- Veritas Academics

TCHR3001: Early Childhood Matters

Summary

Title

Assessment
2

Type

Position
paper

Due Date

Friday,
April 12^th at 11:59 pm AEST/AEDT (end of Week 6)

Length

1500
words

Weighting

50%

Academic Integrity

GenAI may NOT be used
in this task.

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.

Submission

Word
document submitted to Turnitin (do NOT submit PDF documents)

Unit Learning
Outcomes

This assessment task
maps to the following ULOs:

•
ULO1: 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: Critically reflect on their personal
approach/philosophy of learning, development and teaching within early
childhood education and care in relation to contemporary issues.

•
ULO4: Argue a position on current issues in
early childhood education and care, in relation to the literature

Rationale

As an early childhood teacher your beliefs form the basis of your early childhood philosophy. How you implement this philosophy within your teaching practice will be influenced by a range of issues within your local and broader community.

Task Description

This task requires you to analyse and evaluate the various positions of the contemporary issues presented in Module 4 – 6. Include a personal reflection that explains your own position on a selected issue and critically analyse and justify your personal position in relation to current, scholarly literature.

Task Instructions

Drawing on the unit learning materials, unit tutorials and a range of relevant and current scholarly literature, select one issue addressed in Module 4 to 6 of this unit and:

• Part 1: Analyse and evaluate the positions put forward on this issue within the unit materials and discussions. (500 words)

• Part 2: Reflect on and synthesise your personal position on the issue explaining why and how it is relevant to you personally as a teacher/educator working with children, families, and other relevant stakeholders in the Australian early years sector (500 words).

• Part 3: Justify your personal position on the issue using a range of relevant and current scholarly literature. (500 words).

Please note:

• Part 2 and Part 3 of this task can be written in first (“I” statements) or third person, however you need to be consistent over the task in the tense and person you use.

• All areas of your responses to this task need to be supported by relevant and current literature. This means you need to cite relevant and current (within the last 10 years) literature that supports what you are saying throughout your writing.

• Please refer to your rubric for the literature that you MUST include in your responses to each part of this task..

• Please remember that you must use scholarly literature in this task.

Please refer to the following documents to support you in addressing this task:

General:

• How to Incorporate Evidence into Your Writing – https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scudep/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/currentstudents/learning-zone/quick-guides/summarising_and_paraphrasing.pdf

Part 1:

• You MUST refer to the unit learning materials and discussions in the recorded tutorial session/s that address the issue you select.

• Look at the meaning of ‘analyse’ and ‘evaluate’ in the following document – https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/current-students/learning-zone/quickguides/common_instruction_words.pdf

Part 2:

• Read this document about Reflective Writing – https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scudep/current-students/learning-zone/quick-guides/reflective_writing.pdf

Part 3:

• Look at the meaning of ‘justify’ in the following document – https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/current-students/learning-zone/quickguides/common_instruction_words.pdf

• Writing Paragraphs (PEEL method) – https://www.scu.edu.au/media/scu-dep/currentstudents/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/quickguides/planning_and_writing_body_paragraphs.pdf

Formatting and style

APA 7 formatting is required for this task.

• Include a cover page that contains:

o The title of the task in bold o Your name (as author), o Your faculty (Faculty of Education)

o The unit code and name (TCHR3001 Early Childhood Matters) o Your unit assessor’s name (Kelly Simpson) o The due date

• Include a title or the prompt at the start of each response.

• Students may use headings that align with the task instructions to organise their responses.

• Indent the first line of each new paragraph.

• Use 12-point Arial font.

• Double line space your writing and your reference list.

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 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 NQF (ACECQA, 2023), a range of unit materials, 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 8 scholarly references in your response to this task as well as the unit learning materials and the EYLF (AGDE, 2022) and NQS, (ACECQA, 2023).

Resources

• Academic Integrity – https://www.scu.edu.au/about/leadership/executive/academicportfolio-office-apo/academic-integrity-framework/

• SCU Student Learning Zone – https://www.scu.edu.au/current-students/learning-zone/

• The Early Years Learning Framework – https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/202301/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf

• National Quality Standard – https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard

• Guide to the National Quality Framework (including the National Quality Standards) – https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/about/guide

Referencing Style Resource

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

Task Submission

• Your task should be submitted using the submission point in the Turnitin folder titled Assessment 2: Position Paper in the Assessments Tasks and Submission section on the Blackboard TCHR3001 site. Only Microsoft Word documents submitted via the Turnitin portal on Blackboard will be accepted. You must label your final submission with your surname and initials and the assessment task’s name, e.g. SmithJ_PositionPaper.doc

• 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.

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.

GenAI May Not be Used

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT, must NOT be used for this Assessment Task.

