Selecionar segmento
Estude com questões de diferentes segmentos
Atenção: Isso limpará todos os campos já preenchidos no filtro!
Foram encontradas 49.254 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
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:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753578
Legislação Municipal
Analise as sentenças referentes aos direitos do servidor
municipal previstos no Art. 90 da Lei Orgânica Municipal:
I.A lei garante férias anuais remuneradas com adicional de 2/4.
II.O servidor tem direito à licença-paternidade de 5 dias.
III.A jornada de trabalho deve seguir determinações legais, com repouso semanal remunerado preferencialmente aos domingos.
Está correto o que se afirma em:
I.A lei garante férias anuais remuneradas com adicional de 2/4.
II.O servidor tem direito à licença-paternidade de 5 dias.
III.A jornada de trabalho deve seguir determinações legais, com repouso semanal remunerado preferencialmente aos domingos.
Está correto o que se afirma em:
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753575
Português
Texto associado
O texto seguinte servirá de base para responder à questão.
Como descobrir se o vídeo que você está vendo é real ou gerado por IA
Nos últimos meses, os geradores de vídeo baseados em inteligência artificial evoluíram a tal ponto que a confiança nas imagens captadas por câmeras começa a se abalar. O cenário inevitável é o de um público cada vez mais desconfiado: enganado repetidas vezes, o espectador passará a questionar tudo o que vê.
Por enquanto, ainda é possível identificar alguns sinais de que um vídeo pode não ser real. Um dos principais é a baixa qualidade da imagem: filmagens borradas, granuladas ou pixeladas podem indicar o uso de IA. Segundo o professor Hany Farid, da Universidade da Califórnia em Berkeley, especialista em forense digital, esse é um dos primeiros aspectos a observar.
As ferramentas de vídeo com IA continuarão a se aperfeiçoar, e esse tipo de orientação logo se tornará obsoleto. Ainda assim, por ora, vale a pena usá-la para evitar cair em vídeos falsos. O professor Matthew Stamm, da Universidade Drexel, lembra que imagens de má qualidade não são necessariamente falsas, mas que vídeos de IA costumam recorrer a essa aparência para disfarçar falhas visuais.
Esses vídeos apresentam inconsistências sutis — texturas de pele excessivamente lisas, padrões irregulares em cabelos ou roupas e movimentos improváveis de pequenos objetos. Quanto mais nítida a imagem, maiores as chances de perceber esses detalhes. Por isso, vídeos supostamente gravados por câmeras antigas ou de segurança podem esconder imperfeições típicas da IA.
Nos últimos meses, diversos vídeos gerados por IA enganaram milhões de pessoas. Um deles mostrava coelhos saltando sobre um trampolim; outro, um casal se apaixonando no metrô de Nova York; e um terceiro, um pastor pregando contra bilionários — todos falsos. Em comum, tinham a aparência amadora e a baixa resolução.
Hany Farid afirma que há três fatores essenciais para desconfiar: resolução, qualidade e duração. Os vídeos de IA costumam ser curtos — geralmente entre seis e dez segundos — porque sua produção é cara e mais propensa a falhas em trechos longos. Além disso, a baixa qualidade e a compressão propositais das imagens ajudam a mascarar os indícios de falsificação.
Enquanto isso, as grandes empresas de tecnologia investem bilhões para tornar a IA cada vez mais realista. De acordo com Stamm, as falhas visuais que hoje servem de pista tendem a desaparecer em pouco tempo. Ainda assim, os especialistas acreditam que novas técnicas de autenticação ajudarão a distinguir o que é real do que é criado artificialmente.
Farid e Stamm explicam que vídeos gerados ou modificados deixam rastros invisíveis — impressões digitais que podem ser detectadas com ferramentas estatísticas. Além disso, câmeras e programas de IA poderão, em breve, incorporar informações de origem diretamente nos arquivos, facilitando a verificação da autenticidade.
No passado, imagens e vídeos pareciam provas incontestáveis; hoje, podem ser facilmente manipulados. O essencial passa a ser quem criou o conteúdo, de onde ele veio e se foi verificado por fontes confiáveis. Trata-se, segundo Stamm, de um dos maiores desafios da segurança da informação no século atual — um problema recente, mas que mobiliza um número crescente de pesquisadores e profissionais em busca de soluções conjuntas entre tecnologia, educação e políticas públicas.
https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/articles/cz0xp8p5vzmo.adaptado
Essas falhas podem desaparecer em pouco tempo, "ou"
novas técnicas de autenticação ajudarão a distinguir o
real do artificial.
De acordo com a relação estabelecida entre as orações, é
De acordo com a relação estabelecida entre as orações, é
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753565
Pedagogia
A Lei nº 9.394, de 20 de dezembro de 1996, conhecida
como Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional
(LDB), estabelece os princípios, fins e estrutura da
educação brasileira. Essa legislação define as
responsabilidades dos entes federativos, os níveis e
modalidades de ensino, bem como as bases para a
gestão democrática e a valorização dos profissionais da
educação. Além disso, a LDB reforça o direito de todos à
educação e a necessidade de garantir igualdade de
condições para o acesso e a permanência na escola.
