Questões de Concurso Público Prefeitura de Florianópolis - SC 2023 para Professor de Inglês
Foram encontradas 28 questões
Desenvolver um docente capacitado para a Educação 5.0 demanda investimento em formação continuada. Por esse caminho, o professor necessita cuidar de suas emoções e tentar diminuir ao máximo o estresse para refletir isso em sala de aula. É preciso ter condições e as iniciativas para manter uma vida saudável e demonstrar confiança e entusiasmo com a sua profissão. Esses aspectos estão intrinsecamente ligados ao autodesenvolvimento profissional do professor. É importante que o docente tenha também empatia, porque ele precisa criar conexões emocionais com os seus alunos e dar suporte para que cada um deles supere as suas dificuldades (Oyanguren, 2023). Dada essa contextualização, analise as asserções a seguir:
I.A Educação 5.0 é marcada pelo uso intensivo de tecnologias educacionais e uma educação integral com foco em competências digitais e socioemocionais.
II.A Educação 5.0 incorpora os pilares STEAM.
III.Na Educação 5.0, a tecnologia deixa de ser um apoio e passa a ser um eixo estruturante do ensino, devido às suas possibilidades de personalização, colaboração, inovação e criação.
É correto o que se afirma em:
De acordo com dados da Organização das Nações Unidas para a Alimentação e a Agricultura (FAO), da Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde, do Programa Mundial de Alimentos (WFP) e o Fundo das Nações Unidas para a Infância (UNICEF), na América Latina e no Caribe, a má nutrição infantil é um problema que, em suas diversas formas, continua afetando crianças e adolescentes. A desnutrição e o sobrepeso infantil são duas faces da mesma moeda e requerem uma abordagem abrangente. O excesso de peso infantil aumentou de forma alarmante nas últimas duas décadas, ameaçando a saúde e o bem-estar das crianças. Isso posto, analise as asserções a seguir:
I.É necessário manter as pessoas no centro do conjunto de soluções contra a insegurança alimentar e a má nutrição, particularmente no atual contexto de emergência climática.
II.Ainda não se conseguiu melhorar de modo significativo os números anteriores à crise desencadeada pela pandemia de COVID-19. Com isso, se está, cada vez mais, distanciando-se do cumprimento da agenda 2050.
III.É preciso promover ações que protejam as pessoas mais vulneráveis e transformem os sistemas alimentares por meio de políticas públicas holísticas para promover alimentação saudável e acessível.
É correto o que se afirma em:
Associe a segunda coluna de acordo com a primeira, que relaciona conceitos de utilização de tecnologias digitais, ferramentas, operação de aplicativos, pastas e arquivos, procedimentos de informática e suas respectivas funções:
Primeira coluna: Tecnologias digitais, aplicativos e conceitos
1.Android
2.Adobe Reader
3.Windows Explorer
4.OBS Studio
Segunda coluna: Funções
(__)Software que permite visualizar, imprimir, assinar e fazer anotações em arquivos PDF.
(__)Sistema Operacional utilizado em dispositivos móveis.
(__)Gerenciador de arquivos e pastas, utilizado para cópia, exclusão, organização, movimentação e atividades de gerenciamento de arquivos.
(__)É uma suíte de software livre e de código aberto para gravação e transmissão ao vivo de vídeo e áudio.
Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a correta associação entre as colunas:
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)
Ao que compete às Diretrizes Curriculares para a Educação Básica da Rede Municipal de Ensino de Florianópolis - SC (2015), analise as afirmações a seguir e registre V, para verdadeiras, e F, para falsas:
(__)Na organização de novos tempos e experiências educativas, os grupos geracionais têm um espaço de aprendizados assegurado, por isso a hierarquização entre as gerações é necessária. Entende-se que todo ser humano no interior de um dado grupo geracional tem competências à aprendizagem.
(__)Um trabalho pedagógico que toma a problematização como ponto de partida enriquece as experiências e permite aos estudantes atribuírem sentido aos conhecimentos e produtos culturais. Nesse sentido, os núcleos de ação pedagógica devem ser contemplados de modo fragmentado para, no fim, permitir uma abordagem global dos seus processos de aprendizagem.
(__)A instituição-comunidade tem se revelado central, dado o papel das instituições educacionais na organização social contemporânea. Esse elemento relacional pode consolidar a proposta de educação omnilateral. Nesse sentido, tal pressuposto amplia a ideia de prática pedagógica, além de reforçar o educar e o cuidar como indissociáveis.
