TCHR2003 Curriculum Studies in Early Childhood Education Assignment Help
Summary
| Title | Assessment 1 |
| Type | Critical Review |
| Due Date | Monday, 31 March2025, 11:59 pm AEST/AEDT (startof Week 4) |
| Length | 1500 words |
| Weighting | 50% |
| Submission | Word document submitted to Turnitin |
| Unit Learning Outcomes |
This assessment taskmaps to the following ULOs: ULO1: describe and justify curriculum in early childhood education and care services. ULO2: understand and demonstrate conceptual knowledge relatedto key learning areas for children from birth to five years. ULO3: argue, with reference to the literature, how curriculum key learning areas can be appliedto support children’s learning. ULO4: createand analyse learning environments of curriculum key learning areas for children’s development and learning explain the role of the early childhood educator |
Rationale
This unit develops conceptual knowledge of the holistic approach to curriculum in the early childhood setting. There is a focus on an integrated and holistic approach of learning domains for children aged from birth to five years. Students develop children’s conceptual knowledge of these domains, with links made to the Early Years Learning Framework [EYLF] (AGDE, 2022), National Quality Standard [NQS] (ACECQA, 2018) theory and literature.
Task Description
Assessment 1 invites you to step into the role of a curriculum architect for a new early childhood service, “Southern Cross Early Learning”. The task requires you to demonstrate your understanding of how to design a vibrant and engaging curriculum and learning environment for children aged birth to five, drawing on your understanding of play-based learning as described in the Early Years Learning Framework and the National Quality Standard. This task encourages you to critically analyse your curriculum choices, provide justification based on theoretical perspectives, and ensure that learning areas and experiences foster holistic child development. The importance of aligning theory, curriculum standards, and practical pedagogical decisions in early childhood education are emphasised.
Task Instructions
Use the template (including the cover page) provided in the Assessment 1 folder on the TCHR2003 Blackboard Site.
In this task, you are the curriculum architect for a brand-new early childhood centre: “Southern Cross Early Learning”. You will unleash your creativity and expertise to develop a vibrant, engaging curriculum and design learning spaces that inspire curiosity, wonder, and development for children aged birth to five. This project allows you to step into the shoes of an early childhood educator, crafting unique learning areas while grounding your ideas in research and evidence-based practices.
Part 1.
Instructions: Write a 500-word document in full paragraphs (not dot points) for the service’s
Educational Leader explaining your vision for the service’s curriculum.
Create a lively, persuasive piece that includes:
- Curriculum definition: Describe what “curriculum” means in early childhood education
- Curriculum vision. Explain how the service can incorporate play-based learning, and the approaches that can be used.
- Use an engaging scenario or anecdote to illustrate your point.
- Justification: Share how a curriculum framework benefits children, educators, and families.
- Use relatable examples to show how the curriculum ensures every child thrives.
- Links to the Early Years Learning Framework [EYLF] (AGDE, 2022), National Quality Standard [NQS] (ACECQA, 2018) theory and literature (as appropriate).
Part 2.
Use the templates to create 2 (two) different learning environments at “Southern Cross Early
Learning” that could support thinking and learning: 1 (one) indoor environment and 1 (outdoor) environment.
Both of your 2 learning environments must integrate the following learning domains: Science, Numeracy/Maths, Technology.
Each learning environment should be approximately 550 words (this does not include headings).
You are required to demonstrate how each environment supports integrated learning across multiple (maximum 3) developmental domains (physical/cognitive/language/social and emotional/creative) by:
- Describing the physical layout and resources you will include in the learning environment (e.g., furniture, materials, displays)
- Providing a rationale/justification for the learning environment. Explain how the elements included in the environment support the developmental domains. Make direct links to theory and relevant literature
- Analysing your learning environment. Reflect on the strengths and potential limitations. Discuss adaptations to ensure inclusivity for children with disabilities or developmental delays. Explain how you would make the environment culturally responsive (e.g., including artifacts or materials representing various cultures).
