Instructions: Write a two to four page opinion piece on Piaget’s stages and what

Instructions:
Write a two to four page opinion piece on Piaget’s stages and what context they provide for one of the four ideas below:
Developmentally appropriate practices in schools.
Parent controls on children’s computers/phones.
Movie and video game ratings guidelines.
Grade level book restrictions in school libraries.
Include at least three references to the material from the readings.
Learning Content
Jean Piaget is seen as the father of cognitive developmental theory. As a child he had an interest in marine biology and published papers beginning at age 11 and until his death in his eighties. When he began working at Alfred Binet’s school in France he was responsible for interviewing children for placements. He began noticing that children around the same age made the same errors of reasoning. He became obsessed with figuring out why.
Schemas. He hypothesized that our brains had mental mechanisms and he called those, schemas. This mechanism was biological and the foundation of our learning and ability to adapt. As humans, he said, we are scientists trying to understand the world around us, even as infants. We use schemas in at least two ways. First, we assimilate when we discover new information by putting that information in an existing schema. For example, when we learn about mathematics, we usually approach new formulas by referencing what we already mastered. Do you remember learning about fact families in second grade? That process was to assist in broadening your math schemas by adding subtraction to what you already knew about addition. Piaget also said we accommodate when new information comes in that does not fit an existing schema, necessitating the development of a new schema. For instance, my sister-in-law’s family had a yellow gray dog that had a long tail and pointy muzzle. When my sister-in-law took her two year old daughter to the zoo, her daughter burst into tears at the wolf enclosure. Crying, she asked her mother why someone put their dog in that pen. My poor niece saw the wolf and due to overgeneralizing and thinking the yellow gray dog-like creature she saw was her dog, she just broke down. Her mom quickly had to help her create a new schema: wolf. Teachers and parents spend a good bit of time with young children helping them assimilate and accommodate to increase understanding and create accurate schemas. On our own, as we develop our schemas become increasingly complex and elaborate. You may have some fun family stories about accommodating for your own “errors.”
Stages. Piaget also believed as we develop that new abilities and operations come online in stages. As we grow and change, we are able to do increasingly more complex thinking. During the sensorimotor stage (0 to age 2) infants are more able to navigate and understand the world around them. One big operation that develops is object permanence. Babies who do not yet have this ability will not search for a toy when it is covered up. Once they acquire the ability to understand that object does not disappear, they look for the toy. Children in the pre-operational stage (ages 2 to 7) continue their quest for discovery by relying on intuitive answers to their investigations as logic has not kicked in yet. They experience a language explosion and ask a million questions! Why? Because they can, Piaget says. Fortunately, logic comes online in the concrete operations stage (ages 7 to 11). This stage sees creating a series, envisioning it backwards: smallest to largest or fewest to most. Children begin to group objects and create categories. It appears that they like collecting things. You might have been the child who knew all the names of the dinosaurs and whether they were herbivores, carnivores, or omnivores. Perhaps, you were the sports enthusiast who knew lists of factoids and statistics about your favorite team or athlete. All of these are elements of concrete operations. As children begin to understand the finer or more subtle aspects of groups their thinking becomes more sophisticated. Last, Piaget envisioned the formal operational stage (age 11 and up) where abstract thinking comes online. Early adolescents come to understand hypothesizing and deductive reasoning. Another big leap in this stage is developing a social consciousness. Often early teens begin to think about the wider world and the solutions to big problems.
Required Readings
The Sensorimotor Stage of Cognitive Development
(Links to an external site.)
The Pre-Operational Stage of Cognitive Development
(Links to an external site.)
The Concrete Operational Stage of Cognitive Development
(Links to an external site.)
The Formal Operational Stage of Cognitive Development
(Links to an external site.)
Suggested Readings
Biography of Piaget

Identify three core arguments Derrida advances in favor of the continued relevan

Identify three core arguments Derrida advances in favor of the continued relevance of Marx’s political thinking. Set out what you consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of these arguments. In addition to extensive use of class readings from weeks 1-5, you should identify and quote from AT LEAST THREE further academic peer-reviewed articles to expand on your analysis. Additional sources may also be used. Structure your essay roughly as follows: Thesis and elaboration (page 1); analysis of texts (pages 2-4/2-7), critical analysis and testing of your position (pages 5-6/8-11), 4) Conclusion (page 7/12).

