Selecione os filtros para encontrar suas questões de concursos e clique no botão abaixo para filtrar e resolver.
Nada por aqui
Durante o processo de avaliação da aprendizagem em uma turma de Artes, você percebe que alguns alunos estão apresentando dificuldades em expressar suas habilidades artísticas por meio das técnicas aprendidas em sala de aula. Ao analisar essa situação, você decide aplicar uma avaliação formativa para identificar possíveis lacunas no aprendizado dos alunos. Qual dos seguintes métodos de avaliação formativa seria mais apropriado para avaliar as habilidades artísticas dos alunos?
Read Text | and answer questions 05 to 13.
Netflix is trying to prove to the world that it's all grown up
Netflix is trying to persuade Wall Street that it is now all grown up. After squeezing out millions of additional subscribers via its password sharing crackdown and through the introduction of cheaper advertiser-supported plans, the streamer knows that its growth spurts are coming to an end — and now it wants investors to stop obsessing over those pesky membership numbers and instead focus on other metrics.
"In our early days, when we had little revenue or profit, membership growth was a strong indicator of our future potential. But now we're generating very substantial profit and free cash flow. We are also developing new revenue streams like advertising and our extra member feature, so memberships are just one component of our growth", Netflix told shareholders as it reported quarterly earnings.
To that end, Netflix said that it will no longer report quarterly subscriber numbers, starting in 2025. Alas, the metric that Wall Street has forever judged Netflix on — the metric that prompted legacy media companies to burn endless piles of cash in their bids to compete with the streamer — will be retired. The decision to shut off transparency on the metric represents a significant turning point in the streaming revolution. For years, Netflix has prided itself on being extraordinarily transparent. Now it is aiming to hold its cards closer to its chest. And given that streaming giant is the trendsetter in the space, one could expect that other media companies will be inspired by the company's move and also opt to cease reporting such data.
To be fair, what Netflix is saying isn't necessarily off base either. As the company shifts its business model away from subscriptions and toward advertising and other revenue streams, it makes sense to consider how much time users are spending on the service. The more content a user consumes on Netflix, the more likely they are to continue paying for the service, and the more money Netflix then makes from that single subscriber. "We're focused on revenue and operating margin as our primary financial metrics — and engagement (i.e. time spent) as our best proxy for customer satisfaction,” Netflix underscored in its letter to shareholders.
Regardless, less transparency in an already opaque industry is not ideal. The walled garden of streaming already lacks the same detailed viewership data that Nielsen collects on linear television broadcasters. Now, visibility into the streaming world will get even dimmer.
The announcement from Netflix managed to overshadow its otherwise stellar quarter. The company handily beat expectations and added a staggering 9.3 million subscribers, meaning it now boasts nearly 270 million in total. Netflix also beat analyst expectations on both earnings and revenue. However, it wasn't all good news. Netflix forecasted its subscriber growth to be lower in quarter two, chalking it up to “typical seasonality.” That led the stock to slide nearly 5% in after-hours trading.
Whether "typical seasonality” is solely to blame, or whether the streamer is simply starting to hit a ceiling, is hard to tell. Perhaps it is a mix of both. Whatever the cause, the stock sliding on the less-than-ideal outlook is a prime example of why Netflix wants Wall Street to stop focusing on its subscriber numbers. And, in one year's time, investors won't have a choice.
Adapted from: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/19/media/netflix-subscription-numbers/index.html
In “(..) Netflix told shareholders as it reported quarterly earnings", the suffix -ed in the word in italics is:
O Plano Nacional de Educação (PNE) estabeleceu, para o decênio 2014-2024, a meta de alfabetizar todas as crianças, no máximo, até o final do:
Leia o texto:
Escola inclusiva
É alvissareira a constatação de que 86% dos brasileiros consideram haver melhora nas escolas quando se incluem alunos com deficiência. O elevado grau de aceitação aparece em pesquisa Datafolha divulgada em 15 de outubro, Dia do Professor.
