Questões de Concurso Sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 25.289 questões
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753599
Inglês
Autonomous learning refers to students' ability to take
charge of their own learning process, setting goals,
selecting strategies, and self-evaluating progress. Digital
technologies offer unprecedented opportunities for
autonomous English learning through apps, online
platforms, podcasts, and authentic materials. However,
effective autonomy requires explicit instruction in learning
strategies, digital literacy skills, and critical evaluation of
online resources. Teachers play a crucial role in
scaffolding learner autonomy rather than simply
assigning independent work. Responsible technology use
involves understanding privacy concerns, identifying
credible sources, managing screen time, and recognizing
AI limitations. How can English teachers effectively
promote genuine learner autonomy while ensuring
responsible technology use?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753598
Inglês
Dialogue:
Anna: Hey, Tom! You look tired. What happened?
Tom: I stayed up all night finishing my project.
Anna: Oh no! You should take a short nap to catch up on your sleep.
Tom: I know, but I have another meeting in an hour. Maybe I'll just grab a coffee instead.
Anna: Don't burn yourself out! You need some rest.
In the dialogue above, the expression "catch up on" means to:
Anna: Hey, Tom! You look tired. What happened?
Tom: I stayed up all night finishing my project.
Anna: Oh no! You should take a short nap to catch up on your sleep.
Tom: I know, but I have another meeting in an hour. Maybe I'll just grab a coffee instead.
Anna: Don't burn yourself out! You need some rest.
In the dialogue above, the expression "catch up on" means to:
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753597
Inglês
In English pronunciation practice, teachers often use a
technique that involves students repeating words,
sounds, or sentences several times after the teacher.
This repetition helps learners internalize the rhythm,
intonation, and pronunciation patterns of the language,
building accuracy and fluency through controlled
imitation. Which teaching technique does this description
refer to?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753596
Inglês
J.R.R. Tolkien (1892-1973) was not only a renowned
author but also a distinguished philologist and professor
of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford University. His deep knowledge
of Old English, Middle English, Old Norse, Finnish, and
Welsh profoundly influenced his creative work. Unlike
most fantasy authors who create fictional worlds first and
add languages as decoration, Tolkien's approach was
inverted: he created complex, fully-functional languages
with consistent grammar, phonology, and etymology,
then built narratives and worlds where these languages
could exist naturally. His most developed constructed
languages (conlangs) include Quenya (inspired by
Finnish) and Sindarin (inspired by Welsh), both Elvish
languages with distinct characteristics. Tolkien invented
these languages before writing "The Hobbit" or "The Lord
of the Rings," and his fiction essentially served as a
mythology to house his linguistic creations. Which
statement accurately reflects Tolkien's unique
contribution to fantasy literature and the relationship
between his philological expertise and creative writing?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753595
Inglês
English language teachers must explicitly teach reading
strategies to help students process texts efficiently.
Different reading purposes require different approaches.
When students need to find specific information quickly,
such as a date, name, price, or particular fact, without
reading the entire text, they should employ a particular
technique. This strategy involves moving eyes rapidly
over the text to locate specific keywords or information,
similar to searching for a contact in a phone list. It differs
from other strategies like skimming (getting general idea),
intensive reading (detailed comprehension), or extensive reading (reading for pleasure). What is this reading
strategy called when students search for specific
information without reading every word?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753594
Inglês
Charles Dickens (1812-1870) is recognized not only for
his memorable characters and engaging narratives but
also for his incisive social criticism of Victorian England.
