Questões de Concurso
Comentadas sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês
Foram encontradas 9.238 questões
Leia os dois excertos a seguir para responder à questão:
A BNCC prioriza o foco da função social e política da língua inglesa e, nesse sentido, passa a tratá-la em seu status de língua franca. Nessa perspectiva, são acolhidos e legitimados os usos que dela fazem falantes espalhados no mundo inteiro, com diferentes repertórios linguísticos e culturais, o que possibilita, por exemplo, questionar a visão de que o único inglês “correto” – e a ser ensinado – é aquele falado por estadunidenses ou britânicos. Mais ainda, o tratamento do inglês como língua franca o desvincula da noção de pertencimento a um determinado território e, consequentemente, a culturas típicas de comunidades específicas, legitimando os usos da língua inglesa em seus contextos locais. Esse entendimento favorece uma educação linguística voltada para a interculturalidade.
(BRASIL. Base Nacional Comum Curricular. 2019. Adaptado)
Em uma entrevista, o linguista Kanavilil Rajagopalan afirma que “A língua inglesa, já há um bom tempo, deixou de ser propriedade desse ou daquele país. Em sua condição de língua internacional, a língua falada hoje por quase um terço dos seres humanos do planeta, não faz o menor sentido falarmos em falantes nativos. Essa língua, esse “fenômeno linguístico”, na verdade pertence a todos que dela fazem algum uso no seu dia a dia, por mais restrito que ele seja (como ouvir música ou ler manuais de instrução). Como professores de inglês, é nosso dever preparar nossos alunos para serem cidadãos do mundo novo que se descortina diante de nossos olhos. Para atuar nesse admirável mundo novo, os nossos alunos têm de aprender a lidar com todas as formas de inglês.”
(RAJAGOPALAN, K. O inglês como língua internacional na prática docente. In: LIMA, D.C. (Org.). Ensino e aprendizagem. São Paulo: Parábola Editorial, 2009. pp. 39; 41; 45. Adaptado)
Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
In the Star Trek universe, the audience occasionally gets a glimpse inside schools on the planet Vulcan. Young children stand alone in “capsules” surrounded by 360-degree digital screens. Adults walk around but do not talk to the students. Instead, each child interacts only with a sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI). Although this is not the reality in today’s classrooms on Earth, there are people for whom a vision of personalized learning conducted by artificial intelligence has considerable appeal.
Individualized learning has its place. But decades of educational research also demonstrate that learning is essentially a social endeavor. Classrooms that privilege personalized AI chatbots overlook that fact.
Generative AI is quickly coming to classrooms. If decades ago educators worldwide promoted the benefits of “One Laptop per Child”, today we may be approaching the model “one chatbot per child.” What does educational research tell us about what this model could mean for children’s learning and well-being?
During much of the 20th century, learning was understood as mainly as a matter of individual cognition. A misconception, if compared to today’s comprehension of what learning involves. Scientists now understand that apparently individual processes – such as building new knowledge – are actually social interactions with the world around us. In classrooms, this suggests that opportunities for daily personal interaction can strongly support brain health and academic learning.
Therefore, it is important to understand generative AI’s real-life impact on students.
For example: How does it feel to learn from a chatbot, day after day? How will long-term use of AI affect children’s mental health? How does AI use affect children’s relationships with each other and with their teachers? What kinds of relationships might children form with the chatbots themselves? More broadly, we could also ask: What do we, as a society, actually want children to learn?
Good teaching and learning blends social and individual processes. I see the beneficial application of any new technology in the classroom – AI or otherwise – as a way to build upon the social fabric of human learning. My concern about personalized AI tutors is how they might displace already infrequent opportunities for social interaction, further isolating children in classrooms.
(Niral Shah. www.converstion.com, 15.12.2025. Adaptado)
A post-reading discussion aimed at encouraging participants to critically react to the author’s views on the topic could include their reflecting on
Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
In the Star Trek universe, the audience occasionally gets a glimpse inside schools on the planet Vulcan. Young children stand alone in “capsules” surrounded by 360-degree digital screens. Adults walk around but do not talk to the students. Instead, each child interacts only with a sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI). Although this is not the reality in today’s classrooms on Earth, there are people for whom a vision of personalized learning conducted by artificial intelligence has considerable appeal.