Uma década atrás, quando o país aderiu à Convenção sobre os Direitos das Pessoas com Deficiência e assumiu o dever de uma educação inclusiva, era comum ouvir previsões negativas para tal perspectiva generosa. Apesar das dificuldades óbvias, ela se tornou lei em 2015 e criou raízes no tecido social.
A rede pública carece de profissionais satisfatoriamente qualificados até para o mais básico, como o ensino de ciências; o que dizer então de alunos com gama tão variada de dificuldades. Os empecilhos vão desde o acesso físico à escola, como o enfrentado por cadeirantes, a problemas de aprendizado criados por limitações sensoriais — surdez, por exemplo — e intelectuais.
Bastaram alguns anos de convívio em sala, entretanto, para minorar preconceitos. A maioria dos entrevistados (59%), hoje, discorda de que crianças com deficiência devam aprender só na companhia de colegas na mesma condição. Tal receptividade decerto não elimina o imperativo de contar, em cada estabelecimento, com pessoal capacitado para lidar com necessidades específicas de cada aluno. Este pode ser disléxico, deficiente visual ou diagnosticado com transtorno do espectro autista, para dar mais alguns exemplos.
O censo escolar indica 1,2 milhão de alunos assim categorizados. Embora tenha triplicado o número de professores com alguma formação em educação especial inclusiva, contam-se não muito mais que 100 mil deles no país. Não se concebe que possa haver um especialista em cada sala de aula. As experiências mais bem-sucedidas criaram na escola uma estrutura para o atendimento inclusivo, as salas de recursos. Aí, ao menos um profissional preparado se encarrega de receber o aluno e sua família para definir atividades e de auxiliar os docentes do período regular nas técnicas pedagógicas.
Não faltam casos exemplares na rede oficial de ensino. Compete ao Estado disseminar essas iniciativas exitosas por seus estabelecimentos. Assim se combate a tendência ainda existente a segregar em salas especiais os estudantes com deficiência — que não se confunde com incapacidade, como felizmente já vamos aprendendo.
(Editorial, da Folha de São Paulo, 16.10.2019 – adaptado)
Sobre o Protocolo de Ulceras por Pressão (UPP), assinale a alternativa correta.
INSTRUCTION: Read the following text to answer question.
Do Leveled Books Have Any Place in the Classroom?
“The little turtle can see the grass. The little turtle can see the trees. The little turtle can see the flowers”. These are the opening lines to one popular reading program’s leveled books: short, predictable texts designed for beginning readers. The patterned sentence structure – centered on the phrase “the little turtle can see" – invites students to rely on repetition and context clues to identify words they can’t sound out.
Leveled books have been a staple in early elementary reading instruction for more than two decades. But as the “science of reading” movement has spread, leveled books have come under fire. Initially, they encourage students to guess at words rather than use their phonics skills, researchers say, which can prevent children from mapping the letter-sound connections that allow them to become fluent readers.
A second problem is how they sort students into levels. Studies have shown that leveling systems are frequently inaccurate. These systems are usually created by the books’ publishers, which purport to match students with books that have a just-right alignment with their reading comprehension abilities.
In classrooms that are switching to a science of reading approach, educators are now wary of leveled books, because of the damage that they did, said Wiley Blevins, an educational consultant. In his opinion, when children are still learning the code of written language, it is required a “tight connection” between the letter-sound correspondences they’re learning and the text they’re reading, so that they have opportunities to practice. But leveled texts can’t do this job. Blevins said that the textdifficulty levels also don’t offer much practical use because they don’t tell educators what skills students still need to master – which doesn’t necessarily mean kids can’t ever pick up these books.
But what are leveled texts anyway? In many of the most popular reading programs of the last decade, leveled readers were some of the main texts that children worked with. Teachers used books for instruction, grouping students by their level and assigning them reading strategies to practice in the text. They have also been used for assessment since teachers listened to students read these books aloud, keeping a running record of their errors.