Assinale a alternativa com a sequência correta:
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)
A Proposta Curricular da Rede Municipal de Ensino de Florianópolis (2016) delineia o currículo com o(s) seguinte(s) entendimento(s):
I.Situa o currículo como atemporal.
II.Compreende o currículo como processo.
III.Delineia o currículo com a concepção de currículo prescrito.
É correto o que se afirma em:
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)
Para que a escola brasileira cumpra, na atualidade, com sua função social, é fundamental que o professor exerça papéis diversos daqueles que desempenhou no passado - no contexto das tendências pedagógicas tradicionais - em relação ao processo de ensino aprendizagem. Nesse sentido, é fundamental que reconheça a importância da interação social na construção do sujeitos; que supere a lógica de transmissão de conhecimentos, substituindo-a pelo diálogo efetivo entre estudantes, professores, realidade e saberes diversos; que atue com intencionalidade pedagógica, auxiliando o estudante no estabelecimento de conexões entre novos conhecimentos e aqueles já construídos e que incentive os alunos no desenvolvimento gradual de uma atitude de autonomia.
A reflexão apresentada tem relação com qual conceito pedagógico:
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)
Acerca da Lei n.º 9.394/1996, que estabelece as diretrizes e bases da educação nacional, em seu art. 75, há a afirmação de que a ação ___________________________ da União e dos Estados será exercida de modo a corrigir, progressivamente, as disparidades de acesso e garantir o padrão mínimo de qualidade de ensino.
Assinale a alternativa que corretamente preenche a lacuna no excerto:
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)
Os princípios de gestão escolar democrática e participativa, defendidos na Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional, envolvem uma série de questões. Uma delas é apresentada a seguir:
É um documento no qual são expressos objetivos, metas e diretrizes e no qual se expressa a autonomia da gestão administrativa e pedagógica da escola, por meio do planejamento de ações que estejam alicerçadas nas demandas e particularidades pedagógicas e identitárias de toda a comunidade escolar. Deve ser um documento vivo e elaborado de forma participativa.
O texto apresentado se refere ao seguinte elemento da gestão escolar democrática e participativa:
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)
Ao longo da história da educação no Brasil, diferentes concepções e tendências pedagógicas nortearam o processo de ensino e aprendizagem nos espaços escolares, currículos e documentos norteadores. A respeito dessas tendências, assinale a alternativa correta:
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)
Desde o fim da década de 1990, a educação inclusiva passa a fazer parte das discussões sobre políticas e direitos educacionais. Com relação aos conceitos de educação especial e educação inclusiva, assinale a alternativa correta:
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)
O planejamento docente é fundamental para que o processo de ensino e aprendizagem ocorra de forma coerente, mobilizando intencionalidades em favor da construção de conhecimentos que façam sentido para os estudantes.
No seu planejamento, o professor mobiliza uma série de elementos. A esse respeito, associe a segunda coluna de acordo com a primeira, que relaciona distintos elementos que compõem o planejamento do professor com a sua descrição:
Primeira coluna: elementos
1.Recursos didáticos
2.Avaliação
3.Objetivos
4.Metodologia
5.Conteúdos de ensino
Segunda coluna: descrição
(__)materiais físicos ou digitais utilizados para a mediação do processo de ensino e aprendizagem.
(__)metas traçadas no âmbito do processo de ensino e aprendizagem, podendo englobar uma aula, um projeto, uma sequência didática ou o que se espera alcançar ao longo de um dado período escolar.
(__)momento de reflexão sobre todo o processo de ensino e aprendizagem e que deve fazer parte do cotidiano da sala de aula, permitindo observações sobre o processo de construção de conhecimentos pelos estudantes e sobre a própria prática docente.
(__)saberes sistematizados numa dada área do conhecimento ou de forma inter/transdisciplinar.
(__)conjunto de métodos, processos, procedimentos utilizados na mediação da construção do conhecimento.
Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a correta associação entre as colunas:
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)
É fundamental ao profissional da educação realizar, continuamente, reflexões sobre a função social da escola pública na contemporaneidade. A esse respeito, analise as afirmativas a seguir:
I.Cabe à escola, na atualidade, promover a reflexão crítica sobre a sociedade e assumir um compromisso com: a educação integral; com a promoção da igualdade educacional sobre a qual as singularidades devem ser consideradas e atendidas; com a equidade, que pressupõe reconhecer que as necessidades dos estudantes são diferentes e a escola tem papel fundamental na redução da desigualdade.
