Questões de Concursos QM 2020

Read the text to answer question.

Current teaching practice is the direct result of the acquisition-versus-learning debate. Also, both abstract theory and practical techniques have been discussed, have gone in and out of fashion, and have influenced what was and is included in classrooms and teaching materials.

In the 1990s, for example, there was considerable discussion about the Lexical Approach. In the 1970s, methods such as the Silent Way were advocated, and although they may not be used much any more – certainly not as they were originally envisaged – still some of the techniques they included have been incorporated into modern teaching practice.

Amongst the plethora of ideas and techniques which have been offered over the years, some trends have had, and continue to have a significant impact on how languages are taught today.

(HARMER, J. 1998. Adaptado.)

Read the text to answer questions from.

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was a 1970s reaction to much that had gone before, and has guiding principles: first, language is not just patterns of grammar with vocabulary items slotted in; it also involves language functions such as inviting, agreeing and disagreeing, suggesting, etc., which students should learn how to perform using a variety of language exponents (e.g. we can invite by saying “Would you like to come to the cinema?’, ‘D’you fancy coming to the cinema?’, ‘What about coming to the cinema?’, ‘How about a film?’, ‘Are you on for a film?, etc). Students also need to be aware of the need for appropriacy when talking and writing to people in terms of the kind of language they use (formal, informal, tentative, technical, etc). CLT is not just about the language; it is actually about how it is used.

The second principle of Communicative Language Teaching is that if students get enough exposure to language, and opportunities for language use, and if they are motivated, then language learning will take care of itself. Thus, CLT has a lot in common with the acquisition view of language absorption. As a result, the focus of much CLT has been on students communicating real messages, and not just grammatically controlled language. The deployment of many communicative activities, where students use all and any language they know to communicate, shows this aspect of CLT at work.

(Harmer, J. 1998. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question.

A new age has dawned in additional language teaching methodology which directly reflects wider changes in the world. In the corresponding sea-change in educational philosophy, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) presents an opportunity and a threat to accepted language teaching practice. As with immersion, formal language instruction remains integral to most CLIL models. But for this to be synchronous to subject teaching through an additional language, curricular and methodological adjustment is often required.

The ways in which content and language are integrated influence decision-making on how each is handled within the model. For example, this may be through language-learning preparation before the CLIL course, language learning embedded in the CLIL course, or language learning parallel to the CLIL course.

A useful starting point is to consider the content of learning. The concept of what constitutes content in a CLIL context is much more flexible than selecting a discipline from a traditional school curriculum such as geography, music, biology or physics. Whilst curricular subjects such as these might be appropriate for some CLIL programmes, contextual variables such as teacher availability, language support, age of learners and the social demands of the learning environment may mean that a different choice of content is more appropriate. In other words: what exactly is meant by ‘content’ in CLIL will depend on the context of the learning institution.

However, the crucial point here is that, no matter whether issues concerning the content or the language are more dominant at a given point, neither must be subsumed or the interrelationship between the two ignored.

(COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. 2010. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question.

As one of the oldest and most influential foreign language pedagogical journals, The Modern Language Journal (MLJ) offers valuable insights into how technological advances have affected language teaching and learning at various points in history. The present article will review the proposed pedagogical use of technological resources by means of a critical analysis of articles published in the MLJ since its first edition in 1916. The assessment of how previous technical capabilities have been implemented for pedagogical purposes represents a necessary background for the assessment of the pedagogical potential of present-day technologies. In this article I argue that, whereas most “new technologies” (radio, television, VCR, computers) may have been revolutionary in the overall context of human interaction, it is not clear that they have achieved equal degrees of pedagogical benefit in the realm of second language teaching. I further claim that the pedagogical effectiveness of different technologies is related to four major questions: (a) Is increased technological sophistication correlated to increased pedagogical effectiveness? (b) Which technical attributes specific to newtechnologies can be profitably exploited for pedagogical purposes? (c) How can new technologies be successfully integrated into the curriculum? and (d) Do new technologies provide for an efficient use of human and material resources?

(Salaberry, M. Researchgate.net. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question.

A new age has dawned in additional language teaching methodology which directly reflects wider changes in the world. In the corresponding sea-change in educational philosophy, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) presents an opportunity and a threat to accepted language teaching practice. As with immersion, formal language instruction remains integral to most CLIL models. But for this to be synchronous to subject teaching through an additional language, curricular and methodological adjustment is often required.

The ways in which content and language are integrated influence decision-making on how each is handled within the model. For example, this may be through language-learning preparation before the CLIL course, language learning embedded in the CLIL course, or language learning parallel to the CLIL course.

A useful starting point is to consider the content of learning. The concept of what constitutes content in a CLIL context is much more flexible than selecting a discipline from a traditional school curriculum such as geography, music, biology or physics. Whilst curricular subjects such as these might be appropriate for some CLIL programmes, contextual variables such as teacher availability, language support, age of learners and the social demands of the learning environment may mean that a different choice of content is more appropriate. In other words: what exactly is meant by ‘content’ in CLIL will depend on the context of the learning institution.

However, the crucial point here is that, no matter whether issues concerning the content or the language are more dominant at a given point, neither must be subsumed or the interrelationship between the two ignored.

(COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. 2010. Adaptado)

Considere a publicação Atendimento educacional especializado: deficiência física. MEC, (2007) de autoria de Schirmer, Browning; Bersch e Machado para responder à questão.

Lesen Sie die Äußerung einer Schülerin zum Thema „Frontalunterricht“ und kreuzen Sie bei Frage die korrekte Lösung an.

Bei uns im Unterricht machen immer alle dasselbe und zwar, was die Lehrerin sagt. Sie ist sehr nett, aber sie macht immer so schnell. Sie erklärt uns etwas, oft schreibt sie auch etwas an die Tafel, zum Beispiel Grammatikregeln, und dann meint sie, dass wir das alle verstanden haben. Und sie fragt und korrigiert uns dann immer gleich, da bin ich oft froh, wenn ich nicht drankomme. Wir sind doch so verschieden! Meine Freundin zum Beispiel kann Wörter am besten über Bilder lernen, ich mache das nicht so gerne, sie kann sich auch Wörter viel schneller merken als ich, ich muss mir die immer nochmal in Ruhe zu Hause ansehen. Außerdem habe ich oft keine große Lust auf den Unterricht, weil ich nicht so viel zum Sprechen komme. Die meiste Zeit redet die Lehrerin und wenn wir zum Beispiel was erzählen sollen, melden sich andere oft schneller. Für mich wäre es manchmal einfacher, wenn ich erstmal mit meiner Nachbarin darüber sprechen könnte.

(Funk, H. et al. Aufgaben, Übungen, Interaktion. Deutsch lehren lernen 4.

München: Klett-Langenscheidt, 2015)