In the 20^th century, we made tremendous advances in discovering fundamental principles in different scientific disciplines that created major breakthroughs in management and technology for agricultural systems, mostly by empirical means. However, as we enter the 21^st century, agricultural research has more difficult and complex problems to solve.

The environmental consciousness of the general public is requiring us to modify farm management to protect water, air, and soil quality, while staying economically profitable. At the same time, market-based global competition in agricultural products is challenging economic viability of the traditional agricultural systems, and requires the development of new and dynamic production systems. Fortunately, the new electronic technologies can provide us a vast amount of real-time information about crop conditions and near-term weather via remote sensing by satellites or ground-based instruments and the Internet, that can be utilized to develop a whole new level of management. However, we need the means to capture and make sense of this vast amount of site-specific data.

Our customers, the agricultural producers, are asking for a quicker transfer of research results in an integrated usable form for site-specific management. Such a request can only be met with system models, because system models are indeed the integration and quantification of current knowledge based on fundamental principles and laws. Models enhance understanding of data taken under certain conditions and help extrapolate their applications to other conditions and locations.

Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell. Whole System Integration and Modeling — Essential to Agricultural Science and Technology in the 21st Century. In: Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell

(eds.) Agricultural system models in field research and technology transfer. Boca Raton, CRC Press LLC, 2002 (adapted).

Considering the text presented above, judge the following items.

In the 20^th century, we made tremendous advances in discovering fundamental principles in different scientific disciplines that created major breakthroughs in management and technology for agricultural systems, mostly by empirical means. However, as we enter the 21^st century, agricultural research has more difficult and complex problems to solve.

The environmental consciousness of the general public is requiring us to modify farm management to protect water, air, and soil quality, while staying economically profitable. At the same time, market-based global competition in agricultural products is challenging economic viability of the traditional agricultural systems, and requires the development of new and dynamic production systems. Fortunately, the new electronic technologies can provide us a vast amount of real-time information about crop conditions and near-term weather via remote sensing by satellites or ground-based instruments and the Internet, that can be utilized to develop a whole new level of management. However, we need the means to capture and make sense of this vast amount of site-specific data.

Our customers, the agricultural producers, are asking for a quicker transfer of research results in an integrated usable form for site-specific management. Such a request can only be met with system models, because system models are indeed the integration and quantification of current knowledge based on fundamental principles and laws. Models enhance understanding of data taken under certain conditions and help extrapolate their applications to other conditions and locations.

Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell. Whole System Integration and Modeling — Essential to Agricultural Science and Technology in the 21st Century. In: Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell

(eds.) Agricultural system models in field research and technology transfer. Boca Raton, CRC Press LLC, 2002 (adapted).

Considering the text presented above, judge the following items.

In the 20^th century, we made tremendous advances in discovering fundamental principles in different scientific disciplines that created major breakthroughs in management and technology for agricultural systems, mostly by empirical means. However, as we enter the 21^st century, agricultural research has more difficult and complex problems to solve.

The environmental consciousness of the general public is requiring us to modify farm management to protect water, air, and soil quality, while staying economically profitable. At the same time, market-based global competition in agricultural products is challenging economic viability of the traditional agricultural systems, and requires the development of new and dynamic production systems. Fortunately, the new electronic technologies can provide us a vast amount of real-time information about crop conditions and near-term weather via remote sensing by satellites or ground-based instruments and the Internet, that can be utilized to develop a whole new level of management. However, we need the means to capture and make sense of this vast amount of site-specific data.

Our customers, the agricultural producers, are asking for a quicker transfer of research results in an integrated usable form for site-specific management. Such a request can only be met with system models, because system models are indeed the integration and quantification of current knowledge based on fundamental principles and laws. Models enhance understanding of data taken under certain conditions and help extrapolate their applications to other conditions and locations.

Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell. Whole System Integration and Modeling — Essential to Agricultural Science and Technology in the 21st Century. In: Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell

(eds.) Agricultural system models in field research and technology transfer. Boca Raton, CRC Press LLC, 2002 (adapted).

Considering the text presented above, judge the following items.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 45 a 50.

If styles are general characteristics that differentiate one individual from another, then strategies are those specific “attacks” that we make on a given problem, and that vary considerably within each individual. They are the momentby-moment techniques that we employ to solve “problems” posed by second language input and output. Chamot (2005, p. 112) defines strategies quite broadly as “procedures that facilitate a learning task. Strategies are most often conscious and goal driven.”

As our knowledge of second language acquisition increased markedly during the 1970s, teachers and researchers came to realize that no single research finding and no single method of language teaching would usher in an era of universal success in teaching a second language. We saw that certain learners seemed to be successful regardless of methods or techniques of teaching. We began to see the importance of individual variation in language learning. Certain people appeared to be endowed with abilities to succeed; others lacked those abilities. This observation led Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) to describe “good” language learners in terms of personal traits, styles, and strategies. Rubin (Rubin & Thompson, 1982) later summarized fourteen such characteristics. Among other abilities, good language learners tend to:

1. Find their own way, taking charge of their learning

2. Be creative and develop a “feel” for the language by experimenting with its grammar and words

3. Make their own opportunities for practice in using the language inside and outside the classroom

4. Learn to live with uncertainty by continuing to talk or listen without understanding every word

5. Use linguistic knowledge, including knowledge of their first language, in learning a second language

6. Use contextual cues to help them in comprehension

7. Learn to make intelligent guesses

8. Learn chunks of language as wholes and formalized routines to help them perform “beyond their competence”

9. Learn different styles of speech and writing and learn to vary their language according to the formality of the situation.

(, H.Douglas Brown. Principles of language learning and teaching. 5th ed. Longman, 2000. Adaptado)

Confidencial até o momento da aplicação.

Leia o texto para responder às questões de números 45 a 50.

If styles are general characteristics that differentiate one individual from another, then strategies are those specific “attacks” that we make on a given problem, and that vary considerably within each individual. They are the momentby-moment techniques that we employ to solve “problems” posed by second language input and output. Chamot (2005, p. 112) defines strategies quite broadly as “procedures that facilitate a learning task. Strategies are most often conscious and goal driven.”

As our knowledge of second language acquisition increased markedly during the 1970s, teachers and researchers came to realize that no single research finding and no single method of language teaching would usher in an era of universal success in teaching a second language. We saw that certain learners seemed to be successful regardless of methods or techniques of teaching. We began to see the importance of individual variation in language learning. Certain people appeared to be endowed with abilities to succeed; others lacked those abilities. This observation led Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) to describe “good” language learners in terms of personal traits, styles, and strategies. Rubin (Rubin & Thompson, 1982) later summarized fourteen such characteristics. Among other abilities, good language learners tend to:

1. Find their own way, taking charge of their learning

2. Be creative and develop a “feel” for the language by experimenting with its grammar and words

3. Make their own opportunities for practice in using the language inside and outside the classroom

4. Learn to live with uncertainty by continuing to talk or listen without understanding every word

5. Use linguistic knowledge, including knowledge of their first language, in learning a second language

6. Use contextual cues to help them in comprehension

7. Learn to make intelligent guesses

8. Learn chunks of language as wholes and formalized routines to help them perform “beyond their competence”

9. Learn different styles of speech and writing and learn to vary their language according to the formality of the situation.

(, H.Douglas Brown. Principles of language learning and teaching. 5th ed. Longman, 2000. Adaptado)

Confidencial até o momento da aplicação.