Foram encontradas 769 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
TEXT V
Strategic behavior in digital reading in English
as a second/foreign language: a literature review
(Juliana do Amaral, Marília Camponogara Torres, Lêda Maria Braga Tomitch).
Characteristics of a good test
In order to judge the effectiveness of any test, it is sensible to lay down criteria against which the test can be measured, as follows:
Validity: a test is valid if it tests what it is supposed to test. Thus it is not valid, for example, to test writing ability with an essay question that demands specialist knowledge of history or biology — unless it is known that all students share this knowledge before they do the test.
A particular kind of ‘validity’ that concerns most test designers is face validity. This means that the test should look, on the ‘face’ of it, as if it is valid. A test which consisted of only three multiple choice items would not convince students of its face validity however reliable or practical teachers thought it to be.
Reliability: a good test should give consistent results. For example, if the same group of students took the same test twice within two days — without reflecting on the first test before they sat it again — they should get the same results on each occasion. If two groups who were demonstrably alike took the test, the marking range would be the same.
In practice, ‘reliability’ is enhanced by making the test instructions absolutely clear, restricting the scope for variety in the answers. Reliability also depends on the people who mark the tests. Clearly a test is unreliable if the result depends to any large extent on who is marking it. Much thought has gone into making the scoring of tests as reliable as possible.
(Jeremy Harmer. The practice of English language teaching. 2007. Adaptado)
Leia o texto e responda à questão.
In a research project at the University of Illinois, US, Savignon (1972) adopted the term ‘communicative competence’ to characterize the ability of classroom language learners to interact with other speakers, to make meaning, as distinct from their ability to recite dialogs or perform on discrete-point tests of grammatical knowledge.
At a time when pattern practice and error avoidance were the rule in language teaching, this study of classroom acquisition of language looked at the effect of practice on the use of coping strategies as part of an instructional program. By encouraging students to ask for information, to seek out clarification, or to use whatever linguistic or nonlinguistic resources they could gather to negotiate meaning and stick to the communicative task at hand, teachers were invariably leading learners to take risks and speak in other than memorized patterns.
Test results at the end of the instructional period showed conclusively that learners who practiced communication in place of laboratory pattern drills performed with no less accuracy on discrete-points tests of grammatical structure. On the other hand, their communicative competence as measured in terms of fluency, comprehensibility, effort and amount of communication in unrehearsed oral communication tasks significantly surpassed that of learners who had had no such practice. Learners’ reactions to the test formats added further support to the view that even beginners respond well to activities that let them focus on meaning rather than formal features.
(Sandra J. Savignon. Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century. In: Marianne Celce-Murcia. Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Adaptado)
Para responder à questão, leia o texto a seguir, que exemplifica estratégias de leitura, e assinale a alternativa que melhor completa cada uma das lacunas numeradas, considerando o sentido do texto e a norma-padrão da língua inglesa.
John is a conscientious student. When he is told he will 41 tested on the contents of Chapter 2 in the textbook, he looks 42 every unknown word in the dictionary in an effort to fix the information in his memory. Despite his extended preparations, he doesn’t do very well 43 the test, though he says he spent hours preparing. Lia, on the other 44 , excels on the exam, but she has approached the text in a very different way. Before she reads the chapter, she skims through it, looking at subheadings and graphics so as to give herself a general idea of what the text will be about. 45 she reads, she connects the material in the chapter to what she already knows. She frequently asks herself 46 about the text, looking back or ahead to link one part of the text to another. When she is puzzled by the content, she searches for clues in the 47 , tries to paraphrase, or considers what she knows about text 48 . In short, Lia is reading like an expert, 49 John is relying on just one technique. The difference between the two is in 50 use of reading strategies.
[Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice,
by Jack C. Richards and Willy A. Renandya (Eds.)]
Ask teachers what method they subscribe to, and most will answer either that they don’t follow a method at all, or that they are ‘eclectic’, and pick and choose from techniques and procedures associated with a variety of different methods. Some might add that, essentially, their teaching follows the principles laid down by the communicative approach, itself a mixed bag, embracing anything from drills to communicative tasks, and everything in between. But the concept of a single, prescriptive ‘method’ – as in the Direct Method or the Oral Method – seems now to be dead and buried.
