Questões para Concursos

Read the text to answer questions from. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was a 1970s reaction to much that had gone before, and has guiding principles: first, language is not just patterns of grammar with vocabulary items slotted in; it also involves language functions such as inviting, agreeing and disagreeing, suggesting, etc., which students should learn how to perform using a variety of language exponents (e.g. we can invite by saying “Would you like to come to the cinema?’, ‘D’you fancy coming to the cinema?’, ‘What about coming to the cinema?’, ‘How about a film?’, ‘Are you on for a film?, etc). Students also need to be aware of the need for appropriacy when talking and writing to people in terms of the kind of language they use (formal, informal, tentative, technical, etc). CLT is not just about the language; it is actually about how it is used. The second principle of Communicative Language Teaching is that if students get enough exposure to language, and opportunities for language use, and if they are motivated, then language learning will take care of itself. Thus, CLT has a lot in common with the acquisition view of language absorption. As a result, the focus of much CLT has been on students communicating real messages, and not just grammatically controlled language. The deployment of many communicative activities, where students use all and any language they know to communicate, shows this aspect of CLT at work. (Harmer, J. 1998. Adaptado)

Read the text to answer questions from. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was a 1970s reaction to much that had gone before, and has guiding principles: first, language is not just patterns of grammar with vocabulary items slotted in; it also involves language functions such as inviting, agreeing and disagreeing, suggesting, etc., which students should learn how to perform using a variety of language exponents (e.g. we can invite by saying “Would you like to come to the cinema?’, ‘D’you fancy coming to the cinema?’, ‘What about coming to the cinema?’, ‘How about a film?’, ‘Are you on for a film?, etc). Students also need to be aware of the need for appropriacy when talking and writing to people in terms of the kind of language they use (formal, informal, tentative, technical, etc). CLT is not just about the language; it is actually about how it is used. The second principle of Communicative Language Teaching is that if students get enough exposure to language, and opportunities for language use, and if they are motivated, then language learning will take care of itself. Thus, CLT has a lot in common with the acquisition view of language absorption. As a result, the focus of much CLT has been on students communicating real messages, and not just grammatically controlled language. The deployment of many communicative activities, where students use all and any language they know to communicate, shows this aspect of CLT at work. (Harmer, J. 1998. Adaptado)

Read the text to answer questions from. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was a 1970s reaction to much that had gone before, and has guiding principles: first, language is not just patterns of grammar with vocabulary items slotted in; it also involves language functions such as inviting, agreeing and disagreeing, suggesting, etc., which students should learn how to perform using a variety of language exponents (e.g. we can invite by saying “Would you like to come to the cinema?’, ‘D’you fancy coming to the cinema?’, ‘What about coming to the cinema?’, ‘How about a film?’, ‘Are you on for a film?, etc). Students also need to be aware of the need for appropriacy when talking and writing to people in terms of the kind of language they use (formal, informal, tentative, technical, etc). CLT is not just about the language; it is actually about how it is used. The second principle of Communicative Language Teaching is that if students get enough exposure to language, and opportunities for language use, and if they are motivated, then language learning will take care of itself. Thus, CLT has a lot in common with the acquisition view of language absorption. As a result, the focus of much CLT has been on students communicating real messages, and not just grammatically controlled language. The deployment of many communicative activities, where students use all and any language they know to communicate, shows this aspect of CLT at work. (Harmer, J. 1998. Adaptado)

Read the text to answer questions from. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was a 1970s reaction to much that had gone before, and has guiding principles: first, language is not just patterns of grammar with vocabulary items slotted in; it also involves language functions such as inviting, agreeing and disagreeing, suggesting, etc., which students should learn how to perform using a variety of language exponents (e.g. we can invite by saying “Would you like to come to the cinema?’, ‘D’you fancy coming to the cinema?’, ‘What about coming to the cinema?’, ‘How about a film?’, ‘Are you on for a film?, etc). Students also need to be aware of the need for appropriacy when talking and writing to people in terms of the kind of language they use (formal, informal, tentative, technical, etc). CLT is not just about the language; it is actually about how it is used. The second principle of Communicative Language Teaching is that if students get enough exposure to language, and opportunities for language use, and if they are motivated, then language learning will take care of itself. Thus, CLT has a lot in common with the acquisition view of language absorption. As a result, the focus of much CLT has been on students communicating real messages, and not just grammatically controlled language. The deployment of many communicative activities, where students use all and any language they know to communicate, shows this aspect of CLT at work. (Harmer, J. 1998. Adaptado)

Read the text to answer questions from. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was a 1970s reaction to much that had gone before, and has guiding principles: first, language is not just patterns of grammar with vocabulary items slotted in; it also involves language functions such as inviting, agreeing and disagreeing, suggesting, etc., which students should learn how to perform using a variety of language exponents (e.g. we can invite by saying “Would you like to come to the cinema?’, ‘D’you fancy coming to the cinema?’, ‘What about coming to the cinema?’, ‘How about a film?’, ‘Are you on for a film?, etc). Students also need to be aware of the need for appropriacy when talking and writing to people in terms of the kind of language they use (formal, informal, tentative, technical, etc). CLT is not just about the language; it is actually about how it is used. The second principle of Communicative Language Teaching is that if students get enough exposure to language, and opportunities for language use, and if they are motivated, then language learning will take care of itself. Thus, CLT has a lot in common with the acquisition view of language absorption. As a result, the focus of much CLT has been on students communicating real messages, and not just grammatically controlled language. The deployment of many communicative activities, where students use all and any language they know to communicate, shows this aspect of CLT at work. (Harmer, J. 1998. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question. A new age has dawned in additional language teaching methodology which directly reflects wider changes in the world. In the corresponding sea-change in educational philosophy, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) presents an opportunity and a threat to accepted language teaching practice. As with immersion, formal language instruction remains integral to most CLIL models. But for this to be synchronous to subject teaching through an additional language, curricular and methodological adjustment is often required. The ways in which content and language are integrated influence decision-making on how each is handled within the model. For example, this may be through language-learning preparation before the CLIL course, language learning embedded in the CLIL course, or language learning parallel to the CLIL course. A useful starting point is to consider the content of learning. The concept of what constitutes content in a CLIL context is much more flexible than selecting a discipline from a traditional school curriculum such as geography, music, biology or physics. Whilst curricular subjects such as these might be appropriate for some CLIL programmes, contextual variables such as teacher availability, language support, age of learners and the social demands of the learning environment may mean that a different choice of content is more appropriate. In other words: what exactly is meant by ‘content’ in CLIL will depend on the context of the learning institution. However, the crucial point here is that, no matter whether issues concerning the content or the language are more dominant at a given point, neither must be subsumed or the interrelationship between the two ignored. (COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. 2010. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question. A new age has dawned in additional language teaching methodology which directly reflects wider changes in the world. In the corresponding sea-change in educational philosophy, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) presents an opportunity and a threat to accepted language teaching practice. As with immersion, formal language instruction remains integral to most CLIL models. But for this to be synchronous to subject teaching through an additional language, curricular and methodological adjustment is often required. The ways in which content and language are integrated influence decision-making on how each is handled within the model. For example, this may be through language-learning preparation before the CLIL course, language learning embedded in the CLIL course, or language learning parallel to the CLIL course. A useful starting point is to consider the content of learning. The concept of what constitutes content in a CLIL context is much more flexible than selecting a discipline from a traditional school curriculum such as geography, music, biology or physics. Whilst curricular subjects such as these might be appropriate for some CLIL programmes, contextual variables such as teacher availability, language support, age of learners and the social demands of the learning environment may mean that a different choice of content is more appropriate. In other words: what exactly is meant by ‘content’ in CLIL will depend on the context of the learning institution. However, the crucial point here is that, no matter whether issues concerning the content or the language are more dominant at a given point, neither must be subsumed or the interrelationship between the two ignored. (COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. 2010. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question. A new age has dawned in additional language teaching methodology which directly reflects wider changes in the world. In the corresponding sea-change in educational philosophy, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) presents an opportunity and a threat to accepted language teaching practice. As with immersion, formal language instruction remains integral to most CLIL models. But for this to be synchronous to subject teaching through an additional language, curricular and methodological adjustment is often required. The ways in which content and language are integrated influence decision-making on how each is handled within the model. For example, this may be through language-learning preparation before the CLIL course, language learning embedded in the CLIL course, or language learning parallel to the CLIL course. A useful starting point is to consider the content of learning. The concept of what constitutes content in a CLIL context is much more flexible than selecting a discipline from a traditional school curriculum such as geography, music, biology or physics. Whilst curricular subjects such as these might be appropriate for some CLIL programmes, contextual variables such as teacher availability, language support, age of learners and the social demands of the learning environment may mean that a different choice of content is more appropriate. In other words: what exactly is meant by ‘content’ in CLIL will depend on the context of the learning institution. However, the crucial point here is that, no matter whether issues concerning the content or the language are more dominant at a given point, neither must be subsumed or the interrelationship between the two ignored. (COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. 2010. Adaptado)

Read the text and answer question. A new age has dawned in additional language teaching methodology which directly reflects wider changes in the world. In the corresponding sea-change in educational philosophy, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) presents an opportunity and a threat to accepted language teaching practice. As with immersion, formal language instruction remains integral to most CLIL models. But for this to be synchronous to subject teaching through an additional language, curricular and methodological adjustment is often required. The ways in which content and language are integrated influence decision-making on how each is handled within the model. For example, this may be through language-learning preparation before the CLIL course, language learning embedded in the CLIL course, or language learning parallel to the CLIL course. A useful starting point is to consider the content of learning. The concept of what constitutes content in a CLIL context is much more flexible than selecting a discipline from a traditional school curriculum such as geography, music, biology or physics. Whilst curricular subjects such as these might be appropriate for some CLIL programmes, contextual variables such as teacher availability, language support, age of learners and the social demands of the learning environment may mean that a different choice of content is more appropriate. In other words: what exactly is meant by ‘content’ in CLIL will depend on the context of the learning institution. However, the crucial point here is that, no matter whether issues concerning the content or the language are more dominant at a given point, neither must be subsumed or the interrelationship between the two ignored. (COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. 2010. Adaptado)