Questões de Concurso

Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:

Kumaravadivelu’s work on language teaching aims to illustrate the emergence of a postmethod condition in the literature on teaching second/foreign languages, and has what I realize to be a very personalized vision of language teaching.

The different chapters discuss how methods evolved, and then critically assess those methods. A theme emerges that methods and predetermined materials and strategies lack the flexibility to be applied to the many varied contexts of English Language Teaching. Postmethod pedagogies can be differentiated from methods by an emphasis on developing teachers’ skills and flexibility to meet students’ needs. Kumaravadivelu’s critique of methods is the most comprehensive and detailed I have read.

The book is divided into three major sections. The first section describes language as system, discourse and ideology. The second section provides a brief history, description, and assessment of language teaching methods and categorizes them as language-centered, learner-centered, and learningcentered. The third section, Postmethod Perspectives, discusses the parameters of postmethod pedagogy and analyses its challenges and barriers. I found this final section the most compelling reading. The postmethod condition commends strategies to “advance a context-sensitive, locationspecific pedagogy that is based on a true understanding of local linguistic, socio-cultural, and political particularities” (p.224). An approach to language teaching that embraces such situational criteria is relevant to any teacher’s, researcher’s or attentive student’s awareness of just what is being taught and how.

(https://tesl-ej.org. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:

Kumaravadivelu’s work on language teaching aims to illustrate the emergence of a postmethod condition in the literature on teaching second/foreign languages, and has what I realize to be a very personalized vision of language teaching.

The different chapters discuss how methods evolved, and then critically assess those methods. A theme emerges that methods and predetermined materials and strategies lack the flexibility to be applied to the many varied contexts of English Language Teaching. Postmethod pedagogies can be differentiated from methods by an emphasis on developing teachers’ skills and flexibility to meet students’ needs. Kumaravadivelu’s critique of methods is the most comprehensive and detailed I have read.

The book is divided into three major sections. The first section describes language as system, discourse and ideology. The second section provides a brief history, description, and assessment of language teaching methods and categorizes them as language-centered, learner-centered, and learningcentered. The third section, Postmethod Perspectives, discusses the parameters of postmethod pedagogy and analyses its challenges and barriers. I found this final section the most compelling reading. The postmethod condition commends strategies to “advance a context-sensitive, locationspecific pedagogy that is based on a true understanding of local linguistic, socio-cultural, and political particularities” (p.224). An approach to language teaching that embraces such situational criteria is relevant to any teacher’s, researcher’s or attentive student’s awareness of just what is being taught and how.

(https://tesl-ej.org. Adaptado)

Leia os textos para responder à questão.

Text 1

A number of researchers have studied conversations between speakers of English as a Lingua Franca (EFL) and have noted a number of surprising lexico-grammatical characteristics, including:

•  Increasing of redundancy by adding “inexistent” prepositions (We have to study about...).

•  Pluralisation of nouns which are considered uncountable in native-speaker English (informations, staffs).

•  Interchangeable use of the relative pronouns who and which (a book who, a boy which).

•  Omission of articles where they are mandatory in nativespeaker English.

The evidence suggests that non-native speakers are not conforming to a native English standard. Truly, they seem to get along perfectly well despite the fact that they miss things out and put things in which ‘they should not do’.

(HARMER, J. The practice of English language teaching.4th ed, Essex: Pearson Longman. Adaptado)

Text 2

Teaching and learning English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is probably the most radical and controversial approach to emerge in recent years.

Proponents of ELF have already given some indications of how they think conventional approaches to English as a Foreign Language (EFL) should be changed. Jenkins (2000), for example, argues for different priorities in teaching English pronunciation. Teaching certain pronunciation features (which do not cause intelligibility problems), such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding.

(GRADOLL, H. English Next. UK: British Council,2006. Adaptado)

Leia os textos para responder à questão.

Text 1

A number of researchers have studied conversations between speakers of English as a Lingua Franca (EFL) and have noted a number of surprising lexico-grammatical characteristics, including:

•  Increasing of redundancy by adding “inexistent” prepositions (We have to study about...).

•  Pluralisation of nouns which are considered uncountable in native-speaker English (informations, staffs).

•  Interchangeable use of the relative pronouns who and which (a book who, a boy which).

•  Omission of articles where they are mandatory in nativespeaker English.

The evidence suggests that non-native speakers are not conforming to a native English standard. Truly, they seem to get along perfectly well despite the fact that they miss things out and put things in which ‘they should not do’.

(HARMER, J. The practice of English language teaching.4th ed, Essex: Pearson Longman. Adaptado)

Text 2

Teaching and learning English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is probably the most radical and controversial approach to emerge in recent years.

Proponents of ELF have already given some indications of how they think conventional approaches to English as a Foreign Language (EFL) should be changed. Jenkins (2000), for example, argues for different priorities in teaching English pronunciation. Teaching certain pronunciation features (which do not cause intelligibility problems), such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding.

(GRADOLL, H. English Next. UK: British Council,2006. Adaptado)

Leia os textos para responder à questão.

Text 1

A number of researchers have studied conversations between speakers of English as a Lingua Franca (EFL) and have noted a number of surprising lexico-grammatical characteristics, including:

•  Increasing of redundancy by adding “inexistent” prepositions (We have to study about...).

•  Pluralisation of nouns which are considered uncountable in native-speaker English (informations, staffs).

•  Interchangeable use of the relative pronouns who and which (a book who, a boy which).

•  Omission of articles where they are mandatory in nativespeaker English.

The evidence suggests that non-native speakers are not conforming to a native English standard. Truly, they seem to get along perfectly well despite the fact that they miss things out and put things in which ‘they should not do’.

(HARMER, J. The practice of English language teaching.4th ed, Essex: Pearson Longman. Adaptado)

Text 2

Teaching and learning English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is probably the most radical and controversial approach to emerge in recent years.

Proponents of ELF have already given some indications of how they think conventional approaches to English as a Foreign Language (EFL) should be changed. Jenkins (2000), for example, argues for different priorities in teaching English pronunciation. Teaching certain pronunciation features (which do not cause intelligibility problems), such as the articulation of ‘th’ as an interdental fricative, appears to be a waste of time whereas other common pronunciation problems (such as simplifying consonant clusters) contribute to problems of understanding.

(GRADOLL, H. English Next. UK: British Council,2006. Adaptado)