The demise of method is consistent with the widely held view that we are now in a ‘post-method’ era. Thus, as long ago as 1983, Stern declared that ‘several developments indicate a shift in language pedagogy away from the single method concept as the main approach to language teaching’ (1983). One such development was the failure, on the part of researchers, to find any significant advantage in one method over another. As Richards (1990) noted, ‘studies of the effectiveness of specific methods have had a hard time demonstrating that the method itself, rather than other factors, such as the teacher’s enthusiasm, or the novelty of the new method, was the crucial variable’. …
Kumaravadivelu (1994) identified what he called the ‘postmethod condition’, a result of ‘the widespread dissatisfaction with the conventional concept of method’. Rather than subscribe to a single set of procedures, postmethod teachers adapt their approach in accordance with local, contextual factors, while at the same time being guided by a number of ‘macrostrategies’. Two such macrostrategies are ‘Maximise learning opportunities’ and ‘Promote learner autonomy’. …
Nevertheless, and in spite of the claims of the postmethodists, the notion of method does not seem to have gone away completely. In fact, it seems to be doggedly persistent, even if the term itself is often replaced by its synonyms. … This is a view echoed by Bell (2007) who interviewed a number of teachers on the subject, and concluded that ‘methods, however the term is defined, are not dead. Teachers seem to be aware of both the usefulness of methods and the need to go beyond them.’
On the other hand, in a recent paper, Akbari (2008) suggests that it is textbooks that have largely replaced methods in their traditional sense: ‘The concept of method has not been replaced by the concept of postmethod but rather by an era of textbook-defined practice. What the majority of teachers teach and how they teach ... are now determined by textbooks’.
(by Scott Thornbury – http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/ methods-post-method-metodos. Adaptado)
Ask teachers what method they subscribe to, and most will answer either that they don’t follow a method at all, or that they are ‘eclectic’, and pick and choose from techniques and procedures associated with a variety of different methods. Some might add that, essentially, their teaching follows the principles laid down by the communicative approach, itself a mixed bag, embracing anything from drills to communicative tasks, and everything in between. But the concept of a single, prescriptive ‘method’ – as in the Direct Method or the Oral Method – seems now to be dead and buried.
The demise of method is consistent with the widely held view that we are now in a ‘post-method’ era. Thus, as long ago as 1983, Stern declared that ‘several developments indicate a shift in language pedagogy away from the single method concept as the main approach to language teaching’ (1983). One such development was the failure, on the part of researchers, to find any significant advantage in one method over another. As Richards (1990) noted, ‘studies of the effectiveness of specific methods have had a hard time demonstrating that the method itself, rather than other factors, such as the teacher’s enthusiasm, or the novelty of the new method, was the crucial variable’. …
Kumaravadivelu (1994) identified what he called the ‘postmethod condition’, a result of ‘the widespread dissatisfaction with the conventional concept of method’. Rather than subscribe to a single set of procedures, postmethod teachers adapt their approach in accordance with local, contextual factors, while at the same time being guided by a number of ‘macrostrategies’. Two such macrostrategies are ‘Maximise learning opportunities’ and ‘Promote learner autonomy’. …
Nevertheless, and in spite of the claims of the postmethodists, the notion of method does not seem to have gone away completely. In fact, it seems to be doggedly persistent, even if the term itself is often replaced by its synonyms. … This is a view echoed by Bell (2007) who interviewed a number of teachers on the subject, and concluded that ‘methods, however the term is defined, are not dead. Teachers seem to be aware of both the usefulness of methods and the need to go beyond them.’
On the other hand, in a recent paper, Akbari (2008) suggests that it is textbooks that have largely replaced methods in their traditional sense: ‘The concept of method has not been replaced by the concept of postmethod but rather by an era of textbook-defined practice. What the majority of teachers teach and how they teach ... are now determined by textbooks’.
(by Scott Thornbury – http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/ methods-post-method-metodos. Adaptado)
Ask teachers what method they subscribe to, and most will answer either that they don’t follow a method at all, or that they are ‘eclectic’, and pick and choose from techniques and procedures associated with a variety of different methods. Some might add that, essentially, their teaching follows the principles laid down by the communicative approach, itself a mixed bag, embracing anything from drills to communicative tasks, and everything in between. But the concept of a single, prescriptive ‘method’ – as in the Direct Method or the Oral Method – seems now to be dead and buried.