- Making 2 (two) connections to the EYLF v2.0
- Making 2 (two) connections to the NQS
- Providing examples of resources that can be found in the learning environment
- Images of the learning environment (these can either be images that you have taken yourself, or ones that you have sourced *these images do not need to be referenced)
Part 3
Referencing
- APA Referencing style is required to be used for this task
- Include one reference list for all responses on a new page at the end of task
- A minimum of 10 (ten) academic sources are to be included in the reference list
- At a minimum, your sources for this task will include the EYLF v2.0 (AGDE, 2022), NQS (ACECQA, 2018), and a range of broader authoritative literature. Broader literature may include contemporary textbooks, peer reviewed articles, and other authoritative sources
Resources
National Quality Standard Quality https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard
Early Years Learning Framework https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022- V2.0.pdf
Unit materials to support your submission
The unit workshops will feature guest speakers and will support you to break down the requirements of the assessment task. Ensure that you either attend these live or watch the recordings as these will set you up for success.
An example of a completed task can be found in the Assessment task folder on the unit Blackboard sire and will be addressed in workshops.
Suggested readings:
Module 1:
Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Death, E., Dockett, S. & Farmer, S. (2025). Programming and planning in early childhood settings. Cengage Learning Australia.
McLachlan, C., Fleer, M., & Edwards, S. (2018). Early Childhood Curriculum: Planning, Assessment, and Implementation (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Module 2:
Blaise, M., Edwards, S., & Brooker, L. (2014). Theoretical perspectives on play and learning. 10.4135/9781473907850
Boyd, W., Green, N. & Jovanovic, J. (2021). Learning and Teaching in early childhood: Pedagogies of inquiry and relationships. Cambridge University Press.
Fleer, M. (2021). Play in the Early Years. Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, M.E., & Boyer, W. (2020). Play-Based Learning: Evidence-Based Research to Improve Children’s
Learning Experiences in the Kindergarten Classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal. 48, 127–133.
Module 3
McLachlan, C., Fleer, M., Edwards, S. (2013). Content knowledge: The sciences, maths and numeracy. [online]. pp.141-160) Chapter 9
Referencing Style Resource
About APA 7th – APA 7th Referencing Guide – Library guides at Southern Cross University (scu.edu.au)
Task Submission
Assessment 1 should be submitted using Turnitin in the Assessments Tasks & Submission section of the Blackboard TCHR2003 site.
You must label your submission with your surname and initials and the Assessment Task’s name. You must label your submission with your surname and initials and the assessment task’s name, e.g.: JSmith_TCHR2003 Assessment 1.docx
- You are strongly advised to undertake your own SIMILARITY CHECK via Turnitin, PRIOR to the due date, to identify and resolve any academic integrity issues prior to submitting – see SCU Academic Integrity and Turnitin. You can submit up to three times and receive the similarity match report immediately – after three attempts, you will need to wait 24 hours.
- It is YOUR responsibility to ensure that you have submitted the correct file and the FINAL version of your assessment for marking BEFORE the due date/time.
- Turnitin does not generate an automatic email receipt. If you have successfully uploaded your assessment, a green bar will appear at the top of the screen that says: Submission uploaded successfully: Download digital receipt. Use the hyperlink to download your digital receipt and store this with your assignment file.
- If you have any difficulty submitting your assignment, please contact Technology Services and make sure that you log a job with them, so you have evidence of your attempted submission. To avoid any last-minute problems, make sure you submit well before 11:59pm on the due date.
Please note that re-submissions for the assessment tasks for this unit are not permitted as per SCU policy.
Academic Integrity
At Southern Cross University academic integrity means behaving with the values of honesty, fairness, trustworthiness, courage, responsibility, and respect in relation to academic work.
The Southern Cross University Academic Integrity Framework aims to develop a holistic, systematic, and consistent approach to addressing academic integrity across the entire University. For more information see the SCU Academic Integrity Framework
NOTE: Academic Integrity breaches include poor referencing, not identifying direct quotations correctly, close paraphrasing, plagiarism, recycling, misrepresentation, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, fabricating information.