Individualized learning has its place. But decades of educational research also demonstrate that learning is essentially a social endeavor. Classrooms that privilege personalized AI chatbots overlook that fact.
Generative AI is quickly coming to classrooms. If decades ago educators worldwide promoted the benefits of “One Laptop per Child”, today we may be approaching the model “one chatbot per child.” What does educational research tell us about what this model could mean for children’s learning and well-being?
During much of the 20th century, learning was understood as mainly as a matter of individual cognition. A misconception, if compared to today’s comprehension of what learning involves. Scientists now understand that apparently individual processes – such as building new knowledge – are actually social interactions with the world around us. In classrooms, this suggests that opportunities for daily personal interaction can strongly support brain health and academic learning.
Therefore, it is important to understand generative AI’s real-life impact on students.
For example: How does it feel to learn from a chatbot, day after day? How will long-term use of AI affect children’s mental health? How does AI use affect children’s relationships with each other and with their teachers? What kinds of relationships might children form with the chatbots themselves? More broadly, we could also ask: What do we, as a society, actually want children to learn?
Good teaching and learning blends social and individual processes. I see the beneficial application of any new technology in the classroom – AI or otherwise – as a way to build upon the social fabric of human learning. My concern about personalized AI tutors is how they might displace already infrequent opportunities for social interaction, further isolating children in classrooms.
(Niral Shah. www.converstion.com, 15.12.2025. Adaptado)
Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
In the Star Trek universe, the audience occasionally gets a glimpse inside schools on the planet Vulcan. Young children stand alone in “capsules” surrounded by 360-degree digital screens. Adults walk around but do not talk to the students. Instead, each child interacts only with a sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI). Although this is not the reality in today’s classrooms on Earth, there are people for whom a vision of personalized learning conducted by artificial intelligence has considerable appeal.
Individualized learning has its place. But decades of educational research also demonstrate that learning is essentially a social endeavor. Classrooms that privilege personalized AI chatbots overlook that fact.
Generative AI is quickly coming to classrooms. If decades ago educators worldwide promoted the benefits of “One Laptop per Child”, today we may be approaching the model “one chatbot per child.” What does educational research tell us about what this model could mean for children’s learning and well-being?
During much of the 20th century, learning was understood as mainly as a matter of individual cognition. A misconception, if compared to today’s comprehension of what learning involves. Scientists now understand that apparently individual processes – such as building new knowledge – are actually social interactions with the world around us. In classrooms, this suggests that opportunities for daily personal interaction can strongly support brain health and academic learning.
Therefore, it is important to understand generative AI’s real-life impact on students.
For example: How does it feel to learn from a chatbot, day after day? How will long-term use of AI affect children’s mental health? How does AI use affect children’s relationships with each other and with their teachers? What kinds of relationships might children form with the chatbots themselves? More broadly, we could also ask: What do we, as a society, actually want children to learn?
Good teaching and learning blends social and individual processes. I see the beneficial application of any new technology in the classroom – AI or otherwise – as a way to build upon the social fabric of human learning. My concern about personalized AI tutors is how they might displace already infrequent opportunities for social interaction, further isolating children in classrooms.
(Niral Shah. www.converstion.com, 15.12.2025. Adaptado)
Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
In the Star Trek universe, the audience occasionally gets a glimpse inside schools on the planet Vulcan. Young children stand alone in “capsules” surrounded by 360-degree digital screens. Adults walk around but do not talk to the students. Instead, each child interacts only with a sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI). Although this is not the reality in today’s classrooms on Earth, there are people for whom a vision of personalized learning conducted by artificial intelligence has considerable appeal.
Individualized learning has its place. But decades of educational research also demonstrate that learning is essentially a social endeavor. Classrooms that privilege personalized AI chatbots overlook that fact.
Generative AI is quickly coming to classrooms. If decades ago educators worldwide promoted the benefits of “One Laptop per Child”, today we may be approaching the model “one chatbot per child.” What does educational research tell us about what this model could mean for children’s learning and well-being?
