Questões de Inglês - Ensino da Língua Estrangeira Inglesa para Concurso
Foram encontradas 881 questões
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
Read the following statements about English and language conceptions:
I.The official document called 'BNCC' treats the English language, prioritizing the focus on the social and political function of the language, in its status as a língua franca.
II.According to BNCC, the concept of English as a foreign language is heavily criticized for its Eurocentric bias.
III.According to BNCC, other language concepts such as international language, global language, additional language and língua franca are more up to date and because of that the term 'foreign language' should be left in the past and never be used in any type of context.
It is correct what is state in:
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
In TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages) classes, students develop their language skills through various activities: they enhance their listening abilities by engaging in group discussions, practice speaking by participating in oral presentations, refine their writing skills through essay assignments, and strengthen their reading comprehension by analyzing texts in different genres. In the light of that, match the second column according to the first:
First column: skill
1.Reading
2.Listening
3.Writing
4.Speaking
Second column: definition
(__)is the skill of actively perceiving and comprehending spoken language, allowing individuals to understand and interpret oral communication effectively.
(__)is the aptitude to convey thoughts, information, and creativity through the creation of text, using written language to communicate ideas, stories, or messages.
(__)involves the ability to express one's thoughts, ideas, and emotions through coherent and articulate oral communication, contributing to effective dialogue and interpersonal interactions.
(__)is the capacity to decode, interpret, and comprehend written text, enabling individuals to access and extract meaning from written materials, ranging from books and articles to digital content.
Select the option that presents the correct association between the columns:
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
Match the second column according to the first:
First column: topic
1.Translanguaging
2.Língua Franca
3.CLIL
Second column: summarized definition
(__) is a common, global, language used as a means of communication.
(__)is an educational approach where subjects are taught in a language that is not the students' native language to improve language proficiency while learning the content.
(__)is a pedagogical approach that encourages using multiple languages and language varieties to enhance learning and communication, allowing students to draw from their full linguistic repertoire.
Select the option that presents the correct association between the columns:
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
Read three statements about English as a língua franca (ELF). Write T, for true statements, and F, for false ones:
(__)ELF does not adhere to any specific native English dialect or accent but encompasses a wide range of English varieties, making it a flexible and adaptable form of communication.
(__)ELF is a phenomenon where English is used as a common means of communication between speakers of different native languages, often in international or multicultural settings.
(__)ELF is predominantly restricted to academic and formal contexts, such as international conferences, and is rarely used in informal, everyday interactions between non-native English speakers.
Select the alternative with the correct sequence:
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
According to BNCC, the English Language curricular component must guarantee students the development of specific competences.
I.Get to know different cultural heritages, material and immaterial, disseminated in the English language, with a view to exercising enjoyment and expanding perspectives in contact with different artistic-cultural manifestations.
II.Use new technologies, with new languages and modes of interaction, to research, select, share, position yourself and produce meaning in literacy practices in the English language, in an ethical, critical and responsible way.
III.Develop linguistic-discursive repertoires of the English language, used in different countries and by different social groups within the same country, in order to recognize linguistic diversity as a right and value the heterogeneous, hybrid and multimodal uses emerging in contemporary societies.
IV.Identify one's place and that of others in a plurilingual and multicultural world, critically reflecting on how learning the English language contributes to the insertion of subjects in the globalized world, including with regard to the world of work.
Which sentences correspond to Specific English Language Competences for Ensino Fundamental, according to BNCC:
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
Literacy in an additional language, often referred to as "second language literacy" or "bilingual literacy," encompasses the ability to read, write, understand, and effectively ____________ using a language other than one's native or primary language.
Select the option that correctly fills the gap in the statement:
Plurilingualism and translanguaging: commonalities and divergences
Both plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices in the education of language minoritized students remain controversial, for schools have a monolingual and monoglossic tradition that is hard to disrupt, even when the disrupting stance brings success to learners. At issue is the national identity that schools are supposed to develop in their students, and the Eurocentric system of knowledge, circulated through standardized named languages, that continues to impose what Quijano (2000) has called a coloniality of power.
