KNS Magazine학교별 내신 보기

KNS 내신 분석 리포트

한영외고 고1 2026 1학기 기말고사 영어 내신 분석

강동구 ⁠·⁠ 고등 ⁠·⁠ 공통영어

한눈에 보기

한줄평

지문 변형과 다양한 추론 문항이 이어져, 높은 수준의 독해력과 논리적 사고력이 필요했던 시험이었습니다.

총 문항
30문항
서답형
0문항
난도
중상
핵심 영역
독해25문항 ⁠·⁠ 83.3%

시험지 분석

이번 시험의 출제 흐름과
다음 준비

시험 구성

영역별 비중

  • 독해25문항 ⁠·⁠ 83.3%
  • 어휘5문항 ⁠·⁠ 16.7%

출처별 비중

  • 심화 독해16문항 ⁠·⁠ 53.3%
  • 교과서9문항 ⁠·⁠ 30%
  • 단문 독해5문항 ⁠·⁠ 16.7%

문항 구성

총 30문항
  • 객관식30문항 ⁠·⁠ 100%

표시된 비율은 문항 수를 기준으로 계산했어요.

대표 문항

18번3.5점

18. 윗글에 대한 설명으로 적절하지 않은 것은? [3.5점]

  • 유형 독해
  • 내용 추론

이번 시험의 핵심

  • 출제의 중심독해

    독해가 25문항으로 가장 많았습니다.세부 유형으로는 빈칸 추론⁠·⁠선지 판단⁠·⁠추론형 문항이 확인됩니다.

  • 함께 볼 영역어휘

    어휘는 5문항이었습니다.상위권 변별 요소도 확인됩니다.

  • 문제 유형빈칸 추론⁠·⁠선지 판단

    문항 안에는 빈칸 추론⁠·⁠선지 판단⁠·⁠추론형 문항이 포함됐습니다.

다음 시험은 이렇게 준비하세요

  1. 빈칸 추론⁠·⁠독해⁠·⁠어휘 학습은 맞힌 문제도 근거를 설명할 수 있는지 확인하는 방식으로 진행합니다.

  2. 빈칸 추론 문항은 원문과 변형 지문을 나란히 놓고 의미와 논리가 달라진 근거를 표시합니다.

  3. 어휘 복습은 뜻을 가린 예문으로 진행하고, 오답 단어는 문맥에 맞춰 다시 써 봅니다.

자세히 보기

시험 구조

총 30문항이며 모두 객관식으로 출제됐습니다.

출제 범위

교과서
능률(오)_공통 영어 3-4

영역별 특징과 준비

  • 독해

    지문별 핵심 문장 옆에 맞은 선지와 틀린 선지의 근거를 나란히 적어 둡니다.

  • 어휘

    선택지에서 자주 바뀌는 유의 표현을 본문 문장과 짝지어 정리합니다.

한영외고2026 1학기 기말고사 · 고1 · 공통영어
KNS 대표 문항

18번

3.5점
문제

18. 윗글에 대한 설명으로 적절하지 않은 것은? [3.5점]