II.Cabe à escola, na atualidade, privilegiar a memorização de conteúdos de ensino a partir do exercício mecânico e da repetição.
III.Dentre as funções sociais da escola está privilegiar o cuidado com a criança em detrimento dos processos de ensino e aprendizagem, os quais podem ocorrer em outros espaços não escolares.
É correto o que se afirma em:
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)
Conforme Sacristán e Pérez Gómes (2000, p. 27), podemos compreender o currículo como "processo que envolve uma multiplicidade de relações, abertas ou tácitas, em diversos âmbitos, que vão da prescrição à ação, das decisões administrativas às práticas pedagógicas, na escola como instituição e nas unidades escolares especificamente. Para compreendê-lo e, principalmente, para elaborá-lo e implementá-lo de modo a transformar o ensino, é preciso refletir sobre grandes questões".
As teorias sobre currículo podem ser organizadas em teorias tradicionais, críticas e pós-críticas.
Leia as afirmações a seguir sobre currículo:
AFIRMAÇÃO 1
Defendem o reconhecimento da pluralidade cultural e diversidade humana, elaborando uma concepção de currículo que dialoga com as categorias de identidade, alteridade e diferença, trazendo à tona a necessidade de formação humana integral em que seja possível o desenvolvimento da capacidade de olhar através do lugar social do outro, da capacidade de compreender e respeitar às diferenças étnicas, culturais, sexuais, etc.
AFIRMAÇÃO 2
Percebem o currículo como centrado em questões técnicas e baseado em uma perspectiva fabril, de monitoramento e controle dos envolvidos no processo educacional, bem como numa lógica reprodutivista.
A correta inter-relação entre as afirmações apresentadas e as teorias sobre currículo é expressa na afirmativa:
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)
Ao longo da história da educação, esta foi marcada pela influência de diferentes teorias de aprendizagem e desenvolvimento. Analise as duas afirmações a seguir e localize, entre as afirmativas, aquela que corretamente as nomeia:
TEORIA 1 - Também denominado comportamentalismo, relaciona a aprendizagem do ser humano ao ambiente em que se encontra, estando o homem a mercê do meio em que se constitui. Na educação, ancorou métodos de ensino baseados em estímulo e resposta, e na previsibilidade do comportamento humano.
TEORIA 2 - Baseia-se, sobretudo, nos estudos de Piaget sobre o desenvolvimento humano e vincula a aprendizagem ao acionamento de dois mecanismos: a assimilação e a equilibração ou acomodação. O primeiro processo envolve a maneira como o ser humano desenvolve ações para atribuir significado a elementos do ambiente no qual está inserido e interage, buscando, para tanto, estabelecer relações com experiências já vividas e conhecimentos já assimilados. O segundo se refere ao mecanismo por meio do qual o ser humano busca reestabelecer, continuamente, no processo de aprendizagem, um equilíbrio com o meio em que vive.
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)
No novo cenário mundial, reconhecer-se em seu contexto histórico e cultural, comunicar-se, ser criativo, analítico-crítico, participativo, aberto ao novo, colaborativo, resiliente, produtivo e responsável requer muito mais do que o acúmulo de informações. Requer o desenvolvimento de competências para aprender a aprender, saber lidar com a informação cada vez mais disponível, atuar com discernimento e responsabilidade nos contextos das culturas digitais, aplicar conhecimentos para resolver problemas, ter autonomia para tomar decisões, ser proativo para identificar os dados de uma situação e buscar soluções, conviver e aprender com as diferenças e as diversidades. Nesse contexto, a BNCC afirma, de maneira explícita, o seu compromisso com a (BNCC, 2017):
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)
Leia as afirmações a seguir acerca da Educação, Didática e Metodologia de ensino; avaliando sua pertinência de acordo com os documentos norteadores da Educação Brasileira e os estudos contemporâneos na área da Educação:
I.A Educação, sobretudo a educação escolar, é um fenômeno intencional, não neutro, sócio-histórico e cultural.
II.A Didática pode ser compreendida como resultado da ação mediadora entre os processos de ensino e aprendizagem. Ou seja, ela se ocupa de refletir sobre os modos, formas e metodologias para ensinar com o objetivo de promover a aprendizagem dos estudantes.
