Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        Creativity is a quality which manifests itself in many different ways, and this is one of the reasons it has proved so difficult to define. As Amabile (1996) points out, ‘a clear and sufficiently detailed articulation of the creative process is not yet possible.’ Yet we readily recognise creativity when we meet it, even if we cannot define it precisely. For all practical purposes this is enough, and we do not need to spend too much time agonising over a definition.

        There are of course some features which are almost always present in a creative act. The core idea of ‘making something new’ is at the heart of creativity. But novelty is not alone sufficient for something to be recognised as creative. We could, for example, wear a clown’s red nose to class. This would certainly be doing something new and unusual but it would only count as creative if we then did something with it, like creating a new persona. It is also necessary for creative acts to be recognised and accepted within the domain in which they occur. They need to be relevant and practicable – not just novel. Sometimes creative ideas are ahead of their time and have to wait for technology to catch up. Leonardo da Vinci designed an aeroplane in the 15th century, but before aeroplanes could become a reality, materials and fuels had to be available.

        […]

        […] Boden (1990) takes an AI (artificial intelligence) approach to investigating creativity. She asks what a computer would need to do to replicate human thought processes. This leads to a consideration of the self-organising properties of complex, generative systems through processes such as parallel distributed processing. For her, creativity arises from the systematic exploration of a conceptual space or domain (mathematical, musical or linguistic). She draws attention to the importance of constraints in this process. ‘Far from being the antithesis of creativity, constraints on thinking are what make it possible’ (p. 82). Chaos theory (Gleick, 1987) tends to support her ideas. Boden’s approach is richly suggestive for language acquisition, materials writing and for teaching, in that all are rooted in complex, self-organising systems.

(Alan Maley, Nik Peachey. Creativity in the English language classroom.)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        There is no single way of teaching English, no single way of learning it, no single motive for doing so, no single syllabus or textbook, no single way of assessing proficiency and, indeed, no single variety of English which provides the target of learning. It is tempting, but unhelpful, to say there are as many combinations of these as there are learners and teachers. The proliferation of acronyms in English Language Teaching reflects this diversity of models. By a ‘model’ I do not mean a particular variety of English – such as US or British – though selection of a particular variety may play a role.

        By a ‘model’ of English I mean a complex framework, which includes issues of methodology and variety, but goes beyond these to include other dimensions of the context and practice of learning English.

        It is becoming clear that these issues are not easily separable. The appropriateness of content clearly depends on such things as the age of the learner and whether English is to be used primarily as a language of international communication or for survival communication with native speakers, perhaps whilst on holiday in the UK or some other English-speaking country. This is why I have identified broad models which can be thought of as configurations of the factors listed in the box.

        There are many stakeholders involved in the teaching and learning process, each of whom may have a different view. Learners, their families, teachers, governments, employers, textbook publishers, examination providers – all now possess an interest in the English language business.

(David Graddol. English Next. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        There is no single way of teaching English, no single way of learning it, no single motive for doing so, no single syllabus or textbook, no single way of assessing proficiency and, indeed, no single variety of English which provides the target of learning. It is tempting, but unhelpful, to say there are as many combinations of these as there are learners and teachers. The proliferation of acronyms in English Language Teaching reflects this diversity of models. By a ‘model’ I do not mean a particular variety of English – such as US or British – though selection of a particular variety may play a role.

        By a ‘model’ of English I mean a complex framework, which includes issues of methodology and variety, but goes beyond these to include other dimensions of the context and practice of learning English.

        It is becoming clear that these issues are not easily separable. The appropriateness of content clearly depends on such things as the age of the learner and whether English is to be used primarily as a language of international communication or for survival communication with native speakers, perhaps whilst on holiday in the UK or some other English-speaking country. This is why I have identified broad models which can be thought of as configurations of the factors listed in the box.

        There are many stakeholders involved in the teaching and learning process, each of whom may have a different view. Learners, their families, teachers, governments, employers, textbook publishers, examination providers – all now possess an interest in the English language business.

(David Graddol. English Next. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder as questões:

        Foreign language teaching has long relied on written texts as a source of language input. Until relatively recently, however, the sentence has been the privileged unit of meaning and analysis. The grammar-translation method of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, for example, illustrated grammatical principles via exemplary sentences. The pedagogical goal was to recode sentences written in the foreign language into one’s mother tongue, with heavy emphasis placed on accuracy and completeness. During the audiolingual era, from the 1940s to the 1960s, the emphasis shifted to spoken language and dialogues were used as language models, but the individual sentence remained the focus of repetition and drills. Again, formal accuracy remained paramount. In the 1960s, with the advent of ‘cognitive-code learning’ theory (following Chomsky’s rejection of behavioristic models of language learning in the late 1950s), teachers’ goals gradually shifted from instilling accurate language habits, to fostering learners’ mental construction of a second language system. Rule learning was reintroduced, but still only at the level of the individual sentence. Indeed, even today, many introductory level foreign language courses are organized around a planned sequence of grammatical structures that are exemplified in sample sentences for intensive practice.

(Richard Kern. Literacy and language teaching)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        The learning principles that good games incorporate are by no means unknown to researchers in the learning sciences. In fact current research on learning supports the sorts of learning principles that good games use, though these principles are often exemplified in games in particularly striking ways (for a survey and citations of the literature, see Gee 2003). However, many of these principles are much better reflected in good games than they are in today’s schools, where we also ask young people to learn complex and challenging things. With the current return in our schools to skill-and-drill and curricula driven by standardized tests, good learning principles have, more and more, been left on the cognitive scientist’s laboratory bench and, I will argue, inside good computer and video games.

