This is not new, debates about the relative contributions of “nature”, self-discipline, "belief" and “nurture” to people’s characteristics and learning abilities dates to the 19th century. Since the 1970s researchers have sought to understand the complex dynamics between culture and belief, context and environment, brain characteristics and learning.

NAP 2018 confirmed, "Each learner develops a unique array of knowledge and cognitive resources in the course of life that are molded by the interplay of that learner’s cultural, social, cognitive, and biological contexts". https://www.nap.edu/read/24783/chapter/4#33

For example, a study that compared parental expectations in the United States and Vanuatu suggested that whereas U.S. parents tend to consider deviation from a model as showing creativity, parents in Vanuatu tend to equate precise imitation with intelligence (Clegg et al., 2017).

Indeed, Learners/Children are influenced by various developmental factors that are naturally a part of their lives (i.e., families, peer groups, neighborhoods, culture, beliefs, etc.). The potential influence of these learners' environment contexts can enhance the effectiveness of instruction, mediation and communications.

Piaget argued, if human intelligence is to be adaptive, it must have functions to represent both the transformational and the static aspects of reality, [experience and learning]. He proposed that operative intelligence, the active part of intelligence, is responsible for the representation and manipulation of the dynamic or transformational aspects of reality. "It involves all actions, overt or covert, undertaken in order to follow, recover, or anticipate the transformations of the objects or persons of interest". While figurative intelligence is responsible for the representation of the static aspect of intelligence, perception, imitation, imagery and reality. See https://courses.lumenlearning.com/teachereducationx92x1/chapter/piagets-theory-of-cognitive-development/

Also, research have shown that implicit theories (in this context, the personal held beliefs, culture and the child preset 'behaviour operants') about learning, thinking, self worth, value and ability influence how they are motivated and engage in learning, schooling and self development... and their views about what leads to success in and outside of the classroom (Duda & Nicholls, 1992; Dweck, 1999, 2006; Dweck & Molden, 2005; Schunk H. 2012) .

Also, read about Domain 1 and 3 of "the principles from psychology to enhance pre-K to 12 teaching and learning". https://www.apa.org/ed/schools/teaching-learning/top-twenty/principles/thinking-learning

ان اي مهارة تتطور عن طريق التعلم والممارسة , كما ان معتفدات الطلبة الشخصية والاجتماعية والثقافية لها تاثبر كبير على مستوى ادراكهم وفهمهم للبيئة

This is an interesting discussion. As a constructivist researcher, I believe learning can be considered holistically from the ontological, epistemological, and axiological realms. Complexity science would also play into learning theory in terms of multiple dynamic factors situated uniquely in an individual's intelligence, development, experiences, family life, culture, and social interactions. As an elementary teacher educator, I would also contribute that teachers have a woeful understanding of learning theories and must therefore fall back on prescribed curriculum programs that preclude opportunities for the complexity of learning across a diverse spectrum of experiences.

Thanks, sir, Abbas Noah Almosawi for the response. How I wish it were in English Language.

OBrian Stone , you've made an interesting contribution. I agree with you on many "teachers [having] a woeful understanding of learning theories", except those in Teachers Training Colleges, and higher education. The disciplinary understanding of "Learning" and the process obviously tends to be confined to description and analysis of one dimension, the social science and particularly psychology which often omit the context of Scientific Knowledge, insufficient on Moral and Ethical knowledge, also the contribution of intution and intelligence to knowledge construct and learning.

The relations between knowledge and the context of its production (and construct/acquisition) as well as relations between facts and values have become important interest to me - to what extent are the effects of a child belief system, and the context of the child environment, after adjusting for intelligence influence a child ability to think and gain knowledge (scientific, social and relationship context, and general knowledge)?

he positivist–empiricist theory of knowledge based on Francis Bacon’s (1561–1626) assertion that our sense perceptions can generate valid knowledge about the world around by observing the world but did not explain if the knowledge is still valid given differing personal ability, intelligence and constructing ability, also often deception and branding covering truth I the society. This was subscribed to by Comte (2009) and Durkheim (1982, 1952) who independently applied the theory in their attempts to understand society and its dynamics.

Agree with Brian Stone but will add that the social and cultural context of the learner also impacts on cognition as this feeds into their personal understanding of what they teaching should look like and what and how they themselves learn.