Assessment Brief
TCHR5003: PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES IN EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
ASSESSMENT 1: Critical Review

Summary
Title Assessment 1: Critical Review
Due Date Wednesday 24 July 11:59pm AEST (Week 4)
Length 1500 words
Weighting 50%
Submission 1 word document submitted to Turnitin
Academic
Integrity
(See below for
limits of use
where GenAI is
permitted)
In this assessment task, the use of GenAI is allowed but limited.
You may only use GenAI to help guide you in the process of completing your
assessment work. Think of it as a tool. A quick way to access information or
an AI tutor to help answer your questions. So, you can use GenAI to help
guide your research, research, ask questions to help to clarify your
understanding, brainstorm preliminary ideas, get feedback on your ideas and
clarify concepts.
Remember, just as if you Googled something, you still need to evaluate the
information to determine its accuracy and relevance. GenAI can produce
biased and false information. You must find scholarly sources to support any
of the ideas generated. This is a requirement for this assessment.
You cannot include content generated by in your assessment (even if you
have paraphrased, summarised or quoted the output).
You are also encouraged to use Grammarly Premium to help edit and
improve the quality of your written work.
If you opt to use GenAI as defined as acceptable for this assessment, you
must keep evidence of how it was used and acknowledge how you used it in
the process of completing your assessment appropriately. To help understand
what to do, consult the Learning Zone’s resources.
• Quick Guide Acknowledging and Referencing GenAI Use
• Build your skills using GenAI - PAIR Framework
• The SCU Library Guide- GenAI can also help you develop your AI
literacy skills. https://libguides.scu.edu.au/genAI
If you use GenAI tools in your assessment task beyond the acceptable limits,
it may result in an academic integrity breach against you as described in
the Student Academic and Non-Academic Misconduct Rules, Section 3.
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.
Unit Learning
Outcomes
You will demonstrate the following Unit Learning Outcomes on the successful
completion of this task:

• ULO 1: Describe and apply the key principles and practices of the
Early Years Learning Framework (AGDE, 2022).
2
Assessment Brief
• ULO 2: Understand and analyse the importance of relationships and
how to build and foster them with children, families, staff and the
community respecting the diversities of their histories and
backgrounds.
Task Description
You are required to develop a professional response to the three (3) scenarios described below that
have occurred in early childhood settings making reference to the unit materials, the National
Quality Standard [NQS] (ACECQA, 2020) and the Early Years Learning Framework [EYLF] (AGDE,
2022).
Rationale
The scenarios are based on real life events in early childhood settings and relate to the early
childhood principles and practices that have been explored over the first three weeks of the unit
(Modules 1-3).
Task Instructions
Develop a professional response to each scenario below (500 words each) to demonstrate your
understanding of the importance of relationships and how to build and foster them with children,
families, staff and the community respecting the diversities of their histories and backgrounds. Refer
to the EYLF, NQS, unit materials, and academic literature to support your points.
Scenario 1:
You are the early childhood teacher in the toddler room. Increasingly, you notice some of your
colleagues have a deficit view of the toddlers in their care. Your colleagues demonstrate behaviours
that suggest the toddlers are not capable of making choices and completing routines on their own.
Critically analyse this learning environment in terms of a) the need for children’s agency and b) the
practices you would implement for improved children’s agency in this setting.
When synthesising your response, justify your analysis with one NQS Quality Area (ACECQA, 2020),
one EYLF Principle and one EYLF Practice (AGDE, 2022) and academic literature.
Scenario 2
As the early childhood teacher responsible for the Preschool room at a long day care service, you are
eager to introduce a healthier eating program. Your goal is to involve both families and the
community in this initiative. Your service caters to a diverse range of family backgrounds, each with
unique cultural influences and dietary requirements and preferences.
How can you effectively implement a healthier eating program, considering the diverse backgrounds
and preferences? Additionally, how can you ensure participation and support from both families and
the broader community in this initiative?
When constructing your response, justify your answer with one NQS Quality Area (ACECQA, 2020),
one EYLF Principle and one EYLF Practice (AGDE, 2022) and academic literature.
3
Assessment Brief
Scenario 3
You are the educator in the 0–2-year-old room. You have a number of new families who are
concerned about their children who become very upset at drop-off time. You are to formulate a
strategy that will enable you to a) reassure the new families that their children’s behaviour is
common, and b) communicate to the families the practices you undertake to settle the children each
morning and build trust.
When detailing the strategy use one NQS Quality Area (ACECQA, 2020), one EYLF Principle and one
EYLF Practice (AGDE, 2022) and academic literature to justify your decisions, and the importance of
these for the child and family.

Follow the steps below to complete this task:

• Create a new Word Document and save it with your surname and initial and the assessment
task’s name. E.g: MillsA_TCHR5003_criticalreview
• Create a cover page with the following details:
o Student name
o Student ID
o Unit code
o Unit Assessor and Tutor names
o Date submitted
• Complete one reference list for the entire assessment task.
• Once complete, submit task via the Turnitin link in the Assessment and Submission section
of the unit site.
• Adhere to APA7 formatting guidelines
Referencing
APA7th referencing format is required with a minimum of 10 references. Sources should include
relevant early childhood policy and peer-reviewed literature. Link to SCU Libguide here: APA 7
Referencing.
Task Submission
Assessments should be submitted using the Turnitin activity titled “Assessment 1: Critical Review” in
the Assessments Tasks & Submission section on the Blackboard site. Only Microsoft Word
documents submitted via the Turnitin portal on Blackboard will be accepted.
Special Consideration
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 MyEnrolment 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
Except when special consideration is awarded, late submission of assessment tasks will lead
automatically to the imposition of a penalty. Penalties will be incurred as soon as the deadline is
reached.
4
Assessment Brief
• 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
achieved on each subsequent calendar day until the mark reaches zero.
Grades & Feedback
Assignments that have been submitted by the due date will receive an SCU grade and written
feedback. Grades and feedback will be posted to “Grades & Feedback” section on the Blackboard
unit site. Please allow 7-10 days for marks to be posted.

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 the use of generative artificial intelligence tools when
not permitted, poor referencing, not identifying direct quotations correctly, close paraphrasing,
plagiarism, recycling, misrepresentation, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, fabricating
information.
GenAI is allowed – but limited
You may only use GenAI to help guide you in the process of completing your assessment work. Think
of it as a tool. A quick way to access information or an AI tutor to help answer your questions. So,
you can use GenAI to help guide your research, research, ask questions to help to clarify your
understanding, brainstorm preliminary ideas, get feedback on your ideas and clarify concepts. You
must find scholarly sources to support any of the ideas generated. This is a requirement for this
assessment. Please see the Student Academic and Non-Academic Misconduct Rules, Section 3.
5
Assessment Brief
Assessment Rubric
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
(1-34%)
Not
addressed
0%
Demonstrated
understanding of building
and fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff

15 marks
Achieves all
the criteria for
a high
distinction to
an exemplary
standard,
without any
errors.
Outstanding
understanding of
building and
fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff

Very good
understanding of
building and
fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff

Good understanding
of building and
fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff

Satisfactory
understanding of
building and
fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff

Little understanding
of building and
fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff

No understanding of
building and
fostering
relationships with
- Children
- Families
- Community
- Staff
Professional reflective
response to each scenario
justifying response with
reference to relevant
EYLF Principles and
Practices

15 marks
Achieves all
the criteria for
a high
distinction to
an exemplary
standard,
without any
errors.
Outstanding
reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to
relevant EYLF
Principles and
Practices
Very good reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to
relevant EYLF
Principles and
Practices
Good reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to
relevant EYLF
Principles and
Practices
Satisfactory
reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to
relevant EYLF
Principles and
Practices
Poor reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with limited
reference to relevant
EYLF Principles and
Practices
Reflective
professional
response to each
scenario is
incomplete with no
reference to EYLF
Principles and
Practices

Professional reflective
response to each scenario
justifying chosen
response with reference
to National Quality
Standard

15 marks
Achieves all
the criteria for
a high
distinction to
an exemplary
standard,
without any
errors.
Outstanding
reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to the
National Quality
Standard
Very good reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to the
National Quality
Standard
Good reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to the
National Quality
Standard
Satisfactory
reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with reference to the
National Quality
Standard
Poor reflective
professional
response to each
scenario justifying
chosen response
with limited
reference to the
National Quality
Standard
Reflective
professional
response to each
scenario is
incomplete with no
reference to the
National Quality
Standard

6
Assessment Brief
Academic Literacy

5 marks
Demonstrates
a publishable,
comprehensive
understanding
and
application of
correct writing
conventions,
including
accurate
spelling,
grammar, and
punctuation.
The reference
list contains all
the required
information in
the correct
APA 7 format.
Demonstrates a
comprehensive
understanding and
application of correct
writing conventions,
including accurate
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation. The
reference list
contains all the
required information
in the correct APA 7
format.
Demonstrates a
thorough
understanding and
application of correct
writing conventions
by correctly using
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation
throughout with very
minor inaccuracies.
The reference list
contains all the
required information
in the correct APA 7
format, with very
minor errors.
Demonstrates a good
understanding and
application of correct
writing conventions
by correctly using
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation,
with minor
inaccuracies.
The reference list
contains all the
required
information, but
some items may be
in an incorrect
format or have more
than five minor
errors.

Demonstrates a
satisfactory
understanding and
application of correct
writing conventions
by mostly using
correct spelling,
grammar, and
punctuation, with
some inaccuracies.
The reference list
provides most of the
required
information, but
there are some
errors.
Poor understanding
and application of
correct writing
conventions,
including accurate
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation that
impact readability.
The reference list is
incorrectly formatted
or there are an
inadequate number
of references.
Poor understanding
and application of
correct writing
conventions,
including accurate
spelling, grammar,
and punctuation,
that significantly
impact readability.
The reference list is
incomplete or
missing.