TCHR3001: Early Childhood Matters
Assessment 2 Critical Analysis

Item:	Assessment 2: Critical Analysis
Type:	Critical analysis on a contemporary issue in ECEC
Due Date	Friday 5th December (WEEK 6) at 11:59 PM AEST
Length	2000 words (10% leeway +/-)
Weight	50%
Submissions	Template for Assessment Two submitted to Turnitin
Resubmissions	Assessment resubmissions are not permitted in this unit.
Academic Integrity	Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT, is permitted for this preparation of Assessment Task, within university guidelines. If you use GenAl tools, you must use these ethically and acknowledge their use. To find out how to reference GenAl in your work consult the APA 7th referencing style for your unit via SCU Library referencing guides. 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 GenAl to generate ideas for this assessment task.
Unit Learning Outcomes	You will demonstrate the following Unit Learning Outcomes on the successful completion of this task: • ULO1: Students identify a range of issues important to early childhood education and care • ULO2: Analyse a range of positions highlighted in authoritative literature on contemporary issues related to early childhood education and care • ULO3: Students critically reflect on their personal approach/philosophy of learning, development and teaching within early childhood education and care in relation to contemporary issues • ULO 4: Argue a position on current issues in early childhood education and care, in relation to the literature.

Aim

This assessment requires students to critically analyse diverse perspectives that align with a contemporary issue in early childhood education and care, as presented in authoritative literature, and develop a well supported argument for their own position on the issue which is linked to the ULO 4.

Rationale

This assessment builds on assessment 1 and continues to extend students’ analytical and reflective skills. The task fosters critical thinking through the examination of sector issues and the development of evidence-based arguments. By engaging with diverse perspectives and constructing well-supported arguments, students develop the professional expertise needed to navigate the challenges and opportunities within the early childhood field, which, in turn, directly prepares them for roles requiring thoughtful decision-making, policy analysis, and leadership in early childhood settings.

Task Instructions

Part One:

• Select a contemporary issue relevant to early childhood education and care from the options discussed in Modules 4-6. Examples of some areas/issues could include (NO issues about using technology/screen time in children’s learning and development at home/ childcare centre):

o Children’s images in social media

o Nature-based / outdoor play /risky play and children’s learning and development

o Impact of using AI in childcare services

o Access to resources/funding to meet a child’s additional needs

o Reconciliation in EC settings

• Research at least five authoritative sources (e.g., peer-reviewed journals, reputable reports, books) presenting diverse perspectives on the chosen issue. The unit readings will also help.

• Based on your research, argue critically for your dominant position on this issue by identifying its strengths and underlying assumptions to justify your position. Your analysis should demonstrate your understanding of the broader landscape of perspectives surrounding the issue. Identify common themes, points of disagreement, and underlying assumptions. If you prefer, you may use visual aids which could be helpful in comparing and contrasting different ideas.

• Outline an opposing or alternative perspective on the chosen issue. By using current and relevant scholarly literature, justify your own position in relation to both the dominant and opposing/ alternative view to demonstrate a nuanced understanding of the issue's complexities.

Part Two:

Reflect on the relevance of your chosen position to your practice as a teacher/educator working in Australian early childhood education sector. Some guiding questions could be:

• How might this position inform your approach to teaching and learning?

• Explain how your viewpoint/ position would affect your work as an early childhood teacher in Australia.

• How would it shape your teaching?

 

Please note:

• This task can be written in first person (“I” statements) or third person, however you need to be consistent over the task in the tense and person you use for each section.

• All areas of your responses to this task need to be supported by relevant and current scholarly literature. This means you need to cite relevant and established literature that supports what you are saying throughout your writing.

Formatting, style and referencing:

The APA 7th formatting is required for this task.

• Include the TCHR3001 A2 cover page that can be found in the assessment 2 folder.

• Acknowledge how and if you have used AI in your assessment.

• Give evidence of your Special Consideration application if you have applied for this.

• Include clear headings / sub-headings.

• Indent the first line of each new paragraph.

• Use a 12-point font.

• Use a 1.5- or double-line space for your writing and your reference list as this gives spaces for the markers to write feedback.

• Include one reference list on a new page at the end of your task.

• Place the title References in bold in the centre at the top of this page.

• At a minimum, your sources for this task will include the EYLF (AGDE, 2022), the NQS (ACECQA, 2023), a range of unit literature, and broader current scholarly literature.

• Broader literature may include textbooks, peer reviewed articles, and published newspaper and/or media articles by reputable sources (for example, the ABC, The Conversation, Early Childhood Australia).

• You need to include at least 10 current scholarly references in your response to this task per the rubric outline.

Referencing Style Resource:

Please refer to the APA 7th Referencing Guide for this task - https://libguides.scu.edu.au/apa

Writing and Analysing Resources:

• How to Incorporate Evidence into Your Writing - https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/current-students/learning-zone/quick-guides/how_to_incorporate_evidence_into_your_writing.pdf

• Summarising and Paraphrasing - https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/current-students/learning-zone/quick-guides/summarising_and_paraphrasing.pdf

• Writing Paragraphs (PEEL method) - https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/current-students/learning-zone/quick-guides/writing_paragraphs.pdf

• Planning and Writing Body Paragraphs (using the PEEL method) - https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/current-students/learning-zone/quick-guides/planning_and_writing_body_paragraphs.pdf

Task Submission

Submission of your assessment is via Turnitin. The submission link can be found in the Assessment Tasks and Submission Tab in the TCHR3001 Blackboard site, in the Assessment 2 folder.

