Questões de Vestibular PUC - SP 2018 para Vestibular - Segundo Semestre
Foram encontradas 81 questões
I. Girondinos, durante o processo revolucionário francês, criam o Diretório e instauram o voto censitário, além de impedirem a reforma agrária defendida pelos Jacobinos.
II. Oliver Cromwell, líder da Revolução Puritana, ao enfrentar a Holanda entre 1652 e 1654, se auto intitula Lorde Protetor da Inglaterra, Irlanda e Escócia, impondo seu cargo como vitalício e hereditário.
III. Durante a República Romana, o Senado manteve a proibição do casamento entre patrícios e plebeus até a aprovação da Lei Canuleia.
São CORRETAS as afirmações
O trecho acima trata das consequências dos ideais da Revolução Francesa para Portugal e o Brasil, como exemplo do que ocorreu internamente nas monarquias absolutistas após 1789. Assim, podemos AFIRMAR que a Revolução Francesa e seus ideais
O texto refere-se à exploração das terras do Congo durante o imperialismo do século XIX, o que deixou marcas no país e em todo continente africano. Sobre a história deste continente a partir do século XIX, podemos AFIRMAR que
I. A divisão territorial criada pela Conferência de Berlim, em 1885, ajudou a motivar inúmeros conflitos regionais no continente, pois não respeitou as diferentes etnias africanas e suas ocupações territoriais de origem.
II. A grande maioria dos países africanos conquistou sua independência após a Segunda Guerra Mundial, porém, inúmeros outros conflitos surgiram, decorrentes de disputas políticas internas associadas às influências de EUA e URSS, já no contexto da Guerra Fria.
III. A África, após o colapso da URSS, conseguiu desenvolver democracias sedimentadas em acordos étnicos e, hoje, pouco sofre com questões sociais e econômicas, graças a um crescente distanciamento dos países europeus.
“Em primeiro amistoso desde 1947, Estados Unidos vence Cuba em Havana”
Fonte:<http://www.espn.com.br/noticia/637236_em-primeiro-amistoso-desde-
1947-estados-unidos-vence-cuba-em-havana> – acessado em 30/04/2018
Sobre as relações entre os dois países no século XX, podemos AFIRMAR que
A partir do texto acima, do contexto mundial da década de 1930 e dos conhecimentos históricos sobre a Guerra Civil Espanhola, pode-se AFIRMAR que
(Para entender a Terra, 6ª edição-2013, página 538, editora bookman).
Imagem relacionada à circulação geral da atmosfera. Retirado do site: <https://www.internetgeography.net/topics/what-is-global-atmospheric-circulation/> Os ventos são elementos climáticos importantes na formação das paisagens naturais do planeta. Utilizando seus conhecimentos sobre o tema, a imagem acima e o fragmento de texto apresentado, assinale a alternativa que apresenta, respectivamente, uma paisagem natural comum e característica das latitudes próximas dos 30º, e a denominação dos ventos que fluem de volta, rumo ao equador.
“A fome é a expressão biológica de males sociológicos”, frase de Josué de Castro, médico pernambucano que estudou a questão da fome no Brasil em seu livro de 1964
– “Geografia da fome”.
Após a interpretação dos gráficos e contando com o
auxílio da frase de Josué de Castro, assinale a alternativa
que melhor justifica o tema fome:
Assinale a alternativa que apresenta o comentário CORRETO sobre o que foi dito no texto acima.
O texto abaixo deve ser lido como apoio para responder a questão.
A imensa riqueza social e natural do Cerrado está ameaçada de se perder. No ritmo atual de devastação, o bioma como tal pode desaparecer para sempre já em 2030. As consequências socioambientais desse processo são dramáticas e ainda serão mais, como diversos analistas e organizações sociais vêm alertando, caso não seja feito um esforço articulado para impedir que essa expansão para a produção de commodities continue nos moldes de violência, predação e empobrecimento que a tem caracterizado.
(Le Monde Diplomatique Brasil, março de 2018, nº128, suplemento especial)
O texto apresenta uma enorme preocupação com o 2º maior bioma em área do Brasil. Assinale a alternativa que apresenta
de forma explícita fatos, características e tendências que podem ser identificados de forma implícita no texto.
I. O FMA é uma iniciativa liderada pela ONU e de países que necessitam, urgentemente, de água potável para sua população local, como Índia, Indonésia e Arábia Saudita.
II. O FAMA critica o FMA, pois acredita que esses encontros são uma forma de facilitar a mercantilização da água, transformando-a em uma mercadoria cada vez mais valiosa, devido ao avanço de sua escassez.
III. As indústrias e o consumo doméstico são os grandes responsáveis pela maioria da água doce consumida no planeta. Os encontros destacados no texto buscam soluções sustentáveis para esse problema.
