。長さの参考：「2026年度第1回 問題冊子」https://www.eiken.or.jp/eiken/exam/kakomon/2026-1-1ji-p2kyup.pdf

本文語数は上記の問題冊子の説明文から数えた参考値です。教材の問題数と長さは、読み直しながら学ぶために設定しています。

1. 本文と選択肢を3段階で照らす

2. オリジナル英文と4択5問

Looking Beyond a Simple Score（本文315語）

At Brook Lane School, the cafeteria introduced a weekly rating system so that students could judge new lunch menus. Each student could give a meal between one and five points. At first, the cafeteria manager compared only the average scores. A high average seemed to show that a meal should be served again, while a low one suggested it should be removed. However, student representative Riku wondered whether a single number could explain everyone’s experience.

One month, a bean curry received an average of four points, while a vegetable soup received three. The manager planned to keep the curry and remove the soup. Riku looked more closely at the responses. Only twelve students had rated the curry, but sixty had rated the soup. Several students who wanted the soup again had given it three points because its serving size was too small. Their rating did not mean that they disliked its taste.

Riku proposed adding two short questions to the form. Students would explain what they liked about the meal and what they would change. The manager agreed to try the new form for two weeks. Responses showed that many students wanted larger portions of the soup. Some also asked for a less spicy curry. The kitchen could adjust the portions easily, but preparing two versions of the curry would require more staff time.

After reviewing both the comments and the scores, the manager decided to serve the soup again in a larger bowl and test a milder curry once. The cafeteria would collect new responses before making either change permanent. Riku was pleased that the decisions now reflected reasons as well as numbers. He also recognized that comments could not solve every problem, since the kitchen still had limits on time and money. The project taught him that asking more useful questions can improve decisions, even when there is no solution that satisfies everyone.

本文の内容に最も合う答えを1〜4から一つ選びましょう。根拠の英文を見つけてから解答を開きます。

問題1

Why did Riku question the original rating system?

1. One average might not explain the reasons behind students’ experiences.
2. Students were unable to give any meal fewer than five points.
3. The cafeteria ignored the average scores completely.
4. The manager had already decided to remove every new menu.

問題2

What did Riku find about some students who gave the soup three points?

1. They preferred the curry because it had more ratings.
2. They thought the soup tasted worse than every other meal.
3. They liked it but wanted a larger serving.
4. They had never actually eaten the soup.

問題3

What did the new form ask students to do?

1. Choose a meal without giving any reasons.
2. Explain what they liked and what they would change.
3. Decide how much money the kitchen could spend.
4. Compare every dish with meals from other schools.

問題4

What will the cafeteria do before making the menu changes permanent?

1. Stop asking students to rate meals.
2. Prepare two curry versions every day immediately.
3. Remove the soup without serving it again.
4. Collect new responses after trying the changes.

問題5

Which statement best reflects Riku’s final understanding?

1. Better questions can help decisions, but practical limits still matter.
2. Collecting comments guarantees that every student will be satisfied.
3. Average scores are useless and should never be considered.
4. The kitchen’s budget becomes unlimited when more students respond.

3. 選択肢の違いを説明する

4. 4週間の復習計画

4週間は復習計画の一例です。試験までの日数と読める量に合わせて調整しましょう。

関連：長文読解の進め方 ／ ライティングの進め方 ／ リスニングの進め方