For this task:
GenAI May be Used
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as Grammarly, may be used for this Assessment Task. If you use GenAI tools, you must use these ethically and acknowledge their use. To find out how to reference GenAI in your work consult the referencing style for your unit via SCU Library referencing guides. If you are not sure how to, or how much you can use GenAI tools in your studies, contact your Unit Assessor. If you use GenAI tools without acknowledgment it may result in an academic integrity breach against you as described in the Student Academic and Non-Academic Misconduct Rules, Section 3
Please ensure you write in your own words and provide appropriate references (APA 7). Then, to further refine your assessment you are allowed to use AI tools such as Grammarly and Copilot to check your grammar, spelling and punctuation, however, you must acknowledge that you have used AI for this purpose and provide relevant evidence (e.g., screen shots) in an appendix.
Under the Rules – Student Academic and Non-Academic Misconduct Rules (Section 3) students have the right to Appeal against the Academic Integrity Officers academic misconduct Determination, to the Executive Dean, with that determination being final and conclusive, and not subject to further Appeal within the University. Students are not able to appeal against academic misconduct via the Unit Assessor or unit staff.
Special Consideration
Please refer to the Special Consideration section of Policy https://policies.scu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=140
Students wishing to request special consideration to extend the due date of an assessment task must submit a Request for Special Consideration form via their My Enrolment page as early as possible and prior to the original due date for that assessment task, along with any
accompanying documents, such as medical certificates.
Late Submissions & Penalties
Please refer to the Late Submission & Penalties section of Policy https://policies.scu.edu.au/view.current.php?id=00255
Except when special consideration is awarded, late submission of assessment tasks incurs a late penalty. Penalties will be incurred as soon as the deadline for task submission is reached.
- A penalty of 5% of the available marks will be deducted from the actual mark at one minute after the time listed in the due date
- A further penalty of 5% of the available mark will be deducted from the actual mark on each subsequent calendar day until the mark reaches zero.
Grades & Feedback
Assessments that have been submitted by the due date will receive an SCU grade. Grades and feedback will be posted to the ‘Grades and Feedback’ section on the Blackboard unit site. Please allow 7-10 days for marks to be made available.
Resubmission
Resubmission is not permitted for this unit, as per the Rules Relating to Awards – Rule 3 —
Coursework Awards — Student Assessment and Examinations
Assessment Criteria
… continued on next page
Assessment 1 Rubric (TCHR2003) (50%)
| Marking Criteria and & allocation |
High Distinction + (100%) |
High Distinction (85-99%) | Distinction (75-84%) |
Credit (65-74%) |
Pass (50-64%) |
Marginal Fail (35-49%) |
Fail (0-49%) |
Not addressed (0%) |
|
Criterion 1 Clarity, Persuasiveness, and Relevance of Curriculum Vision Effectively communicates the curriculum vision, including a definition, rationale, and justification. The use of relatable language, compelling examples or anecdotes, and age-appropriate, innovative activities are included. Additionally, the integration of theory and literature is considered to enhance credibility and demonstrate a thorough understanding of early childhood education (30%) |
Demonstrates exceptionally clear, engaging, and persuasive content throughout. The curriculum definition is excellent. Rationales and justifications are compelling, with strong connections to real-life examples or anecdotes. The content is highly innovative, showing exceptional creativity in presenting activities and approaches. Theory and literature areseamlessly integrated, enriching the overall narrative and adding credibility to the vision. |
Clear, engaging, and persuasive, with well- developed explanations, rationales, and justifications. Examples or anecdotes effectively illustrate key points, helping to support the vision and approach. Activities and content are relevant, appropriate, and engaging. There is strong integration of theory and literature to support claims and enhance the quality of the content. |
Delivers strong content that is engaging and well- structured but may lack minor depth in some areas. Examples and justifications are effective but could be more compellingor detailed. While theory and literature are integrated, the connections may be slightly less sophisticated or thorough. |
Basic requirements have been met, with adequate explanations and examples. The content is generallyclear and understandable but lacks depth, creativity, or innovation. Limited engagementmay be present, and the integration of theory and literature is present but minimal. |
Minimal or generic content. Explanations, examples, and justifications are limited and do not effectively persuade or engage the audience. There is minimal effort to demonstrate the vision clearly. References to theory and literature are superficial or missing. |
The content is vague, incomplete, orunclear. Explanations and examples are weak or poorly developed, failing to engage the audience. There is little to no integration of theory and literature, and the content lacks coherence. |