IV. Um dos temas mais polêmicos relacionados à questão da água é a chamada “água virtual”, isto é, a quantidade de água necessária para a finalização de um produto e que, normalmente, não é levada em conta de maneira justa, no preço final de uma mercadoria. Os grandes exportadores de carne e madeira, por exemplo, exigem uma revisão de preços desses itens, pois defendem a tese de que junto à carne ou madeira exportada, milhões de litros de água, de forma indireta, também são exportados.
Assinale a alternativa CORRETA:
Brasil tem maior número de assassinatos no campo desde 2003; Pará lidera o ranking de mortes
A violência no campo no Brasil é a maior desde 2003, segundo o relatório da Comissão Pastoral da Terra (CPT), divulgado nesta segunda-feira (16). Em 2017, foram 70 assassinatos, um aumento de 15% em relação ao número de 2016. O Pará liderou o ranking de violência, com 21 assassinatos no ano passado.
Dos 70 assassinatos em 2017, 28 ocorreram em massacres, o que corresponde
a 40% do total. Desde 1985 a 2017, foram registrados 46 massacres no país
com 220 vítimas. No período, o Pará registrou 26 massacres, que vitimaram 125 pessoas.
Fonte notícia: <https://g1.globo.com/pa/para/noticia/para-lidera-o-ranking-de-
mortes-no-campo-com-125-assassinatos.ghtml>
Ao compararmos a notícia ao lado, datada de março de 2018, com o mapa, que apresenta o período de 1985-1996, podemos CONCLUIR que:
Mapa do Oriente Médio
O conflito na Síria surge de maneira mais evidente em março de 2011, na esteira da primavera árabe, através de manifestações contra as políticas do presidente, que utilizou força desproporcional na tentativa de conter os manifestantes. Essa ação violenta por parte do governo desencadeou novas mobilizações populares em muitas cidades sírias, exigindo reformas políticas e a renúncia do presidente. Desde então, uma escalada de violência e a incorporação de novos atores, transformaram as manifestações em um conflito armado de enormes proporções. Segundo o observatório Sírio de Direitos Humanos, já morreram mais de 350.000 pessoas e 56.900 estão desaparecidas que são consideradas mortas. (dados de março de 2018).
Assinale a alternativa que apresenta a continuidade CORRETA em relação ao texto acima.
(...) No modelo, chamado "dockless" (sem estação), popular na China e também existente em cidades europeias, as bicicletas ficam travadas na rua, e os usuários podem liberálas por meio de um aplicativo para celular. (...) O sistema entra em vigor durante uma gestão que não deve promover avanços significativos na malha cicloviária.
Notícia retirada do site da Folha de S.Paulo que foi publicada na versão impressa no dia 2 de abril de 2018 - <httpps://www1.folha.uol.com.br/cotidiano/2018/04/sp-terra-20-mil-bikes-sem-marchas-e- com-gps-para-deixar-onde-quiser.shtml>
As palavras bicicleta, ciclovia, ciclofaixa se tornam cada vez mais comuns quando o tema é “mobilidade urbana”. Negligenciada no Brasil durante décadas, a bicicleta sempre foi vista, sobretudo, como objeto de lazer, principalmente aos olhos da classe média e alta da sociedade. Na última década, esse modal participa das alternativas propostas para tentar dar mais fluidez ao trânsito, especialmente nas grandes cidades brasileiras. A notícia acima evidencia até um certo protagonismo da bicicleta como transporte urbano rápido, eficiente e de baixíssimo impacto ambiental. Utilizando o que foi dito e seus conhecimentos sobre o tema, assinale a alternativa CORRETA.
Responda a questão de acordo com o texto de Lauren Camera.
Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities
By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.
In a unanimous decision with major implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.
“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”
There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.
The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.
While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.
Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.
“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
*reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
In:<https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilities>
Responda a questão de acordo com o texto de Lauren Camera.
Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities
By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.
In a unanimous decision with major implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.
“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”
There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.
The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.
While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.
Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.
“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
*reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
In:<https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilities>
Responda a questão de acordo com o texto de Lauren Camera.
Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities
By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.
In a unanimous decision with major implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.
“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”
There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.
The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.
While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.
Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.
“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
*reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
In:<https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilities>
Responda a questão de acordo com o texto de Lauren Camera.
Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities
By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.
In a unanimous decision with major implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.
“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”
There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.
The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.
While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.
Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.
“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
*reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
In:<https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilities>
Responda a questão de acordo com o texto de Lauren Camera.
Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities
By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.
In a unanimous decision with major implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.
“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”
There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.
The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.
While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.
Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.
“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
*reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
In:<https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilities>
Responda a questão de acordo com o texto de Lauren Camera.
Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities
By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.
In a unanimous decision with major implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.
“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”
There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.
The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.
While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.
Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.
“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”
*reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.
In:<https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilities>
Conheça nossos planos