His novels exposed injustices including child labor,
workhouse conditions, legal system corruption,
educational inadequacies, and class inequalities. Dickens
drew from personal experience: his father's imprisonment
for debt forced twelve-year-old Charles to work in a
blacking factory, a traumatic experience that profoundly
influenced his writing. Novels like "Oliver Twist"
(1837-1839) criticized the Poor Law Amendment Act of
1834, while "Hard Times" (1854) attacked utilitarian
philosophy and industrial capitalism's dehumanizing
effects. "Bleak House" (1852-1853) satirized the Court of
Chancery's endless legal proceedings. Dickens
combined social critique with entertainment, making
serious issues accessible to wide audiences through
serialization in periodicals. How did Dickens' personal
experiences and literary techniques shape his approach
to
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753593
Inglês
American English diverged from British English following
colonial settlement in the 17th century, developing
distinctive features through various influences. Noah
Webster's "American Dictionary of the English Language"
(1828) standardized American spelling (color vs colour,
theater vs theatre). Regional dialects emerged from
different settlement patterns: Southern American English,
New England dialects, Midwestern English, and African
American Vernacular English (AAVE). Immigration waves
introduced vocabulary from Spanish, German, Italian,
and other languages. The Great Vowel Shift had largely
concluded before American colonization, meaning some
features preserved older English pronunciations. What
factors primarily contributed to American English
developing as a distinct variety from British English?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753592
Inglês
Read the passage below:
_____ is a game-based learning platform that makes English lessons more dynamic and engaging. Teachers can create interactive quizzes, surveys, and challenges that motivate students to participate actively. By answering questions in real time, learners improve vocabulary, grammar, and reading comprehension while having fun. The competitive element encourages focus and quick thinking. This tool also allows teachers to assess understanding instantly. It can be used to review content, introduce new topics, or prepare for exams. The colorful interface and background music help create a relaxed and enjoyable atmosphere. In group activities, students collaborate and communicate in English. Overall, this approach transforms traditional lessons into exciting and meaningful learning experiences.
Fill in the blank above and mark the correct alternative.
_____ is a game-based learning platform that makes English lessons more dynamic and engaging. Teachers can create interactive quizzes, surveys, and challenges that motivate students to participate actively. By answering questions in real time, learners improve vocabulary, grammar, and reading comprehension while having fun. The competitive element encourages focus and quick thinking. This tool also allows teachers to assess understanding instantly. It can be used to review content, introduce new topics, or prepare for exams. The colorful interface and background music help create a relaxed and enjoyable atmosphere. In group activities, students collaborate and communicate in English. Overall, this approach transforms traditional lessons into exciting and meaningful learning experiences.
Fill in the blank above and mark the correct alternative.
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753591
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The article presents an argumentative structure where
the author analyzes Reeves' budget strategy, provides
evidence, and evaluates potential consequences. The
text employs cohesive devices such as "At the same
time," "As ever," "Finally," and contrastive structures like
"But" to connect ideas logically. In teaching
argumentative writing in English, particularly for students
preparing to write opinion essays or analytical texts about
current events, it is essential to focus on thesis
statements, supporting evidence, counterarguments, and
appropriate linking words. Consider a teacher who wants
students to write a 250-word argumentative essay
responding to the question: "Should governments
prioritize reducing debt over increasing welfare
spending?" Which instructional sequence would prepare
students for this task?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753590
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The article employs collocations and fixed expressions
characteristic of British political journalism. The text
includes: "balancing the books," "iron-clad fiscal rules,"
"heaping pressure," "bite the bullet," "the stakes could not
be higher," and "pulling ahead." These phrases carry
meanings beyond literal interpretations. Understanding
these conventional word combinations is essential for
comprehension and production. Which of the following demonstrates accurate understanding of the collocations
and idiomatic expressions used in the text?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753589
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
In authentic spoken English, native speakers use
features of connected speech including linking
(connecting final consonant sounds to initial vowel
sounds), elision (dropping sounds), assimilation (sounds
changing when they meet), and weak forms. In the
sentence "Reeves gave particular importance to sticking
with her iron-clad fiscal rules," native speakers would
likely link sounds between words, use weak forms for
function words, and potentially reduce certain sounds.
Understanding these features is crucial for both listening
comprehension and pronunciation teaching. A teacher
preparing students for oral communication should
address these phenomena. Which approach effectively
develops students' ability to understand and produce
natural connected speech?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753588
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The article discusses Chancellor Rachel Reeves'
approach to the upcoming UK budget, highlighting
various economic and political challenges. According to
the text, Reeves held an "extraordinary press
conference" before the budget announcement, which was
described as "highly unusual." The purpose of this
pre-budget communication was to prepare the public for
difficult decisions ahead. In the press conference,
Reeves notably avoided mentioning certain Labour
manifesto pledges while emphasizing other priorities.
Based on a comprehensive reading of the article, which
statement accurately reflects the strategic communication
choices made by Chancellor Reeves during the press
conference?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753587
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The text employs sophisticated vocabulary specific to
economics, government finance, and political analysis.
Terms like "fiscal," "manifesto," "productivity," "borrowing
costs," "welfare," "backbenchers," "grassroot supporters,"
and "OBR" (Office for Budget Responsibility) carry
specific meanings in British political-economic discourse.
Understanding these terms requires knowledge of their
precise meanings within specialized contexts. Which
analysis accurately defines these terms as used in this
political-economic context?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753586
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The text describes multiple interconnected factors
affecting Reeves' budget decisions: government debt,
borrowing costs, productivity forecasts, welfare spending,
tax policy, fiscal rules, upcoming elections, intra-party
tensions, and cost of living concerns. Understanding how
these elements relate causally is essential for deep
comprehension. Which statement accurately represents
the complex causal chains and constraints described in
the article?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753585
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The article uses several idiomatic expressions and
collocations that are characteristic of British political and
economic discourse. For example: "balancing the books"
(managing finances to ensure income matches
expenditure), "iron-clad fiscal rules" (extremely firm financial regulations), "bite the bullet" (make a difficult
decision), and "the stakes could not be higher" (the
consequences are extremely serious). Understanding
these expressions is crucial for authentic comprehension
of English texts. A teacher planning a lesson on idiomatic
expressions from authentic political texts should consider
both their literal and figurative meanings, as well as
register and context. Which pedagogical approach would
effectively help intermediate-level students understand
and use such expressions appropriately?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753584
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The article discusses Chancellor Rachel Reeves' budget
strategy and its political implications. Consider this
passage: "Reeves' appeal to the public to back her
long-term approach to sorting out the British economy
may be admirable. But the political risks to her personally
− and Labour more broadly − remain considerable." The
author's tone reveals an implicit assessment.
Additionally, the text states: "The stakes could not be
higher. A bad result could even lead to questions about
the future of both the chancellor and the prime minister
Keir Starmer." Based on comprehensive analysis of
explicit and implicit meanings, what can be accurately
inferred about the author's perspective?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753583
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach
emphasizes meaningful communication and functional
language use over mechanical grammar drills.
Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), an extension of
CLT, organizes instruction around tasks that reflect
real-world language use. Using the article about UK
budget policy, a teacher could design a task-based
lesson where students engage with authentic content.
The task cycle typically includes: pre-task (introducing
topic and useful language), task (students complete the
task in pairs/groups), planning (preparing to report to
class), report (presenting findings), analysis (examining
language features), and practice (focused work on
language forms that emerged). Which lesson design exemplifies task-based principles while using this article?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753582
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
Examine this sentence from the article: "Even if effective,
these changes will take some time to work through and
may not be enough to convince voters that Labour is on
their side − particularly if inflation is not brought under
control." This sentence contains two conditional
structures. The phrase "Even if effective" represents a
concessive conditional (acknowledging a possibility while
suggesting it may not change the outcome), while "if
inflation is not brought under control" is a first conditional
(real possibility in the future). Understanding conditional
structures is essential for both comprehension and
production in English. Which of the following statements
correctly analyzes the conditional structures and their
functions in academic and journalistic English?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3753581
Inglês
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Tax rises and benefit cuts are on the horizon as
Reeves prepares the UK for a bad-news budget
The UK chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it clear
that taxes will go up, and more cuts to welfare spending
are on the horizon. The moves will be deeply unpopular
and controversial − but in an extraordinary press
conference ahead of the UK budget on November 26,
Reeves made it clear that she believes both will be
necessary.
In a highly unusual move, the chancellor used the press
conference to set out her priorities for balancing the
books while growing the economy. Notably, she did not
mention the pledge in Labour's manifesto not to raise
taxes on working people or increase national insurance,
VAT or income tax.
