Day 20｜設問と本文の照合を効率化する
【メイン課題】
以下の英文を 4分〜5分以内 に読みましょう。
英文：
Bilingual education, in which students are taught academic subjects in two languages, has been the subject of considerable debate among educators and policymakers. While some argue that learning in two languages simultaneously confuses children and delays their academic progress, a growing body of research suggests that bilingual education offers significant cognitive, academic, and social advantages.
Studies conducted in Canada, where French-English bilingual programs have been widely implemented since the 1960s, have consistently shown positive results. Students enrolled in immersion programs not only develop strong skills in both languages but also perform as well as or better than their monolingual peers in subjects like mathematics and science. Researchers attribute this to the cognitive benefits of bilingualism, which include enhanced executive function, better problem-solving abilities, and greater mental flexibility.
In the United States, the debate over bilingual education has been particularly contentious. In 1998, California passed Proposition 227, which effectively banned bilingual education in public schools in favor of English-only instruction. Supporters argued that immigrant children would learn English faster in English-only classrooms. However, research conducted after the law’s implementation showed that the change did not significantly improve English proficiency among non-native speakers. In 2016, California voters repealed the ban, allowing schools to once again offer bilingual programs.
Bilingual education also provides important social and cultural benefits. Students in bilingual programs develop a deeper appreciation for cultural diversity and are better equipped to communicate in a multicultural society. For children from immigrant families, maintaining their heritage language while learning the language of their new country helps preserve their cultural identity and strengthens family bonds. Furthermore, bilingual individuals have a significant advantage in the global job market, where multilingualism is increasingly valued by employers.
The key to successful bilingual education lies in program design and implementation. Research shows that programs lasting at least five to seven years produce the best results, as it takes that long for students to develop academic-level proficiency in a second language. Teacher quality is also crucial; bilingual teachers must be fluent in both languages and trained in bilingual pedagogy. When properly designed and supported, bilingual education programs can give students skills and perspectives that benefit them throughout their lives.
設問：
（1）カリフォルニア州のProposition 227について、以下の出来事を時系列順に並べなさい。
a. バイリンガル教育の禁止が撤回された
b. Proposition 227が可決された
c. 禁止後の調査で英語力の大幅な向上は見られなかった
（2）本文によると、バイリンガル教育プログラムが最良の結果を出すには最低何年必要か。
（3）以下のうち、本文の内容と一致するものを全て選びなさい。
a. カナダのイマージョンプログラムの生徒は数学や科学でも好成績を収めている
b. バイリンガル教育は子供を混乱させ学業の遅れを引き起こすことが証明されている
c. 移民家庭の子供にとって母国語の維持は文化的アイデンティティの保持に役立つ
d. バイリンガルの人材はグローバルな就職市場で有利である
e. 全ての研究がバイリンガル教育の利点を支持している
（4）文章全体の主張を日本語2文以内でまとめなさい。
模範解答を見る ▼
【模範解答】
各段落の要点：
– 第1段落：バイリンガル教育をめぐる議論の紹介。
– 第2段落：カナダでの肯定的な研究結果。
– 第3段落：アメリカ（カリフォルニア）での論争の経緯。
– 第4段落：社会的・文化的メリット。
– 第5段落：成功の鍵（プログラム設計と実施）。
設問の解答：
（1）時系列順：b → c → a
– 1998年にProposition 227可決（b）→ 実施後の調査で効果が見られず（c）→ 2016年に禁止撤回（a）
（2）最低5〜7年。第5段落 “programs lasting at least five to seven years produce the best results” が根拠。
（3）正解：a、c、d
– a：本文 “perform as well as or better than their monolingual peers in subjects like mathematics and science” → 正解
– b：本文第1段落で「混乱させるという意見がある」と述べているが、「証明された」とは言っていない。むしろ研究は肯定的な結果を示している → 不正解
– c：本文 “maintaining their heritage language … helps preserve their cultural identity” → 正解
– d：本文 “significant advantage in the global job market” → 正解
– e：第1段落で反対意見も存在することを述べている → 不正解
（4）バイリンガル教育は認知的・学業的・社会的に多くのメリットをもたらし、移民の子供の文化的アイデンティティの保持にも貢献する。成功には5〜7年の継続と質の高い教師が不可欠であり、適切に設計されたプログラムは生涯にわたる利益をもたらす。
ポイント（速読のコツ⑳）：
– 英文を読みながら 各段落の「キーワード」を1つメモ しよう（例：第1段落＝議論、第2段落＝カナダ、第3段落＝カリフォルニア）。設問に答えるとき「カリフォルニア → 第3段落」と即座に特定でき、本文全体を探し回る時間を大幅に節約できる。
【練習問題】以下の英文を4分〜5分以内に読み、設問に答えなさい。
英文：
The sharing economy, exemplified by companies like Airbnb and Uber, has fundamentally changed how people access goods and services. Instead of owning assets outright, consumers can now rent, share, or borrow almost anything, from cars and apartments to tools and designer clothing. This model appeals to younger generations who value experiences and access over ownership.
The economic benefits of the sharing economy are substantial. It creates income opportunities for individuals who can monetize underused assets such as spare rooms or personal vehicles. For consumers, sharing services often provide more affordable and convenient alternatives to traditional options. A 2023 study estimated that the global sharing economy was worth approximately 150 billion dollars and is projected to reach 335 billion dollars by 2027.
Critics, however, argue that the sharing economy has significant downsides. In cities where Airbnb is popular, short-term rentals have reduced the supply of long-term housing, driving up rents for local residents. Ride-sharing services have been accused of undermining traditional taxi industries and providing insufficient protections for their drivers. Regulatory frameworks have struggled to keep pace with these rapidly evolving business models.
The future of the sharing economy depends on finding a balance between innovation and regulation. Cities like Amsterdam and Barcelona have implemented strict rules on short-term rentals to protect housing markets while still allowing sharing platforms to operate. As the sharing economy continues to grow, both companies and governments must work together to ensure that its benefits are shared broadly and its negative impacts are minimized.
設問：
（1）2027年までにシェアリングエコノミーの市場規模はいくらに達すると予測されているか。
（2）Airbnbが都市に与えるマイナスの影響を本文に基づいて説明しなさい。
（3）文章全体の主張を日本語1文でまとめなさい。
練習問題の解答を見る ▼
【練習問題 解答】
設問の解答：
（1）3,350億ドル（335 billion dollars）。第2段落 “projected to reach 335 billion dollars by 2027” が根拠。
（2）Airbnbの短期賃貸が普及した都市では、長期賃貸住宅の供給が減少し、地元住民の家賃が上昇している。第3段落が根拠。
（3）シェアリングエコノミーは経済的メリットが大きい一方で住宅市場への影響などの課題もあるため、イノベーションと規制のバランスを取りながら、その恩恵を広く共有し悪影響を最小化する必要がある。