You are required to demonstrate if you have developed the unit’s skills and knowledge without the support of GenAI. Grammarly (but NOT GrammarlyGo) may be used to review your task and make changes to grammar or punctuation or to single words however it must NOT be used to re-write sentences or paragraphs.

Please note that GenAI tools include a range of translation tools. It is the responsibility of students to ensure that any translation tool they are using is not a GenAI tool. Students are encouraged to write their work without the support of translation tools for this reason.

If you use GenAI tools in your assessment task, 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.

Special Consideration

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

Late Submissions & Penalties

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

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 Criteria

See the marking rubric for the marking criteria and grading standards.

… continued on next page….

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%)

Criterion 1:

Part 1, Analysis, and evaluation of positions put forward in the unit
learning and tutorials on one issue

from Modules

4-6 is supported with reference to the learning materials and
recorded

tutorial/s.
as well as recent scholarly literature 15%

Achieves all the criteria for a high distinction to an
exemplary standard. Key positions on a chosen issue from Modules 4-6 that
were presented in the learning materials and recorded tutorial/s are analysed
and evaluated at an exceptional level with exceptional integration the unit
materials, recorded tutorials and recent scholarly

Key
positions on a chosen issue from Modules 46 that were presented in the
learning materials and recorded tutorial/s are succinctly and clearly
analysed and evaluated at an outstanding level with clear integration of the
unit materials, recorded tutorial/s and a range of recent scholarly
literature.

Key
positions on a chosen issue from Modules 4-6 that were presented in the
learning materials and recorded tutorial/s are succinctly and clearly
analysed and evaluated at a very good level with clear support from the unit
materials, recorded tutorial/s and a range of recent scholarly literature

Key
positions on a chosen issue from Modules 4-6 that were presented in the
learning materials and recorded tutorial/s are succinctly analysed and
evaluated at a good level with clear reference to the unit materials,
recorded tutorial/s and a range of recent scholarly literature

Key positions on a chosen issues from Modules 4-6 that were
presented in the learning materials and recorded tutorial/s are
satisfactorily analysed and evaluated with references to some unit materials,
recorded tutorial/s and a range of recent scholarly literature evident

Key positions on a chosen
issue from Modules 4-6 that were presented in the learning materials and
recorded tutorial/s are unclearly analysed and evaluated and/or discussed
rather than analysed and evaluated with relevant references to the unit
materials and/or recorded

tutorial/s and/or

Key positions on an issue
from Modules 4-6 that were presented in the learning materials and

recorded

tutorial/s is not addressed and/or the analysis/
evaluation/ discussion presented is not relevant to the positions presented
in the learning materials and/or tutorial/s and/or the references to
scholarly literature

Not
attempted

literature and
no errors.

reference to scholarly
literature and/or no references to the unit materials and/or recorded
tutorial/s are included in an appropriate analysis of an issue from Modules
4-6.

provided are not relevant
to the learning in the unit and/or to the chosen issue.

Criterion 2:

Part 2,

Reflection, and personal position on one
issue from Modules 4-6 is supported by references to the EYLF (AGDE,
2022),

NQS
(ACECQA, 2023) and 4 relevant and current

Achieves all the criteria a
high

distinction,
with exemplary discussion of a personal position on one relevant issue and
support drawn from the integration of a broad range of relevant and current
scholarly

An
outstanding personal position relevant to an ECEC professional on one chosen
issue from Modules 4 – 6 is comprehensively supported through the integration
of a range of relevant and current scholarly literature and

A very good
personal position relevant to an ECEC professional on one chosen issue from
Modules 4 – 6 is clearly

supported
through the integration of 4 or more relevant and current

A
good personal position relevant to an ECEC professional on one chosen issue
from Modules 4 – 6 is supported by clear references to 4 or more relevant and
current scholarly

A
satisfactory personal position relevant to an ECEC professional on one chosen
issue from Modules 4 – 6 is presented with references to 4 relevant and
current scholarly literature

A
personal position relevant to an ECEC professional on one chosen issue from
Modules 4 – 6 is presented without references to at least 2 relevant and
current scholarly literature

The
personal position outlined does not address an issue from Modules 4-6 and/or
the position presented is generic/not personal and/or relevant to an ECEC
professional and/or the

Not
attempted

scholarly
literature. 15%

literature and
no errors.

the EYLF (AGDE, 2022),
NQS

(ACECQA,
2023).

scholarly
literature sources as well as the EYLF (AGDE, 2022), NQS (ACECQA, 2023).

literature sources as well as the EYLF (AGDE, 2022), NQS (ACECQA,

2023).

sources including the EYLF
(AGDE,

2022),
NQS (ACECQA, 2023).

sources
and/or there is no reference to the EYLF (AGDE, 2022), NQS (ACECQA), and/or
the personal position only generally relