Read the following article and answer question based on the text.

Faced with the unprecedented stream of migrants fleeing war and trauma in the Middle East and North Africa, Europe needs to take clear-sighted action.

        For its part, the UK has agreed to take 20,000 refugees, a significant portion of whom will likely be children and orphans according to report. One key aspect in ensuring their smooth settlement in the UK will be providing these refugees with language training.

       Many Syrians are well-educated and many speak fluent English. Others, however, do not speak English well enough to function professionally within the UK. The issue of language is so fundamental to our lives that we often overlook it. Several multi-million pound training contracts have failed to be delivered on account of not addressing the language barrier. All the goodwill, financial backing, and technical expertise to deliver needed medical, economic, military,engineering, or navigational training may be present; but unless there is a shared language in which to impart that knowledge, little will be accomplished.

        One of the biggest misconceptions about language is that if you “just go to the country,” you’ll pick it up. Many people believe that immersion will guarantee fluency; yet you may well know several immigrants who have been in this country for years and still only speak broken English. You might also know dozens of expats in various countries across the world who have failed to pick up the local languages of their host countries. Training and effort are both necessary.

        Though not a guarantee of fluency, immersion is a wonderful opportunity. The first issue we need to address with respect to refugees is ensuring that those who come will actually be immersed. That is, that they will be welcomed as part of larger communities, and not simply join communities of other refugees. On the other hand, immersion is just an opportunity, and in order to take full advantage of it, training and education are required. In terms of refugees, we need to consider options for the provision of language training, whether by self-study, classroom instruction, private tuition, or some combination of the three.        

       The array of needs is staggering. In truth, every language learner has a different set of learning objectives, and will require different training to meet those objectives. Coordinating the actual needs with providers in different regions and accounting for different personal schedules and start dates is a significant challenge. It is, however, a challenge that must be addressed immediately, as proficiency in English will be a key enabler of success for refugees in this country.

(Adapted from Aaron Ralby http://www.blogs.jbs.cam.ac.uk/ socialinnovation/2015/11/16/)

Read the following article and answer question based on the text.

Faced with the unprecedented stream of migrants fleeing war and trauma in the Middle East and North Africa, Europe needs to take clear-sighted action.

        For its part, the UK has agreed to take 20,000 refugees, a significant portion of whom will likely be children and orphans according to report. One key aspect in ensuring their smooth settlement in the UK will be providing these refugees with language training.

       Many Syrians are well-educated and many speak fluent English. Others, however, do not speak English well enough to function professionally within the UK. The issue of language is so fundamental to our lives that we often overlook it. Several multi-million pound training contracts have failed to be delivered on account of not addressing the language barrier. All the goodwill, financial backing, and technical expertise to deliver needed medical, economic, military,engineering, or navigational training may be present; but unless there is a shared language in which to impart that knowledge, little will be accomplished.

        One of the biggest misconceptions about language is that if you “just go to the country,” you’ll pick it up. Many people believe that immersion will guarantee fluency; yet you may well know several immigrants who have been in this country for years and still only speak broken English. You might also know dozens of expats in various countries across the world who have failed to pick up the local languages of their host countries. Training and effort are both necessary.

        Though not a guarantee of fluency, immersion is a wonderful opportunity. The first issue we need to address with respect to refugees is ensuring that those who come will actually be immersed. That is, that they will be welcomed as part of larger communities, and not simply join communities of other refugees. On the other hand, immersion is just an opportunity, and in order to take full advantage of it, training and education are required. In terms of refugees, we need to consider options for the provision of language training, whether by self-study, classroom instruction, private tuition, or some combination of the three.        

       The array of needs is staggering. In truth, every language learner has a different set of learning objectives, and will require different training to meet those objectives. Coordinating the actual needs with providers in different regions and accounting for different personal schedules and start dates is a significant challenge. It is, however, a challenge that must be addressed immediately, as proficiency in English will be a key enabler of success for refugees in this country.

(Adapted from Aaron Ralby http://www.blogs.jbs.cam.ac.uk/ socialinnovation/2015/11/16/)

Read the following article and answer question based on the text.

Faced with the unprecedented stream of migrants fleeing war and trauma in the Middle East and North Africa, Europe needs to take clear-sighted action.

        For its part, the UK has agreed to take 20,000 refugees, a significant portion of whom will likely be children and orphans according to report. One key aspect in ensuring their smooth settlement in the UK will be providing these refugees with language training.

       Many Syrians are well-educated and many speak fluent English. Others, however, do not speak English well enough to function professionally within the UK. The issue of language is so fundamental to our lives that we often overlook it. Several multi-million pound training contracts have failed to be delivered on account of not addressing the language barrier. All the goodwill, financial backing, and technical expertise to deliver needed medical, economic, military,engineering, or navigational training may be present; but unless there is a shared language in which to impart that knowledge, little will be accomplished.

        One of the biggest misconceptions about language is that if you “just go to the country,” you’ll pick it up. Many people believe that immersion will guarantee fluency; yet you may well know several immigrants who have been in this country for years and still only speak broken English. You might also know dozens of expats in various countries across the world who have failed to pick up the local languages of their host countries. Training and effort are both necessary.