Com base nesses fundamentos, analise as assertivas a seguir:
I.A LDB assegura que a educação é direito de todos e dever do Estado e da família, devendo ser promovida com base na igualdade de condições de acesso e permanência na escola.
II.O ensino deve ser ministrado sob o princípio da liberdade de aprender, ensinar, pesquisar e divulgar o pensamento, a arte e o saber.
III.A gestão democrática do ensino público é facultativa e restrita apenas às instituições de ensino superior privadas.
IV.A valorização dos profissionais da educação inclui formação continuada, plano de carreira e remuneração condigna.
V.A LDB determina que a educação escolar se desenvolve predominantemente no lar, dispensando a atuação institucional do Estado.
Está CORRETO o que se afirma em:
Com base nesses fundamentos, analise as assertivas a seguir:
I.A LDB assegura que a educação é direito de todos e dever do Estado e da família, devendo ser promovida com base na igualdade de condições de acesso e permanência na escola.
II.O ensino deve ser ministrado sob o princípio da liberdade de aprender, ensinar, pesquisar e divulgar o pensamento, a arte e o saber.
III.A gestão democrática do ensino público é facultativa e restrita apenas às instituições de ensino superior privadas.
IV.A valorização dos profissionais da educação inclui formação continuada, plano de carreira e remuneração condigna.
V.A LDB determina que a educação escolar se desenvolve predominantemente no lar, dispensando a atuação institucional do Estado.
Está CORRETO o que se afirma em:
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753564
Pedagogia
A profissão docente, no Brasil, está ancorada em marcos
normativos que assegurem liberdade de ensinar,
pluralismo de ideias e compromisso com a dignidade
humana. Na prática cotidiana, tais princípios se traduzem
em escolhas pedagógicas que respeitam a diversidade,
promovem debates fundamentados e visam ao
desenvolvimento integral dos estudantes. A ética
profissional, assim, não se limita à conduta individual,
mas envolve a responsabilidade social da escola e de
seus trabalhadores. Diante desse quadro, avalie o papel
ético do professor na construção de uma aprendizagem
crítica, segundo a legislação e diretrizes nacionais.
I.O professor deve agir de forma autônoma e responsável, pautando-se pela ética e pela dignidade humana.
II.A prática docente deve priorizar a neutralidade política, sem promover debates críticos.
III.A atuação pedagógica deve estimular o respeito à diversidade e aos direitos humanos.
IV.O professor pode restringir conteúdos conforme suas convicções pessoais.
V.A ética docente implica compromisso com a transformação social e a cidadania.
Está CORRETO o que se afirma em:
I.O professor deve agir de forma autônoma e responsável, pautando-se pela ética e pela dignidade humana.
II.A prática docente deve priorizar a neutralidade política, sem promover debates críticos.
III.A atuação pedagógica deve estimular o respeito à diversidade e aos direitos humanos.
IV.O professor pode restringir conteúdos conforme suas convicções pessoais.
V.A ética docente implica compromisso com a transformação social e a cidadania.
Está CORRETO o que se afirma em:
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753563
Pedagogia
A aprendizagem ativa em História pressupõe
investigação, autoria e diálogo com a comunidade.
Projetos que mobilizam arquivos escolares, acervos
locais, relatos orais e espaços de memória aproximam o
currículo das experiências dos estudantes. Ao produzir
narrativas próprias, a turma exercita procedimentos de
pesquisa, comunicação e argumentação. Considerando
tais estratégias, qual prática pedagógica favorece o
engajamento discente?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753562
Pedagogia
No contexto da educação básica brasileira, o ensino de
História tem sido convocado a superar a mera
memorização de personagens e acontecimentos,
articulando temporalidades, escalas e vozes diversas.
Espera-se que a escola forme leitores críticos das
experiências humanas no tempo, capazes de relacionar
passado, presente e expectativas de futuro. Para tanto,
metodologias investigativas e o uso de fontes variadas
ampliam a compreensão de processos sociais. A partir
dessa perspectiva, o estudante se percebe como sujeito
histórico e participa da vida pública de modo informado.
Considerando tais fundamentos, qual princípio orienta
essa concepção pedagógica?
Ano: 2025
Banca:
AMEOSC
Órgão:
Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC
Prova:
AMEOSC - 2025 - Prefeitura de Bandeirante - SC - Professor de História |
Q3753561
Pedagogia
A avaliação integra o processo de ensino e
aprendizagem, produzindo informações para
intervenções pedagógicas e tomada de decisão.
Instrumentos diagnósticos identificam conhecimentos
prévios, enquanto procedimentos formativos
acompanham percursos, ajustando estratégias. Ao final,
avaliações somativas sintetizam o desempenho em
relação aos objetivos.
Considerando essas modalidades, qual característica diferencia a avaliação formativa?
Considerando essas modalidades, qual característica diferencia a avaliação formativa?
Conheça nossos planos