III.Metodologias de ensino, na contemporaneidade, devem obrigatoriamente estar comprometidas com a transmissão do conhecimento, tomando o professor como única parte ativa no processo de ensinar e aprender.
É correto o que se afirma em:
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)
Associe a segunda coluna de acordo com a primeira, que relaciona termos a notas explicativas:
Primeira coluna: termos
1.Disciplinaridade
2.Interdisciplinaridade
3.Transdisciplinaridade
Segunda coluna: nota explicativa
(__)Gestado por Piaget, o termo se refere à busca por uma abordagem de ensino em que se supere a lógica disciplinar, tensionando e buscando romper as fronteiras entre as disciplinas, para se pensar a maneira como os conhecimentos de diversas áreas se articulam na vida e nas interações sociais.
(__)Exploração científica, didática e metodológica especializada de um determinado domínio de estudo; ou seja, reúnem um conjunto sistemático e organizado de conhecimentos de uma mesma área ou campo de estudo, o que se reflete em planos de ensino, metodologias e materiais desenvolvidos para ensinar.
(__)Método de pesquisa e de ensino em que duas ou mais disciplinas são colocadas em interação, podendo envolver desde o simples diálogo entre ideias até a integração de conceitos, metodologias de ensino e procedimentos.
Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a correta associação entre as colunas:
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)
Analise as afirmações a seguir sobre avaliação escolar:
I.De acordo com a BNCC (2017), é fundamental que as redes de ensino e os professores adotem a avaliação formativa de processos ou de resultados, que levem em conta os contextos e as condições de aprendizagem, tomando tais registros como referência para melhorar o desempenho da escola, dos professores e dos alunos.
II.A avaliação formativa se baseia em três pilares: ela é contínua, cumulativa e sistemática.
III.Em relação à avaliação diagnóstica, podemos considerá-la como um tipo de avaliação em que se busca compreender os conhecimentos que os estudantes já possuem, de forma a se traçar o seu histórico de construção de saberes. Por meio de avaliações diagnósticas, é possível observar: o que o estudante já sabe; o que deveria saber, mas ainda não sabe e, inclusive, as suas expectativas em relação ao seu processo de aprendizagem.
É correto o que se afirma em:
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)
história da educação escolar no contexto ocidental é marcada, desde as suas origens na Antiguidade Clássica, pela maneira como se organizaram e se organizam as sociedades e pelas maneiras que atribuem valor e função social à escola ao longo do tempo. A esse respeito, analise as afirmações a seguir:
I.Na Antiguidade Clássica, os modos de ensinar e aprender foram profundamente influenciados pela educação grega - sobretudo espartana e ateniense - e pela educação romana.
II.Durante a Idade Média, a educação foi profundamente influenciada pela Reforma Protestante, que apregoava a liberdade dos métodos de ensino e a universalização da alfabetização.
III.A Educação escolar no Brasil Colônia foi profundamente influenciada pela Igreja Católica, sobretudo pelos educadores jesuítas, cuja abordagem pedagógica era marcada por uma intensa rigidez na maneira de pensar e de interpretar a realidade e métodos de ensino que privilegiavam o preparo, a seleção e o controle.
IV - No contexto pós-Revolução Industrial, ao longo do século XX, surgem, em países como Alemanha e Rússia, discussões sobre princípios educacionais que viriam a resultar, a partir da sistematização a elas dada por Dewey (nos Estados Unidos), na Escola Nova. Nela, defendia-se, entre outros princípios, conforme Manacorda (2002), a necessidade de jogos e brinquedos na instrução da criança; a aprendizagem ancorada no respeito; escolas equipadas com laboratórios; a psicologia como ferramenta para as exigências ativas; a educação como meio de transformação social e o aprender fazendo.
É correto o que se afirma em:
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)
Analise as asserções a seguir:
I.A Educação das Relações Étnico Raciais não é uma política somente para os negros ou para sujeito nenhum, se os negros não estiverem fisicamente presentes.
PORQUE
II.A Educação das Relações Étnico Raciais é para todos e traz centralidade em torno de um sujeito e seus conteúdos como forma de equilibrar as relações sociais e étnicas na escola e, sobretudo, como forma de potencializar a formação de sujeitos que se compreendam iguais nas suas identidades específicas.
A respeito dessas asserções, assinale a opção correta:
Conheça nossos planos