지문

[18~19] 다음을 읽고 물음에 답하시오. (Ⅰ) The principles of The Golden Circle are much more than a communications hierarchy. Its principles are deeply grounded in the evolution of human behavior. The power of WHY is not opinion; it's biology. If you look at a cross section of the human brain, from the top down, you see that the levels of The Golden Circle correspond exactly with the three major levels of the brain. The newest area of the brain, our Homo Sapien brain, is the neocortex, which corresponds with the WHAT level. The neocortex is responsible for rational and analytical thought and language. The middle two sections comprise the limbic brain. The limbic brain is responsible for all of our feelings, such as trust and loyalty. It is also responsible for all human behavior and all our decision-making, and it has no capacity for language. When we communicate from the outside in, when we communicate WHAT we do first, people can understand a vast amount of complicated information, like facts and features, but it doesn't drive behavior. But when we communicate from the inside out, we're talking directly to the part of the brain that controls decision-making, and our language part of the brain allows us to rationalize those decisions. The part of the brain that controls our feelings has no capacity for language. It is this (A) that makes putting our feelings into words so hard. We have trouble, for example, explaining why we married the person we married. We struggle to put into words the real reasons why we love them, so we talk around it or rationalize it. "She's funny, she's smart," we start. But there are lots of funny and smart people in the world, but we don't love them and we don't want to marry them. There is obviously more to falling in love than just personality and competence. Rationally, we know our explanation isn't the real reason. It is how our loved ones make us feel, but those feelings are really hard to put into words. So when pushed, we start to talk around it. We may even say things that don't make any (B) sense. "She completes me," we might say, for example. What does that mean and how do you look for someone who does that so you can marry them? That's the problem with love; we only know when we've found it because it "just feel right." This is where “gut decisions” come from. They just feel right. There is no part of the stomach that controls decision-making, it all happens in the limbic brain. It’s not an accident that we use that word “feel” to explain those decisions either. The reason gut decisions feel right is because the part of the brain that controls them also controls our feelings. Whether you trust your gut or you’re simply following your heart, no matter which part of the body you think is driving the decision, the reality is it’s all in your limbic brain. (Ⅱ) Most people don't know about Samuel Pierpont Langley. And back in the early 20th century, the pursuit of powered man flight was like the dot com of the day. Everybody was trying it. And Samuel Pierpont Langley had, what we assume, to be the recipe for success. Even now, you ask people, "Why did your product or why did your company fail?" and people always give you the same permutation of the same three things: under-capitalized, the wrong people, bad market conditions. It's always the same three things, so let's explore that. Samuel Pierpont Langley was given 50,000 dollars by the War Department to figure out this flying machine. Money was no problem. He held a seat at Harvard and worked at the Smithsonian and was extremely (C) ; he knew all the big minds of the day. He hired the best minds money could find and the market conditions were fantastic. The New York Times followed him around everywhere, and everyone was rooting for Langley. Then how come we've never heard of Samuel Pierpont Langley? (Ⅲ) A few hundred miles away in Dayton, Ohio, Orville and Wilbur Wright were also building a flying machine. Unlike Langley, the Wright brothers did not have the recipe for success. Worse, they seemed to have the recipe for (D) . There was no funding for their venture. No high-level connections. The Wright brothers funded their dream with the proceeds form their bicycle shop. Not a single person working on the team, including Orville and Wilbur, had a college education; some did not even finish high school. What the Wright brothers did have something very special. They had a dream. They know WHY it was important to build this thing. They believed that if they could figure out this flying machine, it would change the world. They imagined the benefits to everyone else if they were successful. Samuel Pierpont Langley was different. He wanted to be rich, and he wanted to be famous. He was in pursuit of the result. He was in pursuit of the riches. And lo and behold, look what happened. The people who believed in the Wright brothers' dream worked with them with blood and sweat and tears. The others just worked for the paycheck. They tell stories of how every time the Wright brothers went out, they would have to take five sets of parts, because that's how many times they would crash before supper.