        Though not a guarantee of fluency, immersion is a wonderful opportunity. The first issue we need to address with respect to refugees is ensuring that those who come will actually be immersed. That is, that they will be welcomed as part of larger communities, and not simply join communities of other refugees. On the other hand, immersion is just an opportunity, and in order to take full advantage of it, training and education are required. In terms of refugees, we need to consider options for the provision of language training, whether by self-study, classroom instruction, private tuition, or some combination of the three.        

       The array of needs is staggering. In truth, every language learner has a different set of learning objectives, and will require different training to meet those objectives. Coordinating the actual needs with providers in different regions and accounting for different personal schedules and start dates is a significant challenge. It is, however, a challenge that must be addressed immediately, as proficiency in English will be a key enabler of success for refugees in this country.

(Adapted from Aaron Ralby http://www.blogs.jbs.cam.ac.uk/ socialinnovation/2015/11/16/)

Read the following article and answer question based on the text.

Faced with the unprecedented stream of migrants fleeing war and trauma in the Middle East and North Africa, Europe needs to take clear-sighted action.

        For its part, the UK has agreed to take 20,000 refugees, a significant portion of whom will likely be children and orphans according to report. One key aspect in ensuring their smooth settlement in the UK will be providing these refugees with language training.

       Many Syrians are well-educated and many speak fluent English. Others, however, do not speak English well enough to function professionally within the UK. The issue of language is so fundamental to our lives that we often overlook it. Several multi-million pound training contracts have failed to be delivered on account of not addressing the language barrier. All the goodwill, financial backing, and technical expertise to deliver needed medical, economic, military,engineering, or navigational training may be present; but unless there is a shared language in which to impart that knowledge, little will be accomplished.

        One of the biggest misconceptions about language is that if you “just go to the country,” you’ll pick it up. Many people believe that immersion will guarantee fluency; yet you may well know several immigrants who have been in this country for years and still only speak broken English. You might also know dozens of expats in various countries across the world who have failed to pick up the local languages of their host countries. Training and effort are both necessary.

        Though not a guarantee of fluency, immersion is a wonderful opportunity. The first issue we need to address with respect to refugees is ensuring that those who come will actually be immersed. That is, that they will be welcomed as part of larger communities, and not simply join communities of other refugees. On the other hand, immersion is just an opportunity, and in order to take full advantage of it, training and education are required. In terms of refugees, we need to consider options for the provision of language training, whether by self-study, classroom instruction, private tuition, or some combination of the three.        

       The array of needs is staggering. In truth, every language learner has a different set of learning objectives, and will require different training to meet those objectives. Coordinating the actual needs with providers in different regions and accounting for different personal schedules and start dates is a significant challenge. It is, however, a challenge that must be addressed immediately, as proficiency in English will be a key enabler of success for refugees in this country.

(Adapted from Aaron Ralby http://www.blogs.jbs.cam.ac.uk/ socialinnovation/2015/11/16/)

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}

O texto a seguir apresenta lacunas numeradas de 41 a 51, das quais foi omitida uma ou mais palavras. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a palavra ou expressão que completa corretamente cada uma das lacunas numeradas, tanto quanto à correção gramatical como quanto ao sentido e estruturação do texto.

Why talk about language teaching methods at all? In recent years, a number of writers have criticized the very concept of (41) in our field. “Let’s just focus on learners and teachers and everything else will fall into place,” they seem to suggest. Some say that teachers see methods as prescriptions for classroom behavior and follow them too (42) , too inflexibly. By contrast, others argue that in planning their lessons, (43) don’t really think about codified methods at all. In the one view, methods and the prefabricated materials that embody them (44) teachers to mere technicians; in the other, teachers are mere improvisers in the here-and-now, with no use for general statements about how (45) acts may fit together. Either view should make any writer about methods and materials stop and think.

Having stopped and (46) , I find myself giving a single reply to both of the above objections: Language teachers are simply not “mere.” They are neither mere technicians (47) mere improvisers. They are professionals who make their own decisions, informed by their own (48) but informed also by the findings of researchers and by the accumulated, distilled, crystallized experience of their peers.

Let me then suggest three questions that we might well ask about “method,” together with my proposed answers:

What is a “method”? A method is more concrete than (49) . An approach is a set of understandings about what is at stake in learning and also about the equipment, mechanical or neurological, that is at work in learning. At the same time, a method is more abstract than a teaching act, which is a one-time event that can be recorded on videotape and on the neurocortexes of learners.

Is it possible to evaluate or to profit from an approach without embodying it in some kind of (50) ? Possible, perhaps, to some limited degree, but not easy.

Is it possible to improvise teaching acts apart from some more or less conscious approach? Possible, perhaps, but rare.

“Method,” then, seems to occupy a strategic mid-position between approach and (51) . For this reason, whoever would either think usefully about teaching or would teach thoughtfully can profit from learning about methods.

_{(E. W. Stevick, Working with Teaching Methods)}