Write an essay of no more than 1200 words (typed, double-spaced, twelve-point st

Write an essay of no more than 1200 words (typed, double-spaced, twelve-point standard font) on one of the following topics. (The word limit should be taken seriously: a clear, coherent, complete paper shorter than 1200 words is perfectly acceptable: any words beyond the limit may not be read.)Provided that you are using the translation on order for the course, you need not give a bibliographic reference. You should refer to the Meditations on First Philosophy (including the selections from the Objections & Replies) by the AT volume and page numbers given in the margins of the volume on order for the course. Question: Explain why, in the Sixth Meditation, Descartes rejects the first argument for the existence of material things (AT VII 71-73) but accepts the second argument (AT VII 74-80) for this conclusion. (In responding to this question, you will need to explain both arguments.)

CHOOSE ONE OF THE TWO QUESTIONS BELOW and write about three paragraphs respondin

CHOOSE ONE OF THE TWO QUESTIONS BELOW and write about three paragraphs responding to the prompt. Follow the rubric for additional assistance in guiding your composition.
1. Describe Perictione’s view of philosophy and why it matters.
OR
2. What was the conclusion of Plato’s Myth of the Cave and how it pertains to the history of philosophy.

you will choose a question arising from your reading and discussion of Plato’s R

you will choose a question arising from your reading and discussion of Plato’s Republic on which you will take a position, either for or against. You will then write a paper adhering to the following format.
Statement of the question and objection. You will (a) state the question you will be answering and (b) provide the best argument you can make position opposite to your own. The statement and objection must be one page in length.
Appeal to authority. You will summarize what authorities have argued for your position on the question. This will obviously require that you do some research. Be sure to cite each source correctly in the body of the paper and to include a bibliography. The appeal to authority must be one page in length.
Proof. You will argue for your position on the question. Your argument must offer rational proof. You should include no appeals to authority in this part of the paper, nor should you seek to answer the objections at this point. Focus on the argument(s) for your position on the question only. The proof must be two to three pages in length.

Define “dialectic” and discuss how Socratic dialogue differs from other conversa

Define “dialectic” and discuss how Socratic dialogue differs from other conversations.
Illustrate your understanding with examples of some specific beliefs one might examine via the Socratic Method.
Explain the difference between knowledge and opinion for Socrates as illustrated in the Meno and the Republic.
Explore your own response to the question of whether human beings can ever know the truth for certain. Can we ever achieve perfect wisdom about the kinds of ideas philosophers explore? Why or why not?

Research paper on Democritus and atomism. Make clear argument. Use primary sourc

Research paper on Democritus and atomism. Make clear argument. Use primary sources, and also contrast secondary source opinions. Here are some sources one could use: Primary: Taylor, C.C.W., The Atomists: Leucippus and Democritus (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999) Overview for background info: Graham, D.W. & Curd, P. (Eds.) (2008). The Oxford handbook of Presocratic philosophy Oxford University Press, Oxford. Long, A.A. (Ed.) (1999). The Cambridge companion to early Greek philosophy Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Secondary: Andrew, Gregory, ‘Leucippus and Democritus on Like to Like and Ou Mallon’, Apeiron, 46 (2013): 446- 68. Baldes, R.W. (1978). Subjectivism and objectively true observation statements in Democritus. The Ancient World 1, 89-95. Curd, P. (2004). The legacy of Parmenides. Parmenides Publishing, Las Vegas (NV). Curd, P. (2001). Why Democritus was not a skeptic. In Essays in ancient Greek philosophy, (Ed, Preus, A.) State University of New York Press, New York, 149-169. Pancheri, L. (1975). Greek atomism and the one and the many. The Journal of the History of Philosophy 13, 139-144. Sedley, D. (1982). Two Conceptions of Vacuum. Phronesis 27(1-2), 175-193. Sedley, D. (2008). Atomism’s Eleatic roots. In Oxford handbook of Presocratic philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, Taylor, C.C.W., The Atomists: Leucippus and Democritus (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999)