지문 전체 보기지문 접기

[18~19] 다음을 읽고 물음에 답하시오. (Ⅰ) The principles of The Golden Circle are much more than a communications hierarchy. Its principles are deeply grounded in the evolution of human behavior. The power of WHY is not opinion; it's biology. If you look at a cross section of the human brain, from the top down, you see that the levels of The Golden Circle correspond exactly with the three major levels of the brain. The newest area of the brain, our Homo Sapien brain, is the neocortex, which corresponds with the WHAT level. The neocortex is responsible for rational and analytical thought and language. The middle two sections comprise the limbic brain. The limbic brain is responsible for all of our feelings, such as trust and loyalty. It is also responsible for all human behavior and all our decision-making, and it has no capacity for language. When we communicate from the outside in, when we communicate WHAT we do first, people can understand a vast amount of complicated information, like facts and features, but it doesn't drive behavior. But when we communicate from the inside out, we're talking directly to the part of the brain that controls decision-making, and our language part of the brain allows us to rationalize those decisions. The part of the brain that controls our feelings has no capacity for language. It is this (A) that makes putting our feelings into words so hard. We have trouble, for example, explaining why we married the person we married. We struggle to put into words the real reasons why we love them, so we talk around it or rationalize it. "She's funny, she's smart," we start. But there are lots of funny and smart people in the world, but we don't love them and we don't want to marry them. There is obviously more to falling in love than just personality and competence. Rationally, we know our explanation isn't the real reason. It is how our loved ones make us feel, but those feelings are really hard to put into words. So when pushed, we start to talk around it. We may even say things that don't make any (B) sense. "She completes me," we might say, for example. What does that mean and how do you look for someone who does that so you can marry them? That's the problem with love; we only know when we've found it because it "just feel right." This is where “gut decisions” come from. They just feel right. There is no part of the stomach that controls decision-making, it all happens in the limbic brain. It’s not an accident that we use that word “feel” to explain those decisions either. The reason gut decisions feel right is because the part of the brain that controls them also controls our feelings. Whether you trust your gut or you’re simply following your heart, no matter which part of the body you think is driving the decision, the reality is it’s all in your limbic brain. (Ⅱ) Most people don't know about Samuel Pierpont Langley. And back in the early 20th century, the pursuit of powered man flight was like the dot com of the day. Everybody was trying it. And Samuel Pierpont Langley had, what we assume, to be the recipe for success. Even now, you ask people, "Why did your product or why did your company fail?" and people always give you the same permutation of the same three things: under-capitalized, the wrong people, bad market conditions. It's always the same three things, so let's explore that. Samuel Pierpont Langley was given 50,000 dollars by the War Department to figure out this flying machine. Money was no problem. He held a seat at Harvard and worked at the Smithsonian and was extremely (C) ; he knew all the big minds of the day. He hired the best minds money could find and the market conditions were fantastic. The New York Times followed him around everywhere, and everyone was rooting for Langley. Then how come we've never heard of Samuel Pierpont Langley? (Ⅲ) A few hundred miles away in Dayton, Ohio, Orville and Wilbur Wright were also building a flying machine. Unlike Langley, the Wright brothers did not have the recipe for success. Worse, they seemed to have the recipe for (D) . There was no funding for their venture. No high-level connections. The Wright brothers funded their dream with the proceeds form their bicycle shop. Not a single person working on the team, including Orville and Wilbur, had a college education; some did not even finish high school. What the Wright brothers did have something very special. They had a dream. They know WHY it was important to build this thing. They believed that if they could figure out this flying machine, it would change the world. They imagined the benefits to everyone else if they were successful. Samuel Pierpont Langley was different. He wanted to be rich, and he wanted to be famous. He was in pursuit of the result. He was in pursuit of the riches. And lo and behold, look what happened. The people who believed in the Wright brothers' dream worked with them with blood and sweat and tears. The others just worked for the paycheck. They tell stories of how every time the Wright brothers went out, they would have to take five sets of parts, because that's how many times they would crash before supper.

선택지
①(Ⅰ) shifts the discussion from a communication framework to a scientific foundation, providing the underlying "why" behind why the Golden Circle works. It sets up a new layer of support for the theory introduced earlier, grounding it in brain anatomy before moving to historical case studies in the next two paragraphs.
②The title for (Ⅰ) would be “Gut Decisions Don't Happen in Your Stomach” as it captures the paragraph's main point that decisions and feelings come from the limbic brain, not the rational, language-based part of the brain.
③(Ⅱ) introduces a real historical counter-example to the case presented in (Ⅲ), describing an individual who had every external advantage typically associated with success (funding, connections, and media attention) yet still failed, raising a question that the next paragraph will answer.
④(Ⅲ) directly contrasts with (Ⅱ), presenting the opposite case (minimal resources, yet ultimate success) to answer the question posed at the end of (II).
⑤According to (Ⅲ), as the Wright brothers' team worked with intense dedication despite lacking resources, while Langley's team did not achieve the same result, this implies that a shared sense of purpose or belief can generate a level of effort and commitment that money alone cannot buy - and that this difference in motivation, as well as resources, was the decisive factors in their differing outcomes.

정답과 해설

정답⑤
핵심 근거

⑤ According to (Ⅲ), as the Wright brothers' team worked with intense dedication despite lacking resources, while Langley's team did not achieve the same result, this implies that a shared sense of purpose or belief can generate a level of effort and commitment that money alone cannot buy - and that this difference in motivation, as well as resources, was the decisive factors in their differing outcomes.

해설

정답은 ⑤입니다. 해당 선택지가 지문⁠·⁠보기의 내용과 어긋납니다. 핵심 표현을 원문의 해당 대목과 대조하면 판단 근거가 분명해집니다.

다음 대비

선지마다 근거 문장을 표시하고, 바뀐 표현이 원문의 의미를 유지하는지 대조합니다.

KNS 내신 상담

우리 학교 시험,
다음 준비까지 함께 보세요

상담하러 가기