The demise of method is consistent with the widely held view that we are now in a ‘post-method’ era. Thus, as long ago as 1983, Stern declared that ‘several developments indicate a shift in language pedagogy away from the single method concept as the main approach to language teaching’ (1983). One such development was the failure, on the part of researchers, to find any significant advantage in one method over another. As Richards (1990) noted, ‘studies of the effectiveness of specific methods have had a hard time demonstrating that the method itself, rather than other factors, such as the teacher’s enthusiasm, or the novelty of the new method, was the crucial variable’. …
Kumaravadivelu (1994) identified what he called the ‘postmethod condition’, a result of ‘the widespread dissatisfaction with the conventional concept of method’. Rather than subscribe to a single set of procedures, postmethod teachers adapt their approach in accordance with local, contextual factors, while at the same time being guided by a number of ‘macrostrategies’. Two such macrostrategies are ‘Maximise learning opportunities’ and ‘Promote learner autonomy’. …
Nevertheless, and in spite of the claims of the postmethodists, the notion of method does not seem to have gone away completely. In fact, it seems to be doggedly persistent, even if the term itself is often replaced by its synonyms. … This is a view echoed by Bell (2007) who interviewed a number of teachers on the subject, and concluded that ‘methods, however the term is defined, are not dead. Teachers seem to be aware of both the usefulness of methods and the need to go beyond them.’
On the other hand, in a recent paper, Akbari (2008) suggests that it is textbooks that have largely replaced methods in their traditional sense: ‘The concept of method has not been replaced by the concept of postmethod but rather by an era of textbook-defined practice. What the majority of teachers teach and how they teach ... are now determined by textbooks’.
(by Scott Thornbury – http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/ methods-post-method-metodos. Adaptado)
Ask teachers what method they subscribe to, and most will answer either that they don’t follow a method at all, or that they are ‘eclectic’, and pick and choose from techniques and procedures associated with a variety of different methods. Some might add that, essentially, their teaching follows the principles laid down by the communicative approach, itself a mixed bag, embracing anything from drills to communicative tasks, and everything in between. But the concept of a single, prescriptive ‘method’ – as in the Direct Method or the Oral Method – seems now to be dead and buried.
The demise of method is consistent with the widely held view that we are now in a ‘post-method’ era. Thus, as long ago as 1983, Stern declared that ‘several developments indicate a shift in language pedagogy away from the single method concept as the main approach to language teaching’ (1983). One such development was the failure, on the part of researchers, to find any significant advantage in one method over another. As Richards (1990) noted, ‘studies of the effectiveness of specific methods have had a hard time demonstrating that the method itself, rather than other factors, such as the teacher’s enthusiasm, or the novelty of the new method, was the crucial variable’. …
Kumaravadivelu (1994) identified what he called the ‘postmethod condition’, a result of ‘the widespread dissatisfaction with the conventional concept of method’. Rather than subscribe to a single set of procedures, postmethod teachers adapt their approach in accordance with local, contextual factors, while at the same time being guided by a number of ‘macrostrategies’. Two such macrostrategies are ‘Maximise learning opportunities’ and ‘Promote learner autonomy’. …
Nevertheless, and in spite of the claims of the postmethodists, the notion of method does not seem to have gone away completely. In fact, it seems to be doggedly persistent, even if the term itself is often replaced by its synonyms. … This is a view echoed by Bell (2007) who interviewed a number of teachers on the subject, and concluded that ‘methods, however the term is defined, are not dead. Teachers seem to be aware of both the usefulness of methods and the need to go beyond them.’
On the other hand, in a recent paper, Akbari (2008) suggests that it is textbooks that have largely replaced methods in their traditional sense: ‘The concept of method has not been replaced by the concept of postmethod but rather by an era of textbook-defined practice. What the majority of teachers teach and how they teach ... are now determined by textbooks’.
(by Scott Thornbury – http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/ methods-post-method-metodos. Adaptado)
Ask teachers what method they subscribe to, and most will answer either that they don’t follow a method at all, or that they are ‘eclectic’, and pick and choose from techniques and procedures associated with a variety of different methods. Some might add that, essentially, their teaching follows the principles laid down by the communicative approach, itself a mixed bag, embracing anything from drills to communicative tasks, and everything in between. But the concept of a single, prescriptive ‘method’ – as in the Direct Method or the Oral Method – seems now to be dead and buried.
The demise of method is consistent with the widely held view that we are now in a ‘post-method’ era. Thus, as long ago as 1983, Stern declared that ‘several developments indicate a shift in language pedagogy away from the single method concept as the main approach to language teaching’ (1983). One such development was the failure, on the part of researchers, to find any significant advantage in one method over another. As Richards (1990) noted, ‘studies of the effectiveness of specific methods have had a hard time demonstrating that the method itself, rather than other factors, such as the teacher’s enthusiasm, or the novelty of the new method, was the crucial variable’. …
Kumaravadivelu (1994) identified what he called the ‘postmethod condition’, a result of ‘the widespread dissatisfaction with the conventional concept of method’. Rather than subscribe to a single set of procedures, postmethod teachers adapt their approach in accordance with local, contextual factors, while at the same time being guided by a number of ‘macrostrategies’. Two such macrostrategies are ‘Maximise learning opportunities’ and ‘Promote learner autonomy’. …
Nevertheless, and in spite of the claims of the postmethodists, the notion of method does not seem to have gone away completely. In fact, it seems to be doggedly persistent, even if the term itself is often replaced by its synonyms. … This is a view echoed by Bell (2007) who interviewed a number of teachers on the subject, and concluded that ‘methods, however the term is defined, are not dead. Teachers seem to be aware of both the usefulness of methods and the need to go beyond them.’