Instructions Consider learning myths as you have read about them in this module

Instructions
Consider learning myths as you have read about them in this module and what you believe about your own learning process. Write a two to four page analysis of learning myths and your learning process. Include a minimum of two references to the reading and/or the TedTalk. Be sure to include specific examples of your experience.
Resources
More on Plato
(Links to an external site.)
More on Aristotle
(Links to an external site.)
More on Confucius
(Links to an external site.)
Learning Content Continued
Back to the module content!
How do learning scientists study learning? How do we know what we know?
Studies vary but often, learning scientists craft experimental designs to compare various ways of solving problems, test reading and comprehension tasks, and study how the environment plays a role in what we learn and remember. As you learned in the myths that linger about learning style, when students are tested via the way they believe they prefer taking in information, there is no difference in their performance. Sometimes, subjects did not even employ their “preferred style” (Willingham, 2009). In these investigations, scientists have been able to uncover clues about our process of cognition and how we use it to figure things out.
Read for more explanation
(Links to an external site.)
Watch the following excellent TedTalk on this topic:
Optional References to Learn More
The Problem with Learning Styles
(Links to an external site.)
More Evidence Against Learning Styles
(Links to an external site.)
The Stubborn Myth of “Learning Styles”

Week 6 Discussion TWO POSTS MINIMUM REQUIRED. BUT, POST AS OFTEN AS YOU WISH. T

Week 6 Discussion
TWO POSTS MINIMUM REQUIRED. BUT, POST AS OFTEN AS YOU WISH.
This week we are going to have a class debate and discussion about the Malden Mills case study. Please review carefully the sources provided in the Malden Mills Resources page.
Our debate and discussion will focus on the following article by Radley Balko, published in 2004:
https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/altruism-bah-humbug
Read the entire article. Consider the following statement,
“Feuerstein’s pledge to continue paying his workers eventually cost them their jobs, and cost Feuerstein his company. Feuerstein ran out of money, and Malden Mills was forced to declare bankruptcy. Welch, on the other hand, turned GE from a sleepy home-appliance company into an international mega-corporation that today is a leader in several industries. For every job slashed, he eventually created dozens of new ones. For all the praise heaped on Feuerstein and scorn heaped on Welch, it is Welch, not Feuerstein, whose…management style did the most good for the most people.”
And then, Balko closes:
“We need to get away from the notion that unfettered capitalism is amoral or, worse, immoral. As the Welch‐​Feuerstein example shows, if we define moral corporate practices as those practices which create the most good for the most people, “ruthless profiteering” is not only not incompatible with morality, it brings about a great deal more morality than altruism does.”
TWO POSTS REQUIRED.
YOU MAY COMMENT ON ANY OF THE TOPICS BELOW. TRY TO DEVELOP A DIALOGUE AND EXPLORE THE ISSUES HERE.
TOPIC ONE, let’s clarify and examine the facts and issues of the case. Does Balko accurately portray the facts?
(Please read the case study carefully. Bradley Balko is a journalist. This is a quote from an article he wrote in 2004. There is more current information on this case in the Case Study resources.)
TOPIC TWO, do you agree with Balko’s position? In answering this question, consider the ‘approach’ to the issue Balko is taking. Is he applying a particular moral theory? (And he may be unaware that he is doing it.) Are there other ways of approaching the issue? What do you think?
TOPIC THREE, consider Balko’s position in terms of ‘ways of life’–Feuerstein’s actions, arguably, flow from his way of life that include deeply held religious beliefs. How might one’s ‘way of life’ influence the way on perceives the issue of whether or not Feuerstein did the ‘right thing’ in paying his workers while the plant was being rebuilt? Also, does Balko’s bias influence his analysis of the facts? Do our deeply held beliefs do that sometimes–influence the way we look at facts and evidence–how we identify evidence, how we interpret evidence? Offer your reflections.

According to Aristotole in the Niccomachean Ethics, how should one live one’s li

According to Aristotole in the Niccomachean Ethics, how should one live one’s life? in other words, what is his view of a good. life? As you compose your essay, consider what rocks virtue and friendship play in Aristotle’s account.
Source-Cite textual evidence from BOOK I, II, III, IV, VIII, or IX & use the bracketed abbreviations that preceded each section- Version translated and intro by Terence Irwin