Questões para Concursos

Read the paragraph and answer question: William Shakespeare (23 April 1564 – 23 April 1616), who was an English playwright, poet and actor, is regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and one of the most famous in the history of humanity. He was very fond of creating words, of which Arch-villain is an example. He also created words by attaching prefixes or suffixes to existing phrases. In Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare popped ‘un’ in front of ‘comfortable’ to create a word that’s now used every day by people around the world. (https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore. Adaptado)

Read the text to answer question: CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) is an approach which is neither language learning nor subject learning, but an amalgam of both and is linked to the processes of convergence – the fusion of elements which may have been previously fragmented, such as subjects in the curriculum. This is where CLIL is groundbreaking. To give a parallel example common in recent times, we can take studies on the environment. A seminal publication on the subject in the 1960s later led to a need to educate young people in schools so as to both inform and, perhaps more crucially, influence behavior. Topics relating to the environment could already be found in chemistry, economics, geography, physics, and even psychology. Yet, as climate change became increasingly worrying, education responded with the introduction of a new subject: “Environmental studies”. In order to structure this new subject, teachers of different disciplines would have needed to climb out of their respective mindsets grounded in physics, chemistry, geography, psychology and so on, to explore ways of building an integrated curriculum, and to develop alternative methodologies by which to implement it. Climate change is a global and local phenomenon, so the increasing availability in some countries of information and communication technologies during the 1990s provided tools by which to make some of these methodologies operational. If we return to languages and CLIL, we have a similar situation. The late 1990s meant that educational insight was firmly set on achieving a high degree of language awareness. Appropriate methodologies were to be used to attain the best possible results in a way which accommodated diverse learning styles. (D. Coyle, P. Hood, D. Marsh. CLIL: content language integrated learning . Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2010.)

Read the text to answer question. Based on theoretical, experimental, and experiential knowledge, teachers and teacher educators have expressed their dissatisfaction with method in different ways. Studies clearly demonstrate that, even as the methodological band played on, practicing teachers have been marching to a different drum. In this sense, the post method condition is established as a timely response. It signifies interrelated attributes. First and foremost, it signifies a search for an alternative to method rather than an alternative method. While alternative methods are primarily products of top-down processes, alternatives to method are mainly products of bottom-up processes. In practical terms, this means that we need to refigure the relationship between the theorizer and the practitioner of language teaching. If the concept of method authorizes theorizers to centralize pedagogic decision-making, the postmethod condition enables practitioners to generate location-specific, classroom-oriented innovative strategies. Secondly, the postmethod condition signifies teacher autonomy. The conventional concept of method “overlooks the fund of experience and tacit knowledge about teaching which the teachers already have by virtue of their lives as students” (Freeman, 1991). The postmethod condition, however, recognizes the teachers’ potential to know not only how to teach but also how to act autonomously within the academic and administrative constraints imposed by institutions, curricula, and textbooks. It also promotes the ability of teachers to know how to develop a critical approach in order to self-observe, self-analyze, and self-evaluate their own teaching practice with a view to effecting desired changes. (B. Kumaravadivelu, Beyond Methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching . Haven and London: Yale University Press. 2003. Adaptado)

Text 7A2-I If we believe that our own information age is defined by the digital structures of electronic communication, we must take early modern culture as inextricably bound to the medium of print. Printed text and image arose within a few years of each other in the mid-fifteenth century, credited to the German goldsmith Johannes Gutenberg, who seemingly drew together a series of extant yet disparate technologies into a new machine that could print several thousand sheets a day. The ancient oil or wine press, the goldsmith’s craft in fine metal carving, the late-medieval development of plentiful rag paper, and the recent formulation of more stable oil-based inks enabled Gutenberg’s ‘revolution’. Similarly, early photography developed from a coming together of two otherwise disparate technologies: on the one hand, the pinhole camera through which capture a refected view of the world as an image, and on the other the chemical means to fix the effects of light exposure on paper. In both cases, these technologies shared aesthetic resources with other media available at the time, while also producing forms of representation that were uniquely theirs, and which offered access to new ways of seeing, and enabled new forms of subjectivity. The greatly expanded flow of visual information facilitated by these technological breakthroughs worked to quicken the circulation of knowledge, and the foundations of thought itself. Genevieve Warwick and Richard Taws. After Prometheus : Art and Technology in Early Modern Europe. In : Art History – Journal of the Association of Art Historians. Special Edition: Art and Technology in Early Modern Europe. p. 201 (adapted)

Text 7A2-I If we believe that our own information age is defined by the digital structures of electronic communication, we must take early modern culture as inextricably bound to the medium of print. Printed text and image arose within a few years of each other in the mid-fifteenth century, credited to the German goldsmith Johannes Gutenberg, who seemingly drew together a series of extant yet disparate technologies into a new machine that could print several thousand sheets a day. The ancient oil or wine press, the goldsmith’s craft in fine metal carving, the late-medieval development of plentiful rag paper, and the recent formulation of more stable oil-based inks enabled Gutenberg’s ‘revolution’. Similarly, early photography developed from a coming together of two otherwise disparate technologies: on the one hand, the pinhole camera through which capture a refected view of the world as an image, and on the other the chemical means to fix the effects of light exposure on paper. In both cases, these technologies shared aesthetic resources with other media available at the time, while also producing forms of representation that were uniquely theirs, and which offered access to new ways of seeing, and enabled new forms of subjectivity. The greatly expanded flow of visual information facilitated by these technological breakthroughs worked to quicken the circulation of knowledge, and the foundations of thought itself. Genevieve Warwick and Richard Taws. After Prometheus : Art and Technology in Early Modern Europe. In : Art History – Journal of the Association of Art Historians. Special Edition: Art and Technology in Early Modern Europe. p. 201 (adapted)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. Building on the professional consensus that no method could claim supremacy, Prabhu (1990) asks why there is no best method. He suggests that there are three possible explanations: (1) different methods are best for different teaching / learning circumstances; (2) all methods have some truth or validity; and (3) the whole notion of what is a good or a bad method is irrelevant. Prabhu argues for the third possibility and concludes that we need to rethink what is “best” such that classroom teachers and applied linguists can develop shared pedagogical perceptions of what real-world classroom teaching is. H.D. Brown (2002), in his critique of methods, adds the following two observations: (1) so-called designer methods seem distinctive at the initial stage of learning but soon come to look like any other learner centered approach; and (2) it has proven impossible to empirically (i.e., quantitatively) demonstrate the superiority of one method over another. Brown (2002) concludes that classroom teachers do best when they ground their pedagogy in “well-established principles of language teaching and learning” (p.17). So what are these well-established principles that teachers should apply in the post methods era? One of the early concrete proposals comes from Kamaravadivelu (1994), who offers a framework consisting of 10 macro strategies, some of which are summarized below: – Maximize learning opportunities. The teacher’s job is not to transmit knowledge but to create and manage as many learning opportunities as possible. – Facilitate negotiated interaction. Learners should initiate classroom talk (not just respond to the teacher’s prompts) by asking for clarification, by confirming, by reacting, and so on, as part of teacher-student and student-student interaction. – Activate intuitive heuristics . Teachers should provide enough data for learners to infer underlying grammatical rules, since it is impossible to explicitly teach all rules of the L2. – Integrate language skills. The separation of listening, reading, speaking, and writing is artificial. As in the real-world, learners should integrate skills: conversation (listening and speaking), note-taking (listening and writing), self-study (reading and writing), and so on. – Raise cultural consciousness. Teachers should allow learners to become sources of cultural information so that knowledge about the culture of the L2 and of other cultures (especially those represented by the students) becomes part of classroom communication. – Ensure social relevance: acknowledge that language learning has social, political, economic, and educational dimensions that shape the motivation to learn the L2, determine the uses to which the L2 will be put, and define the skills and proficiency level needed in the L2. (Celce-Murcia, M. 2001. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. Building on the professional consensus that no method could claim supremacy, Prabhu (1990) asks why there is no best method. He suggests that there are three possible explanations: (1) different methods are best for different teaching / learning circumstances; (2) all methods have some truth or validity; and (3) the whole notion of what is a good or a bad method is irrelevant. Prabhu argues for the third possibility and concludes that we need to rethink what is “best” such that classroom teachers and applied linguists can develop shared pedagogical perceptions of what real-world classroom teaching is. H.D. Brown (2002), in his critique of methods, adds the following two observations: (1) so-called designer methods seem distinctive at the initial stage of learning but soon come to look like any other learner centered approach; and (2) it has proven impossible to empirically (i.e., quantitatively) demonstrate the superiority of one method over another. Brown (2002) concludes that classroom teachers do best when they ground their pedagogy in “well-established principles of language teaching and learning” (p.17). So what are these well-established principles that teachers should apply in the post methods era? One of the early concrete proposals comes from Kamaravadivelu (1994), who offers a framework consisting of 10 macro strategies, some of which are summarized below: – Maximize learning opportunities. The teacher’s job is not to transmit knowledge but to create and manage as many learning opportunities as possible. – Facilitate negotiated interaction. Learners should initiate classroom talk (not just respond to the teacher’s prompts) by asking for clarification, by confirming, by reacting, and so on, as part of teacher-student and student-student interaction. – Activate intuitive heuristics . Teachers should provide enough data for learners to infer underlying grammatical rules, since it is impossible to explicitly teach all rules of the L2. – Integrate language skills. The separation of listening, reading, speaking, and writing is artificial. As in the real-world, learners should integrate skills: conversation (listening and speaking), note-taking (listening and writing), self-study (reading and writing), and so on. – Raise cultural consciousness. Teachers should allow learners to become sources of cultural information so that knowledge about the culture of the L2 and of other cultures (especially those represented by the students) becomes part of classroom communication. – Ensure social relevance: acknowledge that language learning has social, political, economic, and educational dimensions that shape the motivation to learn the L2, determine the uses to which the L2 will be put, and define the skills and proficiency level needed in the L2. (Celce-Murcia, M. 2001. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. Building on the professional consensus that no method could claim supremacy, Prabhu (1990) asks why there is no best method. He suggests that there are three possible explanations: (1) different methods are best for different teaching / learning circumstances; (2) all methods have some truth or validity; and (3) the whole notion of what is a good or a bad method is irrelevant. Prabhu argues for the third possibility and concludes that we need to rethink what is “best” such that classroom teachers and applied linguists can develop shared pedagogical perceptions of what real-world classroom teaching is. H.D. Brown (2002), in his critique of methods, adds the following two observations: (1) so-called designer methods seem distinctive at the initial stage of learning but soon come to look like any other learner centered approach; and (2) it has proven impossible to empirically (i.e., quantitatively) demonstrate the superiority of one method over another. Brown (2002) concludes that classroom teachers do best when they ground their pedagogy in “well-established principles of language teaching and learning” (p.17). So what are these well-established principles that teachers should apply in the post methods era? One of the early concrete proposals comes from Kamaravadivelu (1994), who offers a framework consisting of 10 macro strategies, some of which are summarized below: – Maximize learning opportunities. The teacher’s job is not to transmit knowledge but to create and manage as many learning opportunities as possible. – Facilitate negotiated interaction. Learners should initiate classroom talk (not just respond to the teacher’s prompts) by asking for clarification, by confirming, by reacting, and so on, as part of teacher-student and student-student interaction. – Activate intuitive heuristics . Teachers should provide enough data for learners