Questões de Linguagens do ENEM

Disponível em: www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/ 05/OLIVEIRA-220517-Face-580x373 Acesso em maio 2017.

O chargista Oliveira utiliza a expressão popular “A vaca foi pro brejo” fazendo referência

Disponível em: http://www1.folha.uol.com.brilustradacartumcartunsdiari os#2052017 Acesso em maio 2017. 

Em alguns contextos de uso da linguagem, é possível empregar palavras ou expressões que podem exagerar ou suavizar os sentidos que se quer provocar. Na tirinha Malvados, de André Dahmer, o trecho silenciar por um século trata-se de 

Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities

By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.

In a unanimous decision with majorn implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.

“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”

There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.

The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.

While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.

Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.

“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” *reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.

In: <https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilitie> 30.03.2018

Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities

By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.

In a unanimous decision with majorn implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.

“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”

There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.

The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.

While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.

Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.

“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” *reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.

In: <https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilitie> 30.03.2018

Supreme Court Expands Rights for Students with Disabilities

By Lauren Camera, Education Reporter - March 22, 2017. Adaptado.

In a unanimous decision with majorn implications for students with disabilities, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that schools must provide higher educational standards for children with special needs. Schools must do more than provide a ‘merely more than de minimis’ education for students with disabilities and instead must provide them with an opportunity to make "appropriately ambitious" progress in line with the federal education law.

“When all is said and done,” wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts, “a student offered an education program providing a ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all.” He continued, citing a 1982 Supreme Court ruling on special education: “For children with disabilities, receiving an instruction that aims so low would be equivalent to ‘sitting idly... awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.’”

There are roughly 6.4 million students with disabilities between ages 3 to 21, representing roughly 13 percent of all students, according to Institute for Education Statistics. Each year 300,000 of those students leave school and just 65 percent of students with disabilities complete high school.

The case which culminated in the Supreme Court decision originated with an autistic boy in Colorado named Endrew. His parents pulled him out of school in 5th grade because they disagreed with his individualized education plan. Under federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools must work with families to develop individualized learning plans for students with disabilities.

While Endrew had been making progress in the public schools, his parents felt his plan for that year simply replicated goals from years past. As a result, they enrolled him in a private school where, they argued, Endrew made academic and social progress.

Seeking tuition reimbursement*, they filed a complaint with the state’s department of education in which they argued that Endrew had been denied a "free appropriate public education". The school district won the suit, and when his parents filed a lawsuit in federal district court, the judge also sided with the school district. In the Supreme Court case, Endrew and his family asked for clarification about the type of education benefits the federal law requires of schools, specifically, whether it requires ‘merely more than de minimis’, or something greater.

“The IDEA demands more,” Roberts wrote in the opinion. “It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” *reimbursement – a sum paid to cover money that has been spent or lost.

In: <https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2017-03-22/supreme-court-expands-rights-for-students-with-disabilitie> 30.03.2018

- Aqui tens tu, Zé Fernandes - começou Jacinto, encostado à janela do mirante -, a teoria que me governa, bem comprovada. Com estes olhos que recebemos da Madre natureza, lestos e sãos, nós podemos apenas distinguir além, através da Avenida, naquela loja, uma vidraça alumiada. Mais nada! Se eu porém aos meus olhos juntar os dois vidros simples dum binóculo de corridas, percebo, por trás da vidraça, presuntos, queijos, boiões de geleia e caixas de ameixa seca. Concluo portanto que é uma mercearia. Obtive uma noção: tenho sobre ti, que com os olhos desarmados vês só o luzir da vidraça, uma vantagem positiva. Se agora, em vez destes vidros simples, eu usasse os do meu telescópio, de composição mais científica, poderia avistar além, no planeta Marte, os mares, as neves, os canais, o recorte dos golfos, toda a geografia dum astro que circula a milhares de léguas dos Campos Elísios. É outra noção, e tremenda! Tens aqui pois o olho primitivo, o da Natureza, elevado pela Civilização à sua máxima potência de visão. E desde já, pelo lado do olho portanto, eu, civilizado, sou mais feliz que o incivilizado, porque descubro realidades do Universo que ele não suspeita e de que está privado. Aplica esta prova a todos os órgãos e compreenderás o meu princípio.

(Queirós, Eça de. A cidade e as serras. São Paulo: Ateliê, 2007, p. 63-64)

No fragmento em questão, ao apresentar para o amigo Zé Fernandes sua teoria a respeito da felicidade, Jacinto revela:

A abundância, quem diria, se tornou um problema. A humanidade passou milênios tentando sobreviver à fome, ao desabrigo e à escassez: hoje precisa aprender a lidar com excesso.

Temos alimentos demais, bugigangas demais, roupas, carros, embalagens, papéis, remédios, drogas, livros, filmes, eletrônicos e diversões demais. Ainda estamos aprendendo a viver no meio de tantas coisas. É uma delícia de problema, é claro. Até o século 18, a teoria malthusiana fazia sentido. O crescimento da população levava à escassez de comida e assim à diminuição da poluição. Crises de fome ceifavam multidões todos os séculos. A Revolução Industrial nos fez escapar dessa armadilha. Produzindo mais com menos esforço, operamos um milagre: a população explodiu e a riqueza também. A fome, até então uma condição natural da humanidade, se tornou uma anomalia. 

Luxos que antes eram reservados a reis ou milionários (chás ou janelas com vidros e cortinas, por exemplo) entraram na casa de trabalhadores comuns.

É claro que boa parte do mundo ainda enfrenta a fome e a escassez. Mas não é por falta de conhecimento que isso acontece. Pelo contrário, o caminho da prosperidade já está mais ou menos mapeado e pavimentado.

A abundância é um tipo de problema chique, que todo mundo gostaria de ter. Como o da grã-fina que está cansada de passar as férias em Paris. Mas ainda assim é um problema.

Muitas más notícias que os jornais publicam hoje são produtos da abundância: o trânsito, a obesidade, a poluição, o lixo, o tempo que crianças gastam em frente a telas. Não só crianças, mas os adultos — que em média tocam 2600 vezes no celular por dia.

As pessoas parecem meio perdidas entre tanto conforto e atrações que desviam a atenção. Se perdem em realizações imediatas de consumo, sem foco e força de vontade para perseguir grandes desejos ou objetivos mais ousados.

Se o problema já é grave hoje, imagine no futuro. O autocontrole será cada vez mais necessário. Nossos filhos e netos terão que aprender desde cedo a se controlar diante do excesso de comida, de drogas, de opções de vida e de diversão.

O mundo capitalista já resolveu o problema da escassez: precisa agora de uma educação para a abundância.

Leandro Narloch - Jornalista, mestre em filosofia e autor do Guia Politicamente Incorreto da História do Brasil, entre outros.

Disponível em: <https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/colunas/leandro-narloch/2018/04/desafio-da-nossa-epoca-e-lidar-com-a-abundancia.shtm> Acesso em: 25 abr. 2018.