TCHR5010:
Competency and capability of Preschoolers
Assessment Two: Portfolio
Information Booklet

Assessment name: Portfolio of planning cycle
Due Date: Friday 13 June 11:59pm
Weighting: 50%
Length: 2000 words
Task Description: This Portfolio is comprised of two tasks. You must submit your assessment as one
document.

Task 1: Anecdotal record and learning experience
Anecdotal record
View the video of pre-schoolers provided under the link "Video for Assessment 2" and
complete a detailed anecdotal record of the children’s learning (use the template
provided).
The link for the video is also here: https://youtu.be/sjon4rRQ_08

Learning experience plan
Based on the anecdotal record, write a plan on the planning template of a learning
experience to follow up on and enhance the pre-school children's learning and
development.

Task 2: Reflective practice
This is a real-world project based on scenarios or ethical dilemmas that you are likely to
encounter in your professional work with preschoolers. It is important that you develop
skills and understanding of these issues, and reflect on how to address them, with
reference to your theoretical understanding, the National Quality Standards (NQS), the
Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) and current research in the field.

Background for the scenario
You are the trained teacher in a room with 25 children aged 3-5 years. The other educators
in the room include one trained with a Diploma in Children's Services, Michelle, and the
other educator, Zarla, is working towards Certificate III in Children's Services. Your centre is
open for ten and a half hours per day from 7.30am until 6pm. You work full time on a
variety of eight-hour shifts. The centre is licensed for 79 children and is a for-profit early
learning centre.
Scenario
One of the children, Ishmael, in your room, who is 4.0 years old, sleeps for one hour per
day at your centre. The child arrives at the centre every morning at 7.45am and is picked up
at 5.45pm five days per week. Both parents work full time. The parents come to you, as the
teacher in the preschool room, and say they do not want Ishmael to sleep anymore at the
centre because she is not going to sleep at home until 11pm. They need their sleep, as they
are both busy working. How do you respond to the parents, and what do you do to ensure
that the parents and the children are achieving the best outcomes possible? Address the
unit material, the relevant principles of the EYLF V2.0 (AGDE, 2022) and the NQS (ACECQA,
2018)- especially Quality areas 1, 2 and 6.

Referencing and
formatting
• 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 8 (eight) 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), the unit text, and a range of broader authoritative
literature. Broader literature may include contemporary textbooks, peer reviewed
articles, and other authoritative sources

Formatting: Use APA 7 formatting throughout (this includes indented paragraphs,
double-lined spacing). No contents page is needed for this task.

Referencing Style Resource
About APA 7th - APA 7th Referencing Guide - Library guides at Southern Cross University
(scu.edu.au)


Resources
National Quality Standard 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

Details of the Unit text are available via the Orientation Module on the unit Blackboard site.
Support Resources Academic Integrity – SCU guidelines
Academic Integrity Module - mandatory module for first year students
Learning Zone – workshops, Quick Guides, student appointments
Submission You must include and complete in full the provided SCU coversheet as part of your
submission (this can be found in the Assessment task folder on the TCHR5010 unit
Blackboard site).

Submission of your assessment is via TURNITIN. The submission link can be found in the
Assessment Tasks and Submission Tab in the TCHR5010 Blackboard site.

Please note:
• 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.
• After you have followed the TurnItin submission it is essential you download the
Digital Receipt.
• 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.
Late
Submission/Extension
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

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.



For this task: Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as Grammarly Premium,
may be used ethically for this Assessment Task. However, you must 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.

You must acknowledge any GenAI usage, identify what has been used and how, and
provide relevant evidence (e.g., screen shots) in an appendix.

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.

For example: You may use Grammarly Premium to provide feedback and suggestions on
your writing for academic tone, written expression, grammar, Australian English spelling,
and punctuation. You must not use GenAI to generate ideas for this assessment task. If
you choose to use these tools, you must include an appendix to demonstrate your work
prior to using GenAI.

NOTE: Academic Integrity breaches include poor referencing, not identifying direct
quotations correctly, close paraphrasing, plagiarism, recycling, misrepresentation,
collusion, cheating, contract cheating, fabricating information.

Grades and 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 10 days following submission for marks to be available.