Publishers claimed that the text-leveling system could match students with books that were just right for their abilities – challenging enough to help them practice new skills, but not so challenging as to be frustrating or inaccessible. This idea is based on outdated theories about how children learn. Studies show that students can read books that are above their level with teacher and peer-provided support. They also indicate that restricting students to text at lower reading levels can actually widen achievement gaps.
However, other research has found that the leveling system isn’t even that accurate. A 2014 study showed that data from leveling assessments correctly predicted students’ reading ability only about 50 percent of the time.
The big problem with these books, though, is that they don’t help students develop their decoding skills, that is, their ability to sound out words by connecting letters tospoken sounds, said Kari Kurto, the National Science of Reading Project director at The Reading League – a group that advocates for evidence-based reading policy and classroom practice. Kurto complemented by saying that many of the words in these books aren’t written with constrained sound-spelling patterns, so “there’s no other strategy that a kid can use other than guessing,” Kurto said.
With all of this being said, one question pops up: how teachers can repurpose leveled readers?
As some districts have shifted their reading instructional practice, they have moved from leveled to decodable text – books written to give students practice with the letter-sound correspondences that they are learning in phonics lessons. However, decodable books shouldn’t be the only books that students ever see because at some point they will have to move on to more complex literature, said Blevins. In his point of view, teachers shouldn’t worry about matching students with a particular level, but rather see if they can find books that include some phonics patterns children know.
But can leveled texts build background knowledge? Some educators have repurposed leveled texts in a different way, using them to help students develop content knowledge about a subject. Research shows that students’ background knowledge is a key component of their reading comprehension ability.
According to Kurto, having more books available that might tap into kids’ different interests is valuable. Still, she draws the attention to the fact that many leveled books are written with simple themes and basic vocabulary and syntax. She said, “a lot of the leveled texts are just a little fluffy. If all [students are] getting beyond decodable text is leveled text, then it’s likely that they’re not being exposed to high-quality language and language structures.”
Although the debate about this matter is extensive and opinions are diverse, one thing is worth keeping in mind: what students read in class really matters.
Source: https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/doleveled-books-have-any-place-in-the-classroom/2024/10 Accessed on November 13, 2024. [Adapted]
INSTRUCTION: Read the following text to answer question.
Do Leveled Books Have Any Place in the Classroom?
“The little turtle can see the grass. The little turtle can see the trees. The little turtle can see the flowers”. These are the opening lines to one popular reading program’s leveled books: short, predictable texts designed for beginning readers. The patterned sentence structure – centered on the phrase “the little turtle can see" – invites students to rely on repetition and context clues to identify words they can’t sound out.
Leveled books have been a staple in early elementary reading instruction for more than two decades. But as the “science of reading” movement has spread, leveled books have come under fire. Initially, they encourage students to guess at words rather than use their phonics skills, researchers say, which can prevent children from mapping the letter-sound connections that allow them to become fluent readers.
A second problem is how they sort students into levels. Studies have shown that leveling systems are frequently inaccurate. These systems are usually created by the books’ publishers, which purport to match students with books that have a just-right alignment with their reading comprehension abilities.
In classrooms that are switching to a science of reading approach, educators are now wary of leveled books, because of the damage that they did, said Wiley Blevins, an educational consultant. In his opinion, when children are still learning the code of written language, it is required a “tight connection” between the letter-sound correspondences they’re learning and the text they’re reading, so that they have opportunities to practice. But leveled texts can’t do this job. Blevins said that the textdifficulty levels also don’t offer much practical use because they don’t tell educators what skills students still need to master – which doesn’t necessarily mean kids can’t ever pick up these books.
But what are leveled texts anyway? In many of the most popular reading programs of the last decade, leveled readers were some of the main texts that children worked with. Teachers used books for instruction, grouping students by their level and assigning them reading strategies to practice in the text. They have also been used for assessment since teachers listened to students read these books aloud, keeping a running record of their errors.
