Questões de Vestibular

Foram encontradas 68.627 questões

Resolva questões gratuitamente!

Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!

Ano: 2017 Banca: CEV-URCA Órgão: URCA Prova: CEV-URCA - 2017 - URCA - PROVA I: Física, Matemática, Química e História |
Q1790729 Física

A cada 10 metros de profundidade a pressão hidrostática em um lago aumenta de aproximadamente 1 atmosfera. Sendo 1 atmosfera a pressão atmosférica local, um objeto a 30 metros de profundidade neste lago estará sujeito a uma pressão de:

Alternativas
Ano: 2017 Banca: CEV-URCA Órgão: URCA Prova: CEV-URCA - 2017 - URCA - PROVA I: Física, Matemática, Química e História |
Q1790728 Física

Considere o valor aproximado da aceleração da gravidade como sendo 10metros por segundo ao quadrado. O trabalho realizado pela força peso sobre um corpo de massa 1quilograma quando este é suspenso de uma altura de meio metro para uma altura de um metro e meio, em relação ao solo, é:

Alternativas
Ano: 2017 Banca: CEV-URCA Órgão: URCA Prova: CEV-URCA - 2017 - URCA - PROVA I: Física, Matemática, Química e História |
Q1790727 Física

Um corpo de massa 1kg e velocidade (num certo referencial inercial) de 3m/s colide não-elasticamente com outro de 2kg inicialmente em repouso. Após a colisão ambos permanecem juntos. Podemos notar que:

Alternativas
Ano: 2017 Banca: CEV-URCA Órgão: URCA Prova: CEV-URCA - 2017 - URCA - PROVA I: Física, Matemática, Química e História |
Q1790726 Física

Um objeto de 1 quilograma cai livremente (a partir do repouso) de uma certa altura sob ação da gravidade e na presença de uma força de resistência do ar de 2newtons. Considere a aceleração da gravidade como sendo aproximadamente 10 metros por segundo ao quadrado. Então a velocidade do objeto e o deslocamento percorrido por ele após 2 segundos de queda são, aproximadamente:

Alternativas
Ano: 2017 Banca: CEV-URCA Órgão: URCA Prova: CEV-URCA - 2017 - URCA - PROVA I: Física, Matemática, Química e História |
Q1790725 Física
Um carro percorre um trecho de rodovia com velocidade constante de 60km/h (em quilômetros por hora) durante 15minutos. Supondo que este veículo faz nesta situação 15km por litro de combustível então a quantidade de combustível consumido por ele neste trecho foi de:
Alternativas
Ano: 2017 Banca: CEV-URCA Órgão: URCA Prova: CEV-URCA - 2017 - URCA - PROVA I: Física, Matemática, Química e História |
Q1790724 Física
A unidade de medida composta Ns²/m, onde N = newton, s = segundo e m = metro, corresponde a uma unidade de:

Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790468 Inglês
Science Education in the United States of America

(Audrey B. Champagne.)

    Science education in the United States of America is in the midst of an unprecedented reform movement-unprecedented because the movement is driven by national standards developed with support from the federal government. The standards for science education are redefining the character of science education from kindergarten to the postgraduate education of scientists and science teachers. Unlike the education in most countries of the world, education of students in kindergarten through grade twelve in the United States is not the responsibility of the federal government but is controlled by the individual states. States have the right to regulate all elements of the curriculum-the content all students are expected to learn, the structural organization of programs across all grades, the structural organization of the yearly curriculum in each subject, teaching methods, and textbooks. Historically, and even now, the states jealously guard all their rights and resist efforts by the federal government to exercise control over matters that are the responsibility of the states. The federal government's involvement in education has been to identify matters of national priority and to provide funds and other resources to the states to meet the national priorities. So, for instance, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States felt that its perceived preeminence in scientific research and its national safety were threatened, science education was identified as a national priority. The primary purpose of the federal government's initiatives was to encourage and upgrade the science education of young people who would become practicing scientists. This effort was not perceived by the states as an erosion of their rights because it was a response to a threat to the nation and was targeted on the science education of a relatively few students. The current situation is quite different.
    The federal government's underwriting of the development of national standards for education has the potential for shifting the control of the curriculum from the states to the federal government. This initiative, supported by the National Association of Governors, is the result of the concern of political, business and industrial leaders with the poor quality of education across the nation and with the effect this poor quality has on the U.S. position in the world economy. The goal of the standards movement from the prospective of political, business, and industrial leaders is to strengthen education so that the schools will produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required of them to be productive in the workplace.
   The pedagogy and attitudes of many teachers and professors alike has been that science is for the few. So little concern or effort was applied to make science interesting or to make learning it easy. Consequently, only highly motivated and highly intelligent students survived science courses. Thus it appears education in the natural sciences develops individuals who reason well, are critical thinkers, are creative problem solvers-in short, are intelligent. But, we must ask, does education in the natural sciences produce smarter people or do smart people survive science as it is taught? While historically the answer to the question may well have been survival, the national standards are based on the beliefs that science is for all and can produce smarter people.

(Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ608194.pdf. Adapted.)
Analyse the items usage in the text. Mark the one which is a modifier.
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790467 Inglês
Science Education in the United States of America

(Audrey B. Champagne.)

    Science education in the United States of America is in the midst of an unprecedented reform movement-unprecedented because the movement is driven by national standards developed with support from the federal government. The standards for science education are redefining the character of science education from kindergarten to the postgraduate education of scientists and science teachers. Unlike the education in most countries of the world, education of students in kindergarten through grade twelve in the United States is not the responsibility of the federal government but is controlled by the individual states. States have the right to regulate all elements of the curriculum-the content all students are expected to learn, the structural organization of programs across all grades, the structural organization of the yearly curriculum in each subject, teaching methods, and textbooks. Historically, and even now, the states jealously guard all their rights and resist efforts by the federal government to exercise control over matters that are the responsibility of the states. The federal government's involvement in education has been to identify matters of national priority and to provide funds and other resources to the states to meet the national priorities. So, for instance, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States felt that its perceived preeminence in scientific research and its national safety were threatened, science education was identified as a national priority. The primary purpose of the federal government's initiatives was to encourage and upgrade the science education of young people who would become practicing scientists. This effort was not perceived by the states as an erosion of their rights because it was a response to a threat to the nation and was targeted on the science education of a relatively few students. The current situation is quite different.
    The federal government's underwriting of the development of national standards for education has the potential for shifting the control of the curriculum from the states to the federal government. This initiative, supported by the National Association of Governors, is the result of the concern of political, business and industrial leaders with the poor quality of education across the nation and with the effect this poor quality has on the U.S. position in the world economy. The goal of the standards movement from the prospective of political, business, and industrial leaders is to strengthen education so that the schools will produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required of them to be productive in the workplace.
   The pedagogy and attitudes of many teachers and professors alike has been that science is for the few. So little concern or effort was applied to make science interesting or to make learning it easy. Consequently, only highly motivated and highly intelligent students survived science courses. Thus it appears education in the natural sciences develops individuals who reason well, are critical thinkers, are creative problem solvers-in short, are intelligent. But, we must ask, does education in the natural sciences produce smarter people or do smart people survive science as it is taught? While historically the answer to the question may well have been survival, the national standards are based on the beliefs that science is for all and can produce smarter people.

(Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ608194.pdf. Adapted.)
For Instance (L22) sets:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790466 Inglês
Science Education in the United States of America

(Audrey B. Champagne.)

    Science education in the United States of America is in the midst of an unprecedented reform movement-unprecedented because the movement is driven by national standards developed with support from the federal government. The standards for science education are redefining the character of science education from kindergarten to the postgraduate education of scientists and science teachers. Unlike the education in most countries of the world, education of students in kindergarten through grade twelve in the United States is not the responsibility of the federal government but is controlled by the individual states. States have the right to regulate all elements of the curriculum-the content all students are expected to learn, the structural organization of programs across all grades, the structural organization of the yearly curriculum in each subject, teaching methods, and textbooks. Historically, and even now, the states jealously guard all their rights and resist efforts by the federal government to exercise control over matters that are the responsibility of the states. The federal government's involvement in education has been to identify matters of national priority and to provide funds and other resources to the states to meet the national priorities. So, for instance, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States felt that its perceived preeminence in scientific research and its national safety were threatened, science education was identified as a national priority. The primary purpose of the federal government's initiatives was to encourage and upgrade the science education of young people who would become practicing scientists. This effort was not perceived by the states as an erosion of their rights because it was a response to a threat to the nation and was targeted on the science education of a relatively few students. The current situation is quite different.
    The federal government's underwriting of the development of national standards for education has the potential for shifting the control of the curriculum from the states to the federal government. This initiative, supported by the National Association of Governors, is the result of the concern of political, business and industrial leaders with the poor quality of education across the nation and with the effect this poor quality has on the U.S. position in the world economy. The goal of the standards movement from the prospective of political, business, and industrial leaders is to strengthen education so that the schools will produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required of them to be productive in the workplace.
   The pedagogy and attitudes of many teachers and professors alike has been that science is for the few. So little concern or effort was applied to make science interesting or to make learning it easy. Consequently, only highly motivated and highly intelligent students survived science courses. Thus it appears education in the natural sciences develops individuals who reason well, are critical thinkers, are creative problem solvers-in short, are intelligent. But, we must ask, does education in the natural sciences produce smarter people or do smart people survive science as it is taught? While historically the answer to the question may well have been survival, the national standards are based on the beliefs that science is for all and can produce smarter people.

(Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ608194.pdf. Adapted.)
The goal of the standards movement is to:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790465 Inglês
Science Education in the United States of America

(Audrey B. Champagne.)

    Science education in the United States of America is in the midst of an unprecedented reform movement-unprecedented because the movement is driven by national standards developed with support from the federal government. The standards for science education are redefining the character of science education from kindergarten to the postgraduate education of scientists and science teachers. Unlike the education in most countries of the world, education of students in kindergarten through grade twelve in the United States is not the responsibility of the federal government but is controlled by the individual states. States have the right to regulate all elements of the curriculum-the content all students are expected to learn, the structural organization of programs across all grades, the structural organization of the yearly curriculum in each subject, teaching methods, and textbooks. Historically, and even now, the states jealously guard all their rights and resist efforts by the federal government to exercise control over matters that are the responsibility of the states. The federal government's involvement in education has been to identify matters of national priority and to provide funds and other resources to the states to meet the national priorities. So, for instance, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States felt that its perceived preeminence in scientific research and its national safety were threatened, science education was identified as a national priority. The primary purpose of the federal government's initiatives was to encourage and upgrade the science education of young people who would become practicing scientists. This effort was not perceived by the states as an erosion of their rights because it was a response to a threat to the nation and was targeted on the science education of a relatively few students. The current situation is quite different.
    The federal government's underwriting of the development of national standards for education has the potential for shifting the control of the curriculum from the states to the federal government. This initiative, supported by the National Association of Governors, is the result of the concern of political, business and industrial leaders with the poor quality of education across the nation and with the effect this poor quality has on the U.S. position in the world economy. The goal of the standards movement from the prospective of political, business, and industrial leaders is to strengthen education so that the schools will produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required of them to be productive in the workplace.
   The pedagogy and attitudes of many teachers and professors alike has been that science is for the few. So little concern or effort was applied to make science interesting or to make learning it easy. Consequently, only highly motivated and highly intelligent students survived science courses. Thus it appears education in the natural sciences develops individuals who reason well, are critical thinkers, are creative problem solvers-in short, are intelligent. But, we must ask, does education in the natural sciences produce smarter people or do smart people survive science as it is taught? While historically the answer to the question may well have been survival, the national standards are based on the beliefs that science is for all and can produce smarter people.

(Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ608194.pdf. Adapted.)
“Meet” (L22) does NOT mean:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790464 Inglês
Science Education in the United States of America

(Audrey B. Champagne.)

    Science education in the United States of America is in the midst of an unprecedented reform movement-unprecedented because the movement is driven by national standards developed with support from the federal government. The standards for science education are redefining the character of science education from kindergarten to the postgraduate education of scientists and science teachers. Unlike the education in most countries of the world, education of students in kindergarten through grade twelve in the United States is not the responsibility of the federal government but is controlled by the individual states. States have the right to regulate all elements of the curriculum-the content all students are expected to learn, the structural organization of programs across all grades, the structural organization of the yearly curriculum in each subject, teaching methods, and textbooks. Historically, and even now, the states jealously guard all their rights and resist efforts by the federal government to exercise control over matters that are the responsibility of the states. The federal government's involvement in education has been to identify matters of national priority and to provide funds and other resources to the states to meet the national priorities. So, for instance, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States felt that its perceived preeminence in scientific research and its national safety were threatened, science education was identified as a national priority. The primary purpose of the federal government's initiatives was to encourage and upgrade the science education of young people who would become practicing scientists. This effort was not perceived by the states as an erosion of their rights because it was a response to a threat to the nation and was targeted on the science education of a relatively few students. The current situation is quite different.
    The federal government's underwriting of the development of national standards for education has the potential for shifting the control of the curriculum from the states to the federal government. This initiative, supported by the National Association of Governors, is the result of the concern of political, business and industrial leaders with the poor quality of education across the nation and with the effect this poor quality has on the U.S. position in the world economy. The goal of the standards movement from the prospective of political, business, and industrial leaders is to strengthen education so that the schools will produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required of them to be productive in the workplace.
   The pedagogy and attitudes of many teachers and professors alike has been that science is for the few. So little concern or effort was applied to make science interesting or to make learning it easy. Consequently, only highly motivated and highly intelligent students survived science courses. Thus it appears education in the natural sciences develops individuals who reason well, are critical thinkers, are creative problem solvers-in short, are intelligent. But, we must ask, does education in the natural sciences produce smarter people or do smart people survive science as it is taught? While historically the answer to the question may well have been survival, the national standards are based on the beliefs that science is for all and can produce smarter people.

(Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ608194.pdf. Adapted.)
The text states that:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790463 Inglês
Science Education in the United States of America

(Audrey B. Champagne.)

    Science education in the United States of America is in the midst of an unprecedented reform movement-unprecedented because the movement is driven by national standards developed with support from the federal government. The standards for science education are redefining the character of science education from kindergarten to the postgraduate education of scientists and science teachers. Unlike the education in most countries of the world, education of students in kindergarten through grade twelve in the United States is not the responsibility of the federal government but is controlled by the individual states. States have the right to regulate all elements of the curriculum-the content all students are expected to learn, the structural organization of programs across all grades, the structural organization of the yearly curriculum in each subject, teaching methods, and textbooks. Historically, and even now, the states jealously guard all their rights and resist efforts by the federal government to exercise control over matters that are the responsibility of the states. The federal government's involvement in education has been to identify matters of national priority and to provide funds and other resources to the states to meet the national priorities. So, for instance, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the United States felt that its perceived preeminence in scientific research and its national safety were threatened, science education was identified as a national priority. The primary purpose of the federal government's initiatives was to encourage and upgrade the science education of young people who would become practicing scientists. This effort was not perceived by the states as an erosion of their rights because it was a response to a threat to the nation and was targeted on the science education of a relatively few students. The current situation is quite different.
    The federal government's underwriting of the development of national standards for education has the potential for shifting the control of the curriculum from the states to the federal government. This initiative, supported by the National Association of Governors, is the result of the concern of political, business and industrial leaders with the poor quality of education across the nation and with the effect this poor quality has on the U.S. position in the world economy. The goal of the standards movement from the prospective of political, business, and industrial leaders is to strengthen education so that the schools will produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required of them to be productive in the workplace.
   The pedagogy and attitudes of many teachers and professors alike has been that science is for the few. So little concern or effort was applied to make science interesting or to make learning it easy. Consequently, only highly motivated and highly intelligent students survived science courses. Thus it appears education in the natural sciences develops individuals who reason well, are critical thinkers, are creative problem solvers-in short, are intelligent. But, we must ask, does education in the natural sciences produce smarter people or do smart people survive science as it is taught? While historically the answer to the question may well have been survival, the national standards are based on the beliefs that science is for all and can produce smarter people.

(Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ608194.pdf. Adapted.)
“Thus” (L52) introduces a/an:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790462 Química
Considerando o parametilbenzenol, conhecido usualmente como orto-cresol, assinale o número de carbonos, o tipo de ligação, a função e a massa molar, em g/mol, respectivamente:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790461 Química
Assinale a afirmativa que corresponde à Lei de Ação das Massas.
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790460 Química
O trecho a seguir contextualiza a questão. Leia-o atentamente.
Considerando a reação entre o gás carbônico e a água dentro dos vegetais tem-se a produção de glicose e gás oxigênio.
Reagindo 154 g de gás carbônico com 72 g de água, espera-se a formação de 96 g de gás oxigênio. Assinale a alternativa que compromete tal afirmação.
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790459 Química
O trecho a seguir contextualiza a questão. Leia-o atentamente.
Considerando a reação entre o gás carbônico e a água dentro dos vegetais tem-se a produção de glicose e gás oxigênio.
Indique a quantidade do volume molar, em L, de glicose ao ser produzido 6 mols de gás oxigênio, tendo o volume molar igual a 22,4 L.
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790458 Química
Considere a estrutura referente ao composto telmisartana, utilizado na redução da pressão arterial, para responder à questão.


A fração mássica correta, em %, do calcogênio na estrutura do composto é:
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790457 Química
Considere a estrutura referente ao composto telmisartana, utilizado na redução da pressão arterial, para responder à questão.


Assinale a quantidade de hibridação sp3 e sp presente no composto telmisartana, respectivamente.
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790456 Química
Considere a estrutura referente ao composto telmisartana, utilizado na redução da pressão arterial, para responder à questão.


Indique a alternativa que corresponde correta e respectivamente à massa molar e ao número de ligações pi do composto.
Alternativas
Ano: 2019 Banca: Instituto Consulplan Órgão: FIMCA Prova: Instituto Consulplan - 2019 - FIMCA - Vestibular de Medicina - Edital nº 01/ 2020 |
Q1790455 Química
Considerando o estudo da eletrólise ígnea do cloreto de magnésio, indique a quantidade de massa de magnésio metálico obtido quando uma corrente de 10 A atravessa a cuba eletrolítica durante 40 minutos.
Alternativas
Respostas
5421: D
5422: E
5423: D
5424: C
5425: B
5426: A
5427: C
5428: B
5429: A
5430: B
5431: A
5432: C
5433: C
5434: E
5435: E
5436: A
5437: B
5438: A
5439: E
5440: C