The content irrelevant, or off-topic, with no clear content or persuasive effort. Definitions, examples, and justifications are missing or unrelated to the taskrequirements. |
Not attempted |
|
Criterion 2 Design, Implementation, and Inclusivity of two learning environments (one indoor and one outdoor) The effectiveness of thedesigns, including layout, resources. A clear and thoughtfulrationale for each design choice is highlighting how the elements contribute to children’sdevelopmental progress. Inclusivityof all children considered. Examples of, suggested activitiesand materials along with a balanced analysis of strengths and potential challenges. Links to the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF), National |
Exceptional descriptions of learning environments, showcasing innovative layouts, high- quality resources, inclusivity, and cultural responsiveness. Activities and materials are creative, developmentally appropriate, and diverse. Strong analysis of strengths and limitations. |
Detailed and thoughtful descriptions of learning environments, with very well- chosenresources, inclusivity, and cultural responsiveness. Activities and materials are very engaging and appropriate. |
Strong descriptions of learning environments, though some elements may lack innovation or depth. Inclusivity, and cultural responsiveness have been considered well. Activities and materials are engaging and appropriate. |
Adequate descriptions oflearning environments and activities, with some attention to inclusivity and culturalresponsiveness. Activities and materials are appropriate. |
Basic descriptions of learning environment, resources, and activities, with minimal attention to inclusivity or cultural responsiveness. Activities and materials are somewhat appropriate. |
Vague or incomplete descriptions of learning environments, with weak resources and/or activities and little attention to inclusivity. |
Learning environments resources, and/or activities are not described or are inappropriate/irrelevant. |
Not attempted |
|
Quality Standard (NQS), and relevant theory/research (30%) |
||||||||
|
Criterion 3 Alignment with EYLF, NQS, and contemporary literature (25%) |
Exceptional integration of the EYLF, NQS, and authoritative literature across all sections. Links are precise, relevant, and enhance the submission significantly. |
Clear and effective integration of the EYLF, NQS, and literature, with strongrelevance to the content. |
Good integration of the EYLF, NQS, and literature, though links may be less detailed or sophisticated. |
Adequate integration of the EYLF, NQS, and literature but lacks depth or precision. |
Minimal or general references to the EYLF, NQS, or literature, with limited integration. |
Weak or unclear links to the EYLF, NQS, or literature. | Limited references to the EYLF, NQS, and/or literature. | Not attempted |
|
Criterion 4 Referencing and Academic Integrity Academic Literacy including correct word count, correct writing conventions, use ofprofessional language and academic referencing (APA 7th style). A minimum of 10 academic references included. (15%) |
Flawless use of academic writing conventions and APAreferencing with a comprehensive range of high- quality, authoritative sources. All references are accurately formatted and seamlessly integrated into the content. Word count within +/- 10% of the set word count. |
Accurate academic writing and APA referencing with a strong range of relevant sources. Very minor formatting errors may be present. Word countwithin +/- 10% of the set word count. |
Good academic writing and APA referencing with a range of appropriate sources, though there may be some errors or inconsistencies informatting. Word count within +/- 10% of the set word count. |
Adequate academic writing and referencing with some relevant sources. Some minor and inconsistent errors with formatting. Word count within +/- 10% of the set word count. |
Basic academic writing and referencing with limited sources. Some errors and inconsistencies with formatting. Word count within +/- 10% of the set word count. |
Poor standard of academic writing and referencing with consistent errors in most/all areas Word count significantly under or over +/- 10% of the set word count for the task |
Significant improvement needed in academic writing and referencing. Referencing is absent, incorrect, or irrelevant |
Not attempted |
Description of SCU Grades
High Distinction:
The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows exceptional ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as outstanding in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Distinction:
The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows a well-developed ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as distinguished in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Credit:
The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements specified, demonstrates insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying
relevant skills and concepts. The student’s performance could be described as competent in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Pass:
The student’s performance satisfies all of the basic learning requirements specified and provides a sound basis for proceeding to higher-level studies in the subject area.
The student’s performance could be described as satisfactory in relation to the learning requirements specified.
Fail:
The student’s performance fails to satisfy the learning requirements specified.