Instead, she said her focus was on lowering the burden
of excessive government borrowing and debt, improving
public services and tackling the cost of living.
Reeves gave particular importance to sticking with her
"iron-clad" fiscal rules. These, she argued, were essential
for showing she is being responsible with the nation's
finances and preventing a further rise in the cost of
borrowing (the interest the government pays on its debt).
At more than £100 billion per year, this already makes up
10% of all government spending. The government's
spending watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility
(OBR), projects the total to rise to £111 billion by the next
financial year.
She also emphasised the importance of measures to
boost UK productivity. Productivity forecasts are
expected to be downgraded by the OBR, heaping yet
more pressure on the chancellor's budget choices.
Reeves questioned whether the forecast would
accurately predict the future − but has accepted that she
will have to work within the OBR's constraints in this
year's budget.
The chancellor is right that there is a pressing need to
boost productivity. But it is by no means certain that
planned investment in things like housing, nuclear power
and a third runway at Heathrow will yield big gains, at
least in the near term.
At the same time, she made it clear that to meet her
budget target there will need to be cuts to public
spending. Some cuts will come from more "efficiency"
savings by government departments (that perennial
option that all chancellors reach for).
But they will also come from tackling the UK's rapidly
rising welfare budget, focusing on the large number of
young people who are not in education, employment or
training but depend on state benefits (so-called "Neets").
Any cuts to the welfare budget, as well as a failure to abolish the two-child benefit limit (although she is under
pressure from colleagues to bite the bullet and axe it), will
cause dismay within the parliamentary Labour party as
well as many party activists.
As ever, the budget choices will be political as well as
economic. Both the Conservatives and Reform UK will
accuse Labour of breaking its manifesto promises. They
will also claim Labour is undermining any chance of
growth by raising taxes by a larger amount than any UK
government has done in the last 50 years.
At the same time, it will become even more difficult for
Labour to manage its large but fractious parliamentary
majority. Earlier this year, backbenchers forced the
government to restore the winter fuel payment for some
pensioners and abandon plans to cut personal
independence payments for disabled claimants.
Local government elections, as well as elections to the
Scottish and Welsh parliaments, are looming next May.
Reeves risks further alienating Labour's grassroot
supporters and pushing them towards smaller left-wing
parties such as the Greens. They already seem to be
pulling ahead of Labour among younger voters.
The stakes could not be higher. A bad result could even
lead to questions about the future of both the chancellor
and the prime minister Keir Starmer.
Finally, the chancellor's goal to cut the cost of living for
working people does not seem particularly ambitious. Her
suggested approach involves cutting energy costs by
investing more in electricity generation, and reducing the
cost of food by changing the business rates system to
help small businesses.
Even if effective, these changes will take some time to
work through and may not be enough to convince voters
that Labour is on their side − particularly if inflation is not
brought under control.
Reeves' appeal to the public to back her long-term
approach to sorting out the British economy may be
admirable. But the political risks to her personally − and
Labour more broadly − remain considerable.
https://theconversation.com/tax-rises-and-benefit-cuts-are-on-the-horizo
n-as-reeves-prepares-the-uk-for-a-bad-news-budget-269008
The text contains several instances of passive voice
constructions. Examine this sentence: "Productivity
forecasts are expected to be downgraded by the OBR,
heaping yet more pressure on the chancellor's budget
choices." This sentence uses passive voice with an
infinitive construction. Understanding the transformation
between active and passive voice, particularly with
complex verb structures, is crucial for advanced writing.
Which of the following correctly identifies the grammatical
structure and appropriate active voice transformation?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
Unesc
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Três Barras - SC
Prova:
Unesc - 2025 - Prefeitura de Três Barras - SC - Professor de Inglês |
Q3751465
Inglês
Methodologies and teaching approaches for teaching
English in the early and later years of Elementary School
When planning English language instruction in
Elementary School, the teacher must adapt the approach
to the age group. Which methodological practice is most
appropriate for the early years (1st to 5th grade)?
Conheça nossos planos