Questões de Concurso
Comentadas para professor - inglês
Foram encontradas 12.081 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
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)
Observe the following comic strip and select the correct alternative:
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)
Within the provided text, identify the conjunction that simultaneously introduces an opposing viewpoint while emphasizing causality between two ideas:
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 the text above, it is possible to state that:
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:
Maria foi numa padaria e comprou 4 leites no valor de R$ 6,50 cada e 3 bolos no valor de R$ 18,25 cada. Ela pagou a conta com uma nota de R$ 100,00, recebendo de troco um valor, em reais, de:
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:
Sorry for the delayed response
01 Have ___ (1) e-mail you’ve been meaning (but not really) to reply to? Read below for some
02 reasons why your response has been delayed:
03 • I totally meant to respond to this earlier, but I didn’t know ___ (2) answer to your question
04 and I kept not caring enough to ask anyone. Now ___ (3) weird amount of time has passed,
05 so I’m going to loop Laura (cc’d) into this e-mail thread to see if she can handle this. Laura?
06 • Sorry for ___ (4) delay! I put off answering your e-mail until I had ___ (5) even more tedious
07 task that I wanted to avoid. Thanks!
08 • So sorry that I’m just getting to this now. There were six other people on this e-mail thread
09 and I was hoping that one of them would answer your question and I could just go on living
10 my life.
(Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CsHm2YnteFa/ – text especially adapted for this test).
Analyze the following excerpt from the text: “(...) your response has been delayed” (l. 02). Mark the alternative below that shows the sentence correctly rewritten in an interrogative structure and in the same verb tense.
Sorry for the delayed response
01 Have ___ (1) e-mail you’ve been meaning (but not really) to reply to? Read below for some
02 reasons why your response has been delayed:
03 • I totally meant to respond to this earlier, but I didn’t know ___ (2) answer to your question
04 and I kept not caring enough to ask anyone. Now ___ (3) weird amount of time has passed,
05 so I’m going to loop Laura (cc’d) into this e-mail thread to see if she can handle this. Laura?
06 • Sorry for ___ (4) delay! I put off answering your e-mail until I had ___ (5) even more tedious
07 task that I wanted to avoid. Thanks!
08 • So sorry that I’m just getting to this now. There were six other people on this e-mail thread
09 and I was hoping that one of them would answer your question and I could just go on living
10 my life.
(Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CsHm2YnteFa/ – text especially adapted for this test).
Analyze the following statements about the highlighted word “enough” (l. 04):
I. It is an adjective and can only be used with nouns.
II. It is an adverb, and it can modify adjectives and verbs.
III. It should be placed after the verb.
Which ones are correct?
Sorry for the delayed response
01 Have ___ (1) e-mail you’ve been meaning (but not really) to reply to? Read below for some
02 reasons why your response has been delayed:
03 • I totally meant to respond to this earlier, but I didn’t know ___ (2) answer to your question
04 and I kept not caring enough to ask anyone. Now ___ (3) weird amount of time has passed,
05 so I’m going to loop Laura (cc’d) into this e-mail thread to see if she can handle this. Laura?
06 • Sorry for ___ (4) delay! I put off answering your e-mail until I had ___ (5) even more tedious
07 task that I wanted to avoid. Thanks!
08 • So sorry that I’m just getting to this now. There were six other people on this e-mail thread
09 and I was hoping that one of them would answer your question and I could just go on living
10 my life.
(Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CsHm2YnteFa/ – text especially adapted for this test).
Which of the alternatives below correctly and respectively completes the gaps in the text with the missing articles, in the order of 1 to 5?
Sorry for the delayed response
01 Have ___ (1) e-mail you’ve been meaning (but not really) to reply to? Read below for some
02 reasons why your response has been delayed:
03 • I totally meant to respond to this earlier, but I didn’t know ___ (2) answer to your question
04 and I kept not caring enough to ask anyone. Now ___ (3) weird amount of time has passed,
05 so I’m going to loop Laura (cc’d) into this e-mail thread to see if she can handle this. Laura?
06 • Sorry for ___ (4) delay! I put off answering your e-mail until I had ___ (5) even more tedious
07 task that I wanted to avoid. Thanks!
08 • So sorry that I’m just getting to this now. There were six other people on this e-mail thread
09 and I was hoping that one of them would answer your question and I could just go on living
10 my life.
(Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CsHm2YnteFa/ – text especially adapted for this test).
In which of the sentences below the underlined phrasal verb “go on” is used with the most similar meaning to the one used in the text (l. 09)?
Sorry for the delayed response
01 Have ___ (1) e-mail you’ve been meaning (but not really) to reply to? Read below for some
02 reasons why your response has been delayed:
03 • I totally meant to respond to this earlier, but I didn’t know ___ (2) answer to your question
04 and I kept not caring enough to ask anyone. Now ___ (3) weird amount of time has passed,
05 so I’m going to loop Laura (cc’d) into this e-mail thread to see if she can handle this. Laura?
06 • Sorry for ___ (4) delay! I put off answering your e-mail until I had ___ (5) even more tedious
07 task that I wanted to avoid. Thanks!
08 • So sorry that I’m just getting to this now. There were six other people on this e-mail thread
09 and I was hoping that one of them would answer your question and I could just go on living
10 my life.
(Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CsHm2YnteFa/ – text especially adapted for this test).
Mark the INCORRECT alternative about the text.
Segundo Mike Ribble, a cidadania digital envolve alguns pontos básicos:
I. Alfabetização digital (capacidade usar a tecnologia digital).
II. Saúde e bem-estar digital (ligados ao uso da tecnologia).
III. Etiqueta digital (padrão de conduta dos usuários da internet).
Quais estão corretas?
É um conjunto de propostas que definem ações voltadas à educação para que as escolas formem cidadãos ativos na construção da sociedade, definindo os métodos educacionais utilizados para que o estudante atinja o desenvolvimento de maneira geral. Esse é o conceito de:
Nessa metodologia, o aluno tem o primeiro contato com a matéria a ser estudada em casa, chegando à sala de aula (física ou virtual síncrona) já tendo lido, visto ou ouvido algum material sobre o assunto. Como se chama essa metodologia?
Pode ser classificado em dois tipos: o metodológico e o radical. O criador do modelo metodológico é John B. Watson (1878-1958), e para ele, todo ser humano aprende a partir de seu ambiente, estando o homem à mercê do meio. Essa descrição se refere a qual modelo metodológico?
Conheça nossos planos