All theories emerge from a place, an experience, a time, and a position, and in this case, plurilingualism and translanguaging have developed, as we have seen, from different loci of enunciation. But concepts do not remain static in a time and place, as educators and researchers take them up, as they travel, and as educators develop alternative practices. Thus, plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes look the same, and sometimes they even have the same practical goals. For example, educators who say they use plurilingual pedagogical practices might insist on developing bilingual identities, and not solely use plurilingualism as a scaffold. And educators who claim to use translanguaging pedagogical practices sometimes use them only as a scaffold to the dominant language, not grasping its potential. In the United States, translanguaging pedagogies are often used in English-as-a-Second Language programs only as a scaffold. And although the potential for translanguaging is more likely to be found in bilingual education programs, this is also at times elusive. The potential is curtailed, for example, by the strict language allocation policies that have accompanied the growth of dual language education programs in the last decade in the USA, which come close to the neoliberal understanding of multilingualism espoused in the European Union.
It is important to keep the conceptual distinctions between plurilingualism and translanguaging at the forefront as we develop ways of enacting them in practice, even when pedagogies may turn out to look the same. Because the theoretical stance of translanguaging brings forth and affirms dynamic multilingual realities, it offers the potential to transform minoritized communities sense of self that the concept of plurilingualism may not always do. The purpose of translanguaging could be transformative of socio-political and socio-educational structures that legitimize the language hierarchies that exclude minoritized bilingual students and the epistemological understandings that render them invisible. In its theoretical formulation, translanguaging disrupts the concept of named languages and the power hierarchies in which languages are positioned. But the issue for the future is whether school authorities will allow translanguaging to achieve its potential, or whether it will silence it as simply another kind of scaffold. To the degree that educators act on translanguaging with political intent, it will continue to crack some openings and to open opportunities for bilingual students. Otherwise, the present conceptual differences between plurilingualism and translanguaging will be erased.
Source: GARCÍA, Ofelia; OTHEGUY, Ricardo. Plurilingualism and translanguaging: Commonalities and divergences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, v. 23, n. 1, p. 17-35, 2020.
Garcia e Otheguy (2020)
Consider the statements related to the text presented below. Write T, for true, and F, for false:
(__)According to the text, educators who use plurilingual pedagogical practices insist on developing monolingual identities.
(__)Translanguaging pedagogies in the United States are used only as a scaffold in bilingual education programs.
(__)Plurilingual and translanguaging pedagogical practices are controversial in the education of language minoritized students.
Select the alternative with the correct sequence:
TEXTO 6
ESSENTIAL GAME ELEMENTS
At its heart, gamification is about taking elements from games and applying them to non-game settings (Deterding, 2011). While many look at modern video games as a key inspiration for gamification, central elements such as points and levels come out of tabletop roleplaying games. While no one has yet succeeded in coming up with an undisputed definition for "game," most would agree that to be considered a game, it must include at least the following aspects:
1. Interactivity: If there is no way for the player to affect change on the system; if there is nothing for the player to actually do, then it ceases to be a game.
2. Rules: A mechanism to constrain the behavior of players in pre-specified ways.
3. Goal(s): One or more objectives that players pursue while interacting with the game.
4. Quantifiable measure of progress (or success): This can be as simple as a binary acknowledgement of completion, or as complex as a set of cricket scores.
5. Definite ending: While some applications commonly referred to as games do not have clear endings (The Sims, for example), most games have a clear endpoint. By this measure of game, it could easily be argued that a formal educational course meets these criteria.