Publishers claimed that the text-leveling system could match students with books that were just right for their abilities – challenging enough to help them practice new skills, but not so challenging as to be frustrating or inaccessible. This idea is based on outdated theories about how children learn. Studies show that students can read books that are above their level with teacher and peer-provided support. They also indicate that restricting students to text at lower reading levels can actually widen achievement gaps.
However, other research has found that the leveling system isn’t even that accurate. A 2014 study showed that data from leveling assessments correctly predicted students’ reading ability only about 50 percent of the time.
The big problem with these books, though, is that they don’t help students develop their decoding skills, that is, their ability to sound out words by connecting letters tospoken sounds, said Kari Kurto, the National Science of Reading Project director at The Reading League – a group that advocates for evidence-based reading policy and classroom practice. Kurto complemented by saying that many of the words in these books aren’t written with constrained sound-spelling patterns, so “there’s no other strategy that a kid can use other than guessing,” Kurto said.
With all of this being said, one question pops up: how teachers can repurpose leveled readers?
As some districts have shifted their reading instructional practice, they have moved from leveled to decodable text – books written to give students practice with the letter-sound correspondences that they are learning in phonics lessons. However, decodable books shouldn’t be the only books that students ever see because at some point they will have to move on to more complex literature, said Blevins. In his point of view, teachers shouldn’t worry about matching students with a particular level, but rather see if they can find books that include some phonics patterns children know.
But can leveled texts build background knowledge? Some educators have repurposed leveled texts in a different way, using them to help students develop content knowledge about a subject. Research shows that students’ background knowledge is a key component of their reading comprehension ability.
According to Kurto, having more books available that might tap into kids’ different interests is valuable. Still, she draws the attention to the fact that many leveled books are written with simple themes and basic vocabulary and syntax. She said, “a lot of the leveled texts are just a little fluffy. If all [students are] getting beyond decodable text is leveled text, then it’s likely that they’re not being exposed to high-quality language and language structures.”
Although the debate about this matter is extensive and opinions are diverse, one thing is worth keeping in mind: what students read in class really matters.
Source: https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/doleveled-books-have-any-place-in-the-classroom/2024/10 Accessed on November 13, 2024. [Adapted]
Read Text Iand answer question.
Text I
More More More: What Is Money Dysmorphia?
Do you ever worry that you don't have enough money, even though your bank account suggests you're doing fine? You might be experiencing "money dysmorphia.” This is a term for when a person has a distorted view of their financial situation — particularly when a wealthy person believes they don't have enough money to be secure. The idea is similar to body dysmorphia, where a person agonizes about flaws they perceive in their body, even if they are not noticeable to others.
American lawyer and financial expert Ali Katz may have been the first to use the term, having written about money dysmorphia extensively in 2016. But it wasn't until late 2023 that it started trending. Because, as it turns out, the feeling can be pretty common — especially among young people.
In August 2023, Bloomberg published the results of a survey of over 1,000 Americans making over $175,000 a year. And while earning this much would put these people among the 10% richest in the country, a quarter of them said they felt "very poor," "poor,” or that they were just managing to get by.
In addition, a December 2023 survey for Intuit Credit Karma found that, out of 1,006 Americans, 29% experienced money dysmorphia — which the survey defined as "having a distorted view of one's finances that could lead them to make poor decisions.” That figure rose to 41% among millennials, who are usually defined as those born between 1981 and 1996. And it was 43% among Generation Z, typically considered to have been born between 1997 and 2012.
Some believe social media is to blame. With Instagram and TikTok full of influencers flaunting lavish lifestyles, it's understandable that young people might feel insecure about their own financial situations. And as well as causing stress, money dysmorphia might make people stay in jobs they don't like, or choose work over spending time with their families.
Speaking to Business Insider, Katz said it's important to actually calculate how much is enough for you — and "know the difference between what you need and what you want."
Adapted from: https://engoo.com.br/app/dailynews/article/more-more-more-what-is-moneydysmorphia/eMBHgsr7Ee6RxDeDj30Epw