to infer underlying grammatical rules, since it is impossible to explicitly teach all rules of the L2. – Integrate language skills. The separation of listening, reading, speaking, and writing is artificial. As in the real-world, learners should integrate skills: conversation (listening and speaking), note-taking (listening and writing), self-study (reading and writing), and so on. – Raise cultural consciousness. Teachers should allow learners to become sources of cultural information so that knowledge about the culture of the L2 and of other cultures (especially those represented by the students) becomes part of classroom communication. – Ensure social relevance: acknowledge that language learning has social, political, economic, and educational dimensions that shape the motivation to learn the L2, determine the uses to which the L2 will be put, and define the skills and proficiency level needed in the L2. (Celce-Murcia, M. 2001. Adaptado)

TEXT: How do people overcome fossilization and achieve nativelike fluency in second language acquisition? There are a lot of common misconceptions about fossilization and language development. It's impossible to correct all of them in a post here, but I'll address a few that have been mentioned below. Fossilization is a stage at which a second language speaker seems to cease making progress toward becoming more targetlike in his or her use of the language, so a "learning plateau" is a reasonable analogy. The comparison wherein "the L2 learner has his own linguistic system" that's still influenced by L1 and other things is known as the "interlanguage." The question researchers cannot conclusively answer is whether or not that "plateau" is reversible after a certain point, be it age, fluency level, etc., in order to start making progress again. Different people are motivated by different things, which range from need (to pass a test, to get a job, to watch movies without subtitles, to make friends, etc.) to learning style (preferring to study from texts, liking/disliking impromptu, small-talk with people just to practice, preference for/against learning formal rules, and aptitude). It is easy to remember verb conjugations. There is no single formula. Finding someone who can correct your errors tactfully and effectively most certainly does not need to be demotivating, depressing or draining whatsoever. I'm a very fluent non-native speaker of Spanish, and I actively request that my native speaker (NS) friends correct me when I make a mistake, or use a phrase that sounds funny in their dialect, etc. How else will I learn? It's fascinating to learn little details like that now after so many years. As long as they don't do it in a mocking or condescending way, or at a socially inappropriate time, why wouldn't I want their help? Of course, if you correct a beginner every time they try to utter a sentence, it could be discouraging - and obnoxious - but everything in moderation. One of the biggest cognitive challenges is whether or not L2 speakers can learn to consciously notice differences between their L2 efforts and the way a NS talks. There are decades of research on this (my own included) and I'll gladly give references if anyone actually cares. Noticing falls into two broad categories. First, the ability to " notice the gap ," i.e. hear a NS say a sentence and think, "Hmm, I understand what he meant but I've never heard that word before; it must mean ___" or "I know what he meant but it would not have occurred to me to say it that way; I'll try to remember that for later." The second is the ability to " notice the hole ," i.e. when the L2 learner is trying to speak/ write and realizes that his "interlanguage" lacks a word, sound or structure needed to accurately convey his own thought. If he can seek the input necessary to fill the hole, he has a much stronger chance of acquiring it. The thought processes involved during that moment are holding the forms (or lack thereof) in working memory, and the longer it stays there for further processing, the greater the possibility that it is retained in long-term memory for later use. The NS interlocutor can help promote noticing through corrective feedback (also a subject of decades of research, for which I'm also happy to provide resources if anyone is genuinely interested.) I have been using a variety of strategies for years as a language coach when working with my clients, whether helping IT executives from India and Egypt learn to write more grammatically accurate e-mail or helping priests from Nigeria improve prosodic aspects of their pronunciation (i.e. stress and intonation patterns.) Each person is different. I have found no evidence to support the argument that a person who has fossilized cannot begin to make progress again toward a more target-like L2 use at least in some areas, with the right motivation, input and effort. The question is only about how much progress, in what areas, in how much time, and through what methods. Adapted form: https://www.quora.com/How-do-people-overcome-fossilization-andachieve-native-like-fluency-in-second-language-acquisition Acesso em 22/09/2023