Source: Gamification in the Classroom: Old Wine in New Badges, by Katrin Becker and Scott Nicholson. In: Learning, Education and Games Volume Two: Bringing Games into Educational Contexis. ETC Press, 2006. Available on: hitps://www.researchgate.net/publication/308402198 Gam ification in the Classroom Old Wine in New Badges
Analise as seguintes afirmativas sobre o texto "Essential Game Elements”:
I. Gamification é uma metodologia ativa na qual professores usam jogos modernos em sala de aula para instigar a aprendizagem participativa.
Il. Uma sala de aula em um curso de educação formal que não utiliza gamification possui elementos de games, como os apontados no texto.
llI. Uma sala de aula de língua inglesa pode se beneficiar de gamification na maioria dos elementos, exceto o "final definido” (elemento 5), pois a língua(gem) está mudando constantemente e aprender inglês é uma descoberta constante.
Marque a alternativa CORRETA:
Sobre uma abordagem comunicativa no ensino de línguas, assinale a alternativa correta.
Sobre o ensino de Língua Inglesa no contexto brasileiro, escolha a alternativa correta.
De acordo com os conteúdos propostos para o terceiro e quarto ciclo em relação ao eixo Conhecimento Sistêmico, os PCNs propõem os seguintes conteúdos atitudinais, EXCETO:
Como outro objetivo deste método é o de transmitir um conhecimento sobre a língua, a gramática assume um papel normativo, sendo ela um dos focos centrais da aula. Para que os alunos possam ganhar consciência das regras gramaticais, extensos trabalhos com a memorização são realizados, na forma de exercícios estruturalistas de substituição e/ou repetição.
O texto, acima, se refere a qual das metodologias de ensino de Língua Inglesa?
Leslie Dickinson is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Heriot-Watt, Scotland. In her article Learner autonomy: what, why and how? a definition of autonomy, he presents the definition for autonomy.
According to her, it is correct to say that:
I. Autonomy is essentially an attitude to learning rather than a methodology.
II. Learning or learner’s autonomy is not a license to behave without constraint.
III. Autonomy is not primarily a matter of the physical setting of learning.
IV. Helping learners to become autonomous is not a threat to the teacher's job.
The correct affirmatives are:
“In the field of language teaching, the term syllabus has both practical and theoretical meanings. In a practical sense, it is an actual plan of course. In theoretical sense, it refers to a specific way to conceptualize what language is and how language is learned so that the materials can be selected and prepared for the classroom.” (CELSE-MURCIA, 2014)
The items that can be considered examples of syllabuses are:
I. Task-based syllabus, skill-based approaches, lexical syllabus
II. Negotiated syllabus, project-based language learning, lexical syllabus
III. Grammatical syllabus, notional-functional syllabus, text-based syllabus
IV. Task-based syllabus, content-based instruction, grammatical syllabus
The correct affirmatives are:
The cognitive approach is a well known one among teachers and researchers of foreign languages.
Concerning the principles of the four current approaches to language teaching that CelseMurcia presents in her book Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, the cognitive approach stablishes that:
Leffa on his book Ensino e Aprendizagem mentions the importance of differentiating learning and acquisition.
According to Leffa:
There are three preferences in common Learner Styles, according to Celse-Murcia: perceptual preference, personality preference, and processing preference.
According to perceptual preference, we can say that auditory, visual and kinesthetic are styles and the only one of them with the correct description below is:
Krashen is an important author that deals with language acquisition. In his book Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning, he shows that findings on first language influence on second language performance are quite consistent with findings and hypotheses from other apparently nonrelated areas, and that they contribute to a clear theoretical picture of second language acquisition and performance.
I. First language influence appears to be strongest in complex word order and in word-for-word translations of phrases.
II. First language influence is weaker in bound morphology.
III. First language influence seems to be strongest in acquisition poor environments.
According to his research findings, the correct affirmatives are:
Celse-Murcia, in her book Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, stablishes central principles of four current approaches to language teaching.
The four approaches are:
According to Leffa, the ideal foreign language teacher needs to have certain characteristics.
The ideal foreign language teacher characteristics’ are:
Conheça nossos planos