        Game design involves modeling human interactions with and within complex virtual worlds, including learning processes as part and parcel of these interactions. This is, in fact, not unlike design research in educational psychology where researchers model new forms of interaction connected to learning in classrooms (complex worlds, indeed), study such interactions to better understand how and why they lead to deep learning, and then ultimately disseminate them across a great many classrooms (see, for example, the chapters in Kelly 2003).

(James Paulo Gee. Situated Language and Learning: a critique of traditional schooling)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        The learning principles that good games incorporate are by no means unknown to researchers in the learning sciences. In fact current research on learning supports the sorts of learning principles that good games use, though these principles are often exemplified in games in particularly striking ways (for a survey and citations of the literature, see Gee 2003). However, many of these principles are much better reflected in good games than they are in today’s schools, where we also ask young people to learn complex and challenging things. With the current return in our schools to skill-and-drill and curricula driven by standardized tests, good learning principles have, more and more, been left on the cognitive scientist’s laboratory bench and, I will argue, inside good computer and video games.

        Game design involves modeling human interactions with and within complex virtual worlds, including learning processes as part and parcel of these interactions. This is, in fact, not unlike design research in educational psychology where researchers model new forms of interaction connected to learning in classrooms (complex worlds, indeed), study such interactions to better understand how and why they lead to deep learning, and then ultimately disseminate them across a great many classrooms (see, for example, the chapters in Kelly 2003).

(James Paulo Gee. Situated Language and Learning: a critique of traditional schooling)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        A new topic area will quickly generate the need to acquire new language in the form of vocabulary, structures, and pronunciation. It is a good idea to have ready a way of coping with this demand.

        If students can feel that they have the time and opportunity to master the use of language that either you or they have identified as being necessary for a certain stage in a project, this will go a long way to increasing their confidence and language competence.

        One way to do this is to produce a language monitor which focuses on vocabulary and structures that have been identified as being useful.

        This allows other students to read it and absorb the word or phrase, the meaning, pronunciation, associated words or collocations, and how to use it in a sentence. They can also add their own cards. The vocabulary monitor remains on the noticeboard throughout the project, constantly available for reinforcement and consolidation. It can also be used as a source of vocabulary games.

        In addition to this or as an alternative, if you have suitable computer facilities available, electronic lists could be created. Students can add to the lists in the same way as the noticeboard. The updated list can be printed out at regular intervals and put on the noticeboard and handouts given to the students.

(Diana L. Fried-Booth. Project Work. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        A new topic area will quickly generate the need to acquire new language in the form of vocabulary, structures, and pronunciation. It is a good idea to have ready a way of coping with this demand.

        If students can feel that they have the time and opportunity to master the use of language that either you or they have identified as being necessary for a certain stage in a project, this will go a long way to increasing their confidence and language competence.

        One way to do this is to produce a language monitor which focuses on vocabulary and structures that have been identified as being useful.

        This allows other students to read it and absorb the word or phrase, the meaning, pronunciation, associated words or collocations, and how to use it in a sentence. They can also add their own cards. The vocabulary monitor remains on the noticeboard throughout the project, constantly available for reinforcement and consolidation. It can also be used as a source of vocabulary games.

        In addition to this or as an alternative, if you have suitable computer facilities available, electronic lists could be created. Students can add to the lists in the same way as the noticeboard. The updated list can be printed out at regular intervals and put on the noticeboard and handouts given to the students.

(Diana L. Fried-Booth. Project Work. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        […] The action research cycle results show that task design should follow a certain sequence: First, tasks should focus on gaining an understanding of the e-literacy skills required when working with tools such as forums, wikis, and social bookmarking sites for language learning and teaching purposes. Ideally, this understanding should enable teachers to provide a rationale for using bespoke tools. Next, tasks should raise their awareness of a tool’s specific affordances, i.e. the constraints and possibilities of the modes available for meaning making and communication (Hampel & Hauck, 2006). This will allow the teachers to move to the next level of Hampel and Stickler’s (2005) skills pyramid by fostering their multimodal communicative competence and thus their professional literacy (Willis, 2001). These steps are a prerequisite for the subsequent phase in which teachers themselves design tasks with the goal of fostering, in turn, their learners’ multimodal competence and autonomy since merely equipping learners with creative and democratic representational online resources will not necessarily result in higher student control over the learning process or the development of autonomy (Hampel & Hauck, 2006).

(Carolin Fuchs, Andreas Müller-Hartmann, Mirjam Hauck. Promoting learner autonomy through multiliteracy skills development in cross-institutional exchanges. Adaptado)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder a questão:

        […] The action research cycle results show that task design should follow a certain sequence: First, tasks should focus on gaining an understanding of the e-literacy skills required when working with tools such as forums, wikis, and social bookmarking sites for language learning and teaching purposes. Ideally, this understanding should enable teachers to provide a rationale for using bespoke tools. Next, tasks should raise their awareness of a tool’s specific affordances, i.e. the constraints and possibilities of the modes available for meaning making and communication (Hampel & Hauck, 2006). This will allow the teachers to move to the next level of Hampel and Stickler’s (2005) skills pyramid by fostering their multimodal communicative competence and thus their professional literacy (Willis, 2001). These steps are a prerequisite for the subsequent phase in which teachers themselves design tasks with the goal of fostering, in turn, their learners’ multimodal competence and autonomy since merely equipping learners with creative and democratic representational online resources will not necessarily result in higher student control over the learning process or the development of autonomy (Hampel & Hauck, 2006).

(Carolin Fuchs, Andreas Müller-Hartmann, Mirjam Hauck. Promoting learner autonomy through multiliteracy skills development in cross-institutional exchanges. Adaptado)