During much of the 20th century, learning was understood as mainly as a matter of individual cognition. A misconception, if compared to today’s comprehension of what learning involves. Scientists now understand that apparently individual processes – such as building new knowledge – are actually social interactions with the world around us. In classrooms, this suggests that opportunities for daily personal interaction can strongly support brain health and academic learning.
Therefore, it is important to understand generative AI’s real-life impact on students.
For example: How does it feel to learn from a chatbot, day after day? How will long-term use of AI affect children’s mental health? How does AI use affect children’s relationships with each other and with their teachers? What kinds of relationships might children form with the chatbots themselves? More broadly, we could also ask: What do we, as a society, actually want children to learn?
Good teaching and learning blends social and individual processes. I see the beneficial application of any new technology in the classroom – AI or otherwise – as a way to build upon the social fabric of human learning. My concern about personalized AI tutors is how they might displace already infrequent opportunities for social interaction, further isolating children in classrooms.
(Niral Shah. www.converstion.com, 15.12.2025. Adaptado)
Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
In the Star Trek universe, the audience occasionally gets a glimpse inside schools on the planet Vulcan. Young children stand alone in “capsules” surrounded by 360-degree digital screens. Adults walk around but do not talk to the students. Instead, each child interacts only with a sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI). Although this is not the reality in today’s classrooms on Earth, there are people for whom a vision of personalized learning conducted by artificial intelligence has considerable appeal.
Individualized learning has its place. But decades of educational research also demonstrate that learning is essentially a social endeavor. Classrooms that privilege personalized AI chatbots overlook that fact.
Generative AI is quickly coming to classrooms. If decades ago educators worldwide promoted the benefits of “One Laptop per Child”, today we may be approaching the model “one chatbot per child.” What does educational research tell us about what this model could mean for children’s learning and well-being?
During much of the 20th century, learning was understood as mainly as a matter of individual cognition. A misconception, if compared to today’s comprehension of what learning involves. Scientists now understand that apparently individual processes – such as building new knowledge – are actually social interactions with the world around us. In classrooms, this suggests that opportunities for daily personal interaction can strongly support brain health and academic learning.
Therefore, it is important to understand generative AI’s real-life impact on students.
For example: How does it feel to learn from a chatbot, day after day? How will long-term use of AI affect children’s mental health? How does AI use affect children’s relationships with each other and with their teachers? What kinds of relationships might children form with the chatbots themselves? More broadly, we could also ask: What do we, as a society, actually want children to learn?
Good teaching and learning blends social and individual processes. I see the beneficial application of any new technology in the classroom – AI or otherwise – as a way to build upon the social fabric of human learning. My concern about personalized AI tutors is how they might displace already infrequent opportunities for social interaction, further isolating children in classrooms.
(Niral Shah. www.converstion.com, 15.12.2025. Adaptado)
"The status of English as a lingua franca (ELF) means that the language can no longer be regarded as the exclusive property of its native speakers. Instead, it belongs to everyone who uses it. In Brazil, the National Common Curricular Base (BNCC) embraces this perspective to promote linguistic democracy and intercultural dialogue." (Adaptado de: British Council Brazil, Online Articles).
Considerando as reflexões do fragmento textual e os pressupostos teórico-metodológicos que orientam o componente curricular de Língua Inglesa na Base Nacional Comum Curricular (BNCC), assinale a alternativa que apresenta de forma correta uma implicação pedagógica decorrente da concepção do inglês como língua franca na Educação Básica.
I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body. For this I had deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart.
SHELLEY, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Signet Classics, 1965. p. 56.
A mudança de percepção do narrador em relação ao próprio experimento contribui para a construção de uma tensão associada
"A handful of Young's Musical Games can be found in libraries, museums, and private collections today. They're luxury items: the boards were made of mahogany..."
In this passage, the pronoun "they" refers to:
I. Anne Young received a royal patent in 1801.
II. She published her companion treatise two years later.
III. The patent had been granted before the treatise appeared.
IV. Her treatise has remained the first British patent ever granted for a game.
Mark the alternative that presents the propositions that are CORRECT.