Questões de Concursos Inglês

Leia o texto para responder à questão.

Building on the professional consensus that no method could claim supremacy, Prabhu (1990) asks why there is no best method. He suggests that there are three possible explanations: (1) different methods are best for different teaching / learning circumstances; (2) all methods have some truth or validity; and (3) the whole notion of what is a good or a bad method is irrelevant. Prabhu argues for the third possibility and concludes that we need to rethink what is “best” such that classroom teachers and applied linguists can develop shared pedagogical perceptions of what real-world classroom teaching is.

H.D. Brown (2002), in his critique of methods, adds the following two observations: (1) so-called designer methods seem distinctive at the initial stage of learning but soon come to look like any other learner centered approach; and (2) it has proven impossible to empirically (i.e., quantitatively) demonstrate the superiority of one method over another. Brown (2002) concludes that classroom teachers do best when they ground their pedagogy in “well-established principles of language teaching and learning” (p.17).

So what are these well-established principles that teachers should apply in the post methods era? One of the early concrete proposals comes from Kamaravadivelu (1994), who offers a framework consisting of 10 macro strategies, some of which are summarized below:

– Maximize learning opportunities. The teacher’s job is not to transmit knowledge but to create and manage as many learning opportunities as possible.

– Facilitate negotiated interaction. Learners should initiate classroom talk (not just respond to the teacher’s prompts) by asking for clarification, by confirming, by reacting, and so on, as part of teacher-student and student-student interaction.

– Activate intuitive heuristics. Teachers should provide enough data for learners to infer underlying grammatical rules, since it is impossible to explicitly teach all rules of the L2.

– Integrate language skills. The separation of listening, reading, speaking, and writing is artificial. As in the real-world, learners should integrate skills: conversation (listening and speaking), note-taking (listening and writing), self-study (reading and writing), and so on.

– Raise cultural consciousness. Teachers should allow learners to become sources of cultural information so that knowledge about the culture of the L2 and of other cultures (especially those represented by the students) becomes part of classroom communication.

– Ensure social relevance: acknowledge that language learning has social, political, economic, and educational dimensions that shape the motivation to learn the L2, determine the uses to which the L2 will be put, and define the skills and proficiency level needed in the L2.

(Celce-Murcia, M. 2001. Adaptado)

Crazy Horse

Crazy Horse (Tasunke Witko, 1840-1877) was an Oglala Lakota Sioux warrior and warband leader considered among the greatest defenders of Sioux lands against the forces of the US government in the 19th century. He is one of the most famous Native American figures in history and among the Sioux's most honored heroes. Although he is often referred to as a "chief", Crazy Horse was actually a "Shirt Wearer" – a kind of "subchief" – who carried out the decisions of the council and also served as a war chief of a given band of warriors. Even so, Crazy Horse inspired such devotion in his followers that he was regarded as a "chief" and is referenced as such by others.

His name, Tasunke Witko (Crazy Horse), is accurately translated as "His Crazy Horse" or "His Horse is Crazy" and was his father's and grandfather's name, seemingly referencing a horse that behaved erratically. According to Black Elk, however, the name correlated to Crazy Horse's famous vision in which he saw his horse dancing as though "made only of shadow" in a strange or "crazy" way.

Crazy Horse dedicated himself to opposing the US military as early as 1854 following the Grattan Fight (Grattan Massacre) and the subsequent massacre of Little Thunder's camp in 1855 by Colonel William S. Harney. He continued his resistance over the next eleven years and was named a "Shirt Wearer" in 1865. He fought in the Battle of Plate River Bridge (1865), Red Cloud's War (1866-1868), the Battle of the Rosebud (1876), and the Battle of the Little Bighorn (1876). His last full-scale engagement with US forces was the Battle of Wolf Mountain in January 1877.

World History Encyclopedia. Adaptation.

Leia o texto para responder à questão.

Building on the professional consensus that no method could claim supremacy, Prabhu (1990) asks why there is no best method. He suggests that there are three possible explanations: (1) different methods are best for different teaching / learning circumstances; (2) all methods have some truth or validity; and (3) the whole notion of what is a good or a bad method is irrelevant. Prabhu argues for the third possibility and concludes that we need to rethink what is “best” such that classroom teachers and applied linguists can develop shared pedagogical perceptions of what real-world classroom teaching is.

H.D. Brown (2002), in his critique of methods, adds the following two observations: (1) so-called designer methods seem distinctive at the initial stage of learning but soon come to look like any other learner centered approach; and (2) it has proven impossible to empirically (i.e., quantitatively) demonstrate the superiority of one method over another. Brown (2002) concludes that classroom teachers do best when they ground their pedagogy in “well-established principles of language teaching and learning” (p.17).

So what are these well-established principles that teachers should apply in the post methods era? One of the early concrete proposals comes from Kamaravadivelu (1994), who offers a framework consisting of 10 macro strategies, some of which are summarized below:

– Maximize learning opportunities. The teacher’s job is not to transmit knowledge but to create and manage as many learning opportunities as possible.

– Facilitate negotiated interaction. Learners should initiate classroom talk (not just respond to the teacher’s prompts) by asking for clarification, by confirming, by reacting, and so on, as part of teacher-student and student-student interaction.

– Activate intuitive heuristics. Teachers should provide enough data for learners to infer underlying grammatical rules, since it is impossible to explicitly teach all rules of the L2.

– Integrate language skills. The separation of listening, reading, speaking, and writing is artificial. As in the real-world, learners should integrate skills: conversation (listening and speaking), note-taking (listening and writing), self-study (reading and writing), and so on.

– Raise cultural consciousness. Teachers should allow learners to become sources of cultural information so that knowledge about the culture of the L2 and of other cultures (especially those represented by the students) becomes part of classroom communication.

– Ensure social relevance: acknowledge that language learning has social, political, economic, and educational dimensions that shape the motivation to learn the L2, determine the uses to which the L2 will be put, and define the skills and proficiency level needed in the L2.

(Celce-Murcia, M. 2001. Adaptado)

Text I

The BNCC and Twenty-First Century Skills

The most ambitious feature of the BNCC, which only appeared in the document’s third version, was to establish ten core competencies that all students should develop throughout basic education, starting in early childhood. These competencies include lifelong learning, critical thinking, aesthetic sensibilities, communication skills, digital literacy, entrepreneurship, self-care, empathy, citizenship and ethics. The core competencies broaden the goals of basic education well-beyond academic skills to twenty-first century skills widely regarded as essential to preparing the next generations for the challenges of the 4th industrial revolution.

As ambitious as it was, the BNCC was criticized for the lack of explicit links between the ten core competencies and the subject specific competencies and skills, leaving cities and states with the responsibility of making these links themselves. In addition to this, the core competencies are not generally integrated into teacher training programs and are often de-prioritized for the more basic literacy and numeracy needs. In this context, the Ministry of Education and its partners in the third sector have developed orientations, produced videos and online courses aimed at filling this gap, and helped cities and states integrate the ten core competencies in their curricula.

[…]

Ensuring all Brazilian students master the ten core competencies laid out by the BNCC by the end of high school is a long-term, extremely ambitious goal. Before we can set a timeframe for when we will be able to achieve this feat, we need to know where we stand. Due to the core competencies’ complexity, each involves several skills, attitudes and sometimes values, it is unclear whether we will be capable of measuring all ten of them and by when. Until then we are in the company of the OECD, which is already tackling this challenge and will likely pave the way for Brazil in this respect

Note: BNCC: Base Nacional Comum Curricular;

OECD: The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Adapted from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-41882-3_2