No último domingo, dia 31, aconteceu a primeira etapa do concurso para ingresso na carreira de Oficial de Chancelaria do Ministério de Relações Exteriores. O Curso Sapientia também fez parte desse processo, auxiliando na preparação de candidatos para o certame por meio dos nossos cursos regulares e da revisão Hora H Especial OfChan.
Agora nós queremos ajudar também aos candidatos na confecção de recursos. É comum que candidatos fiquem descontentes com o gabarito preliminar da banca, então pedimos aos nossos professores que comentassem a prova e apontassem as questões com mais chances de mudança de gabarito ou de anulação. Vamos focar nas duas provas de línguas que, além de terem maior número de questões na parte objetiva, tiveram algumas questões bastante polêmicas.
Lembrete! Os recursos devem ser interpostos até as 23 horas e 59 minutos do dia 3 de Fevereiro (quarta-feira). Você encontra o link para a página de recursos aqui.
O primeiro comentário será do professor de Língua Inglesa, Todd Marshall, que tratou tanto da parte Objetiva quanto da parte Discursiva da prova para Oficial de Chancelaria.
So I did the texts from the 1st phase and like it or not, they are all correct.
The only possible error that could be questioned is in question 34 (prova Tipo 1 – Branca), in which both “but” and “although could grammatically be used with a Subject + Verb _ Linking word + Subject + Verb construction.
The “but” is the better option as it givers a clear separation of the two contrasting ideas; however, the term “although” also creates a contrast that does not change the overall meaning of the sentence. The other questions are correct. I see no possible appeals in them.
Having said that, I truly feel that this was quite childish, and reached little beyond a “vestibular” level of English. The second phase questions were relatively simplistic and tiny in comparison to what I had been preparing candidates for. But I did tell people that if they said to do a summary of 15 lines or less, then to use only two paragraphs, and the second section was basically a mini-press release on immigration, which we had gone over extensively in class. But the third section was a horribly constructed question that reaches back to 1970’s style of grammatical teaching, which has not been used for nearly 40 years. To still be speaking of how NOT to learn a language, in my opinion, perpetuates the Brazilian dilemma, which maintains language learning at infantile level, not allowing the students to think for themselves. Any answer I would have given would have criticized the examination itself. I only hope that you were able to keep your cool and say something simplistic about the need to learn a foreign language from a more critical-thinking approach. I was really upset with such a childish question!! But I hope you all were able to enter the reviewers’ simple minds and say something worthwhile.
That’s my point of view. Take it for what it is worth.
No próximo post, a professora Claudia Simionato comentará as questões da prova de Língua Portuguesa.