シャドーイング練習: What’s the best way to lift people out of poverty? - YouTubeで英語スピーキングを学ぶ
C1
In 2018, a non-profit gave every adult in western Kenya’s Ahenyo village $500.
39 文
文が短すぎたり長すぎる場合は、Editをタップして調整してください。
1
In 2018, a non-profit gave every adult in western Kenya’s Ahenyo village $500.
2
Most of their families had lived in extreme poverty for generations, and this sum was roughly equivalent to most recipients’ annual salaries.
3
Despite all this, the money came with no strings attached outside a commitment to speak with researchers after two years.
4
They hoped this influx of cash would lift the villagers out of poverty.
5
But they also knew this could easily be the latest in a long line of failed philanthropic interventions.
6
In the 1960s, charitable organizations began ramping up their philanthropic efforts, spending billions funding education, job training, agricultural development, infrastructure projects, and health care programs in attempts to help poor countries.
7
These programs hoped to create a springboard of knowledge and capital that would foster financial independence and bolster struggling economies.
8
But when economists started studying this kind of aid in the late 90s and early 2000s, they made some surprising discoveries.
9
After running various randomized control trials, where one group received education or job training and another group did not, the researchers found this kind of aid often had minimal impact.
10
School supplies failed to improve education.
11
Job training didn’t always raise incomes.
12
And the benefits of nutrition education varied dramatically from group to group.
13
These disappointing results even extended to newer philanthropic models.
14
At this time, many theorists advocated heavily for microfinance, a model that offered small loans to aspiring entrepreneurs in weak economies.
15
But while microfinance recipients consistently repaid their loans with interest, the programs failed to meaningfully raise their incomes.
16
All these failures led researchers to consider a strategy many considered ridiculous: direct cash giving.
17
Most philanthropists saw this approach as the worst kind of shortsighted philanthropy.
18
They assumed recipients would quickly spend the cash and then end up back where they started.
19
But when researchers returned to Ahenyo two years later, the results were astonishing.
20
Business revenues were up 65%.
21
Families saved more and ate more.
22
Kids were doing better in school.
23
There was less alcoholism, depression, domestic violence, and inequality between families.
24
And these impacts weren’t unique to Ahenyo.
25
Since this study, direct cash giving has become one of the most researched poverty interventions, and it's consistently shown impacts that often exceed traditional aid programs.
26
In fact, a subsequent study spanning hundreds of Kenyan villages found the surrounding economy grew by more than twice what was given out just a year after the cash transfers.
27
However, direct cash giving isn’t a silver bullet.
28
Poverty is a generational issue that requires long-term changes to solve; and since this intervention is relatively new, we still don’t fully understand the effects of cash giving on extended timelines.
29
For example, a Ugandan study beginning in 2008 found that while a cash transfer improved some families’ earnings over the first four years, the positive effect disappeared after the next five years.
30
Then it returned again under the pressure of the COVID-19 pandemic.
31
Clearly, we still have a lot to learn about how cash giving unfolds over time.
32
But regardless of what we learn in the future, the theory for why direct cash giving works can help change how we think about poverty today.
33
Where traditional aid programs assume that philanthropists have the best knowledge of a community's needs, cash giving programs believe the people experiencing poverty best understand what they need to escape it.
34
For example, perhaps for one person, repairing their home is more important to long-term success than starting a new business.
35
And for another, ensuring their child can finish school might allow them to bring in more money in the future.
36
Fortunately, we can afford this kind of help.
37
Today, wealthy countries spend $200 billion a year in international aid, and philanthropists have a trillion and a half more sitting in private foundations.
38
We already have the means to eliminate extreme poverty.
39
But doing so will require these institutions to trust the expertise of the people actually living in these conditions.
アプリをダウンロード
話したすべての文をAIが採点
TRENDING
人気動画
なぜこの動画で話す練習をするべきか？
この動画は、貧困対策に関する革新的なアイデアを提案しているため、英語を学ぶ上で非常に価値があります。具体的な事例とデータを通じて、多様な視点を提供しており、議論を促進します。この内容を通じて英語を話す練習をすることで、発表力や論理的思考を強化し、自分の意見をしっかりと伝えるスキルが向上します。また、英語の発音を良くするための素材としても理想的です。実際の対話で使われる文脈に基づいたフレーズや表現を学ぶことができます。
文法と表現の文脈
- “While”での対比: 動画内では、さまざまな状況を比較する際に「while」を効果的に使用しています。この言葉を使うことで、異なる視点や時間の経過を示すことができ、話の流れを滑らかにします。
- 現在完了形: 「has lived」「have lived」などの現在完了形が登場し、過去の経験が現在の状況にどのように影響しているかを説明します。この文法を使いこなすことで、より精度の高いコミュニケーションが可能になります。
- 動名詞の使用: 「spending billions」「helping poor countries」など、動名詞を用いることで名詞句を作り、具体的な行動を表現します。この形をマスターすることで、自分の意見をより効果的に表現できるようになります。
一般的な発音の落とし穴
この動画には、特に発音が難しい単語やフレーズがいくつかあります。例えば、「philanthropy（慈善活動）」や「entrepreneurs（起業家）」などの言葉は、正確なアクセントが求められます。特に「philanthropy」の際は、強弱アクセントに注意が必要です。英語シャドーイングを利用して、これらの単語を繰り返し練習することで、正しい発音を身につけることができます。また、IELTS スピーキング対策としても、これらの発音練習は役立ちます。shadowspeaksの技術を使って、実際の発話を真似することで発音が一層洗練されていくでしょう。
シャドーイングとは？英語上達に効果的な理由
シャドーイング（Shadowing）は、もともとプロの通訳者養成プログラムで開発された言語学習法で、多言語習得者として知られるDr. Alexander Arguelles によって広く普及されました。方法はシンプルですが非常に効果的：ネイティブスピーカーの英語を聞きながら、1〜2秒の遅延で声に出してすぐに繰り返す——まるで「影（shadow）」のように話者を追いかけます。文法ドリルや受動的なリスニングと異なり、シャドーイングは脳と口の筋肉が同時にリアルタイムで英語を処理・再現することを強制します。研究により、発音精度、抑揚、リズム、連音、リスニング力、そして会話の流暢さが大幅に向上することが確認されています。IELTSスピーキング対策や自然な英語コミュニケーションを目指す方に特におすすめです。