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%)
Task 1: Anecdotal
record and learning
experience (45%)
Articulation of the
planning cycle.
Anecdotal record shows
evidence of
understanding children’s
learning and
development with links
to theory, the EYLF and
NQS.
Demonstrates planning
for Preschoolers’ learning
and development,
interests and
competencies with links
to the EYLF, NQS and
theory.
Exceptional
articulation of the
planning cycle. The
anecdotal record
provides rich,
insightful
observations with
deep understanding
of children’s
learning and
development.
Comprehensive and
seamless
integration of
relevant theory,
EYLF Learning
Outcomes, and NQS
Quality Areas.
Planning is
exemplary—highly
responsive to
preschoolers'
interests, strengths,
and competencies
with clear
theoretical and
practical
justification.
Highly effective
and clear
articulation of
the planning
cycle. The
anecdotal
record
demonstrates
strong
understanding
of children’s
learning and
development,
with
consistently
relevant and
accurate links
to theory, EYLF,
and NQS.
Planning is
thoughtful and
well-aligned to
preschoolers’
needs, showing
excellent
awareness of
their interests
and
competencies.
Clear and
competent
articulation of
the planning
cycle. The
anecdotal
record
demonstrates a
sound
understanding
of children’s
learning and
development,
with
appropriate
links to theory,
EYLF, and NQS.
Planning
reflects
preschoolers’
interests and
strengths, with
evidence of
intentional
teaching and
theoretical
consideration.
Adequate
articulation of
the planning
cycle. Anecdotal
record shows
basic
understanding
of learning and
development,
with some
appropriate
references to
theory, EYLF,
and NQS.
Planning is
generally
relevant to
preschoolers'
interests and
competencies,
though may
lack depth or
consistency in
theoretical
application.
Limited articulation
of the planning cycle.
Anecdotal record
shows a basic or
superficial
understanding of
children’s learning
and development.
Some links to EYLF,
NQS, or theory are
present but may be
inconsistent or
underdeveloped.
Planning meets
minimal expectations
with general
references to
children’s needs.
Incomplete or
unclear
articulation of
the planning
cycle.
Anecdotal
record provides
minimal insight
into children’s
development
and contains
few or unclear
links to EYLF,
NQS, or theory.
Planning lacks
depth and is
not sufficiently
tailored to
preschoolers’
interests or
competencies
Poor or missing
articulation of
the planning
cycle. Anecdotal
record is
inaccurate,
irrelevant, or
absent. No
meaningful
connection to
EYLF, NQS, or
theory. Planning
is inappropriate
or not evident.
No attempt
made to
address the
planning cycle,
children’s
learning, or
relevant
frameworks. No
submission or
content
provided.
Task 2: Reflective
practice (45%)
Reflection and response
to one ethical dilemma
encountered in an early
childhood centre with
consideration to:
-All involved
stakeholders’
perspectives
- The unit’s readings,
the EYLF and the NQS,
Exceptional and
deeply reflective
response
demonstrating
critical insight into
the ethical dilemma.
All stakeholders’
perspectives are
thoughtfully
considered with
empathy and
nuance. Reflection
Highly reflective
and well-
reasoned
response.
Demonstrates
strong
understanding
of the ethical
dilemma and
thoughtfully
incorporates
the views of all
Clear and
considered
reflection on
the ethical
dilemma.
Stakeholders’
perspectives
are addressed
with sensitivity,
and links to unit
readings, EYLF,
NQS, and
Adequate
reflection with
clear effort to
explore the
ethical
dilemma. Some
perspectives
are considered,
though
discussion may
lack depth or
balance.
Basic reflection on
the ethical dilemma
with minimal critical
engagement.
Stakeholder
perspectives are
mentioned but not
well explored.
Limited or surface-
level connections to
unit readings, EYLF,
NQS, or scholarly
Superficial or
unclear
reflection.
Ethical dilemma
may be poorly
understood or
described, with
minimal
recognition of
stakeholders’
perspectives.
Few or
Very limited or
no reflection.
Ethical dilemma
is not
appropriately
addressed.
Stakeholder
perspectives
are ignored or
misrepresented.
No meaningful
use of readings,
No submission
or no attempt
to address the
ethical dilemma
or related
reflections. No
content
provided.




and scholarly sources. is richly supported
by scholarly
sources, unit
readings, the EYLF,
and the NQS,
integrated
seamlessly.
Response shows
high-level ethical
reasoning and
professional
integrity, going
beyond
expectations.

relevant
stakeholders.
Reflection is
well-supported
by relevant
readings, EYLF,
NQS, and
scholarly
literature.
Shows
advanced
critical thinking
and
professional
awareness.

scholarly
sources are
relevant and
mostly well
integrated.
Shows strong
ethical
awareness and
reflective
thinking.

References to
readings, EYLF,
NQS, and
scholarly
sources are
present but
may be limited
or unevenly
applied. Shows
developing
reflective and
ethical
reasoning.

sources. Reflection
meets minimum
standards but lacks
depth and clarity.
irrelevant
connections to
required
frameworks or
readings.
Limited
demonstration
of reflective or
ethical thinking.
EYLF, NQS, or
scholarly
sources. Lacks
evidence of
reflection or
understanding.
Criterion 3
Academic Literacy
including correct word
count, correct writing
conventions, use of
professional language and
academic referencing
(APA 7th style).
A minimum of 8 academic
references included.
(10%)
Flawless use of
academic writing
conventions and
APA referencing
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 count
within +/- 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
in formatting.
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

学霸联盟