On the other hand, in a recent paper, Akbari (2008) suggests that it is textbooks that have largely replaced methods in their traditional sense: ‘The concept of method has not been replaced by the concept of postmethod but rather by an era of textbook-defined practice. What the majority of teachers teach and how they teach ... are now determined by textbooks’.
(by Scott Thornbury – http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/ methods-post-method-metodos. Adaptado)
TEXT 3
“Despite the contemporary calling of the speech/textual genre conceptions to deal with privations in the educational system (ROJO, 2008), the treatment given to genre, especially in theories operating with the notion of textual genre, has mainly focused on genre’s stable characteristics and on the development of competencies/capacities that lead to the comprehension and production of the oral and written genres circulating in the social world.
One of the implications of this kind of treatment for the literacy practices at school has considerably often been the genre displacement from micro and macrolinguistic contexts that interact in meaning construction to abstractly focus on the stable characteristics defining news, comics, recipes, editorial, blogs etc. Another, and maybe more serious, unfolding is that since it doesn’t look at how genres mingle and hybridize with other genres and semiosis in processes of constant (re)designing meanings, such a treatment can end up contributing to the mere (re)production of genres legitimized by school, leaving little or no space at all for the innovations and destabilization that mingling and transgression processes print to texts in contemporaneity and, as a consequence, for a critical position in relation to meanings constructed in the margins of what school validates as acceptable literacy practices.”
OLIVEIRA, M. B. F.; SZUNDI, P. T. C. Multiliteracies Practices at School: for a responsive education to contemporaneity.
Bakhtiniana, São Paulo, v. 9, n. 2, Jul./Dec. 2014, p. 206,207.
We’re all looking forward to have a few days’ holiday together.
In the context above, there is mistake related to:
There is a danger in paying too much attention to learners’ errors. While errors indeed reveal a system at work, the classroom language teacher can become so preoccupied ________ noticing errors that the correct utterances in the second language go unnoticed. In our observation and analysis of errors – for all that they do reveal about the learner – we must beware of placing too much attention on errors and not lose sight of the value of positive reinforcement of clearly expressed language that is a product of the learner’s progress of development. While the diminishing of errors is an important criterion ______ increasing language proficiency, the ultimate goal of second language learning is the attainment of communicative fluency.
Another inadequacy in error analysis is an overemphasis on production data. Language is speaking and listening, writing and reading. The comprehension of language is as important as production. It so happens that production lends itself to analysis and thus becomes the prey of researchers, __________ comprehension data is equally important in developing an understanding of the process of SLA.
(Brown, D. H. Principles of language learning and teaching. 2000. Adapted)
Considerando-se palavras que expressam intensidade, numerar a 2ª coluna de acordo com a 1ª e, após, assinalar a alternativa que apresenta a sequência CORRETA:
(1) It was freezing cold.
(2) It was a bit cold.
(3) It was fairly cold.
(---) I wore a sweater, because it was windy.
(---) I wore snow boots, two pairs of pants and a winter coat, because there was a snowstorm.
(---) I wore a jacket and a scarf, because it started to snow.
Text for the questions from 38 to 50.
Sound Advice for Language Learners
1 A recent issue of a language learning magazine has
consulted a number of experts in the field of second
language acquisition. Their advice may prove invaluable for
4 those considering a language course. Ask yourself some
basic questions, they suggest. Did you enjoy studying
languages at school, for example? Can you really afford the
7 time to learn a language?
First and foremost, you have to be realistic in your
goals. If you fail to set achievable aims you are likely to give
10 up. Besides, it is worth knowing that the most expensive
courses are not necessarily the best. You should also bear in
mind that the quicker you learn a language the more quickly
13 you forget it. Sue Miller, a French teacher, attempted to
teach herself German by enrolling on a crash course.
Already fluent in three languages, her chances of making
16 progress were high. Two years on she hardly remembers
anything. “I should have chosen a regular course in order to
have more time for practice and consolidation.”
19 Sue’s comment is certainly a good piece of advice.
Internet: <www.flo‐joe.uk> (adapted).
The words “necessarily” (line 11), “quickly” (line 12), “certainly” (line 19) are adverbs. Which word from the options below is not?
Conheça nossos planos