Research Paper that will compare Behavioral Learning Theories and Cognitive Learning Theories. You will include a title page, a 150–250-word abstract, an 8-page body, and a reference page. The body will include an introduction, 6 sections, and a conclusion. The paper must be written in current APA format. Current APA Level 1 sub-headings must be used throughout the paper. The 6 main sections of the paper will address the following topics:
- Historical Development of Each Theory—For each theory, discuss prominent persons and their corresponding historic research. Include how the theory has been developed over time. Have there been significant changes from its development to what current researchers in the area believe?
- Key Concepts of Each Theory—This section will focus on the major points of each theory. How is new information acquired? What are the goals of learning? What is unique about each theory?
- Research Support for Each Theory—This section will include a review of 4 peer-reviewed scholarly research articles. The first 2 articles will address research in which Behavior Learning Theory has been applied. The other 2 articles will use Cognitive Learning Theory in the research. Each article must show the effectiveness of the learning theory it addresses.
- Educational Implications—This section will discuss the implications for how learning takes place in the classroom. Discuss the benefits and applications of each theory. How would each theory say people learn in a classroom setting? What are the benefits to teaching new information utilizing each theory?
- Biblical Worldview—Discuss what the Bible says regarding learning behavior in humans. How would a biblical worldview impact a learner? Include chapter and verse when citing the Bible.
The assessment between the Canadian cultural “mosaic” and the yank “melting pot” refers back to the famous thought of distinctive models of migrant acculturation. From a sociological angle, this distinction refers to contrasting models of integration and assimilation which might be significant to Canada’s self-concept as a multicultural society. The standards of cultural mosaic and melting pot arose from the project of conceiving cultural identification in settler international locations. countries like Canada and the us couldn't claim to be ethnically, linguistically, or religiously cohesive within the manner that ecu kingdom states did as they had been based by using diverse migrant businesses who dispossessed indigenous peoples of their lands. the us developed an photograph of a melting pot wherein civic belonging caused national identity, and cultural or spiritual differences have been made secondary via “Americanization,” a form of partial assimilation (Castles, de Haas, & Miller, 2013, p. 266). founded on the idea of biculturalism between Protestant English and Catholic French corporations, Canada has visible itself reflecting the concept of a cultural mosaic. This model is explicitly contrasted with the yank melting pot and refers to a shape of multiculturalism that lets in extra room for coexistence between special groups (Banting, Courchene, & Seidle, 2007). in place of emphasizing assimilation, this version emphasizes integration. at the same time as those phrases originate in popular discourses about immigration and acculturation, their relation to the principles of assimilation and integration provide them sociological that means. From a sociological perspective, the standards of cultural mosaic and melting pot refer to one-of-a-kind models of migrant acculturation within their new society. those fashions are meditated in the theories of pluralism and assimilation, respectively. Pluralism is meditated inside the development of seen minority neighbourhoods in predominant urban centres. In Canada, seen minority neighbourhoods were increasing rapidly for the reason that Nineteen Eighties, making the “ethnic mosaic in Canadian cities greater diverse and seen” (Hou & Picot, 2004, p. 13). Visibility is an critical element of this growth. seen minority neighbourhoods are visible now not most effective due to their populations but also because of the presence of corporations and services that cater to a selected ethnic community. The ethos of pluralism and multiculturalism perspectives this form of visibility as advantageous for the overall Canadian polity, with the preservation of ethnic identification and religious, instructional, and welfare establishments particular to that community as fantastic (Hou & Picot, 2004). This version is awesome from an assimilationist attitude on immigration. The spatial assimilation model proposes that immigrants to begin with stay in visible minority neighbourhoods because they lack assets, but as they improve their scenario they convert their socioeconomic achievements into an stepped forward spatial role and assimilate with most of the people group (Fong & Wilkes, 1999). This version is harking back to the melting pot, wherein social and cultural variations that first of all symbolize migrant corporations are lessened over time until stated organization commonly identifies with the built, civic identity of the settler kingdom. but even as those fashions are related to Canada, in the case of the cultural mosaic, and the united states, inside the case of the melting pot, the application of these models to Canada indicates more complexity in the sociology of migration. The concept that migrants to Canada keep their cultural identification as a part of a mosaic instead of assimilating has been contradicted by way of sociological studies. as opposed to retaining all precise cultural or social characteristics through the years, immigrant minorities do seem to assimilate in sure key approaches. a few migrant agencies have significantly extra charges of gender i>GET ANSWER