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.

• When you have submitted your assignment to Turnitin 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.

• Label the Word file with your surname and the assessment number, e.g., Simpson_A2.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.

• If 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.

Resubmissions

As per SCU Rules Relating to Awards - Rule 3 - Coursework Awards - Student Assessment and Examinations: Section 6 - Assessment Resubmission, there are NO resubmissions available for either of the tasks in this unit. Requests for resubmission of either task will be declined in line with the SCU Assessment, Teaching and Learning Procedure - https://policies.scu.edu.au/view.current.php?id=00255

Special Consideration

Please refer to the Special Consideration section of Policy https://policies.scu.edu.au/document/view-current.php?id=140

Late Submissions and Penalties

Please refer to the Late Submission & Penalties section of Policy https://policies.scu.edu.au/view.current.php?id=00255

Academic Integrity

Adherence to SCU's academic integrity policies is mandatory. Breaches may result in severe penalties, including failing the assessment or the unit. Examples of academic misconduct include plagiarism, collusion, and the use of unauthorised tools or materials. Refer to SCU’s academic integrity policies and guides for detailed information on what constitutes a breach, and the consequences involved.

You are permitted to use Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools responsibly and ethically to complete components of this assignment. Please do not post confidential, private, personal, or otherwise sensitive information into Gen AI tools. If you use these tools, you must be aware of their limitations, biases, and propensity for fabrication.

All students must declare if they have or have not used GenAI to assist with assessment completion (for example, brainstorming, understanding concepts, generating examples, summarising readings, proofreading text).

Your use of AI tools must adhere to the SCU Academic Integrity Framework, which includes upholding honesty, ethics, professionalism, and academic integrity. All use of Gen AI must be explicitly documented and acknowledged in your submission. If you use generative AI 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. To find out how to reference generative AI in your work, consult the referencing style for your unit via the library referencing guides.

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.

• A penalty of 5% of the available marks will be deducted from the actual mark at one minute after the time listed on 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

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 days for marks to be posted.

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%)	Absent Fail 0%
Criterion 1: Identification of an ECEC issue and articulation of a leading and opposing position including critical analysis of literature - 30%	Achieves all the criteria for a high distinction to an exemplary standard with outstanding integration of the unit content and references.	Comprehensive and insightful analysis of diverse perspectives with clear, concise, and compelling articulation of a well-defined position. Strong dentification of strengths, and underlying assumptions.	Thorough analysis of diverse perspectives; clear articulation of a defined position; well developed identification of key strengths and assumptions	Sound analysis of diverse perspectives; articulated position but not well-defined; some identification of strengths and assumptions	Basic analysis of perspectives; position unclear or underdeveloped; limited identification of strengths, and assumptions	Some analysis is there with unclear position; no identification of strengths and assumptions	Superficial or missing analysis; position missing or illogical; failure to identify or analyse key perspectives effectively.	Not attempted.
Criterion 2: Argumentation 30%	Achieves all the criteria for a high distinction to an exemplary standard, with outstanding integration of the unit materials and a deep knowledge of the issues.	Well-supported and nuanced arguments; effective use of evidence; insightful engagement with diverse perspectives; strong address of counterargumen ts.	Well-supported arguments; use of evidence; engagement with diverse perspectives; address of counterarguments.	Soundly supported arguments; some use of evidence; attempts to engage with diverse perspectives; some address of counterargumen ts.	Arguments lack sufficient support; limited use of evidence; minimal engagement with diverse perspectives; weak address of counterarguments	A few arguments without any evidence; there is no engagement with diverse perspectives; no address of counterargue ments.	Arguments are missing, illogical, or unsupported by evidence.	Not attempted.
Criterion 3: Reflection and Personal Relevance - 20%	Achieves all the criteria for a high distinction to an exemplary standard, with outstanding engagement with the unit materials and current literature.	An insightful reflection on the personal relevance of the chosen position; clear articulation of how the position informs teaching practice.	Thoughtful reflection on personal relevance; articulation of how the position informs teaching practice.	Sound reflection on personal relevance; some attempt to connect the position to teaching practice.	Limited reflection on personal relevance; weak connection to teaching practice	A very limited reflection on personal relevance; a very limited connection to teaching practice.	Reflection is missing or superficial; there is no connection to teaching practice.	Not attempted.
Criterion 4: Standard of writing and presentation - spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, APA 7th referencing - 20%	Achieves all the criteria for a high distinction to an exemplary standard, without any errors.	Writing is clear, insightful and cohesive and flows seamlessly throughout so that clear connections between sections are evident. Flawless use of APA referencing style is evident and there are no errors in spelling, punctuation or grammar.	In-depth and clear writing with minor errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, and APA 7th referencing	Good standard of writing and presentation with some errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, APA 7th referencing	Satisfactory standard of writing and presentation with many errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, APA 7th referencing	Writing is not cohesive, and/or the presentation with many errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, APA 7th referencing. The unit learning materials have not been included in a reference list or intext citations.	Poor standard of writing and presentation with many errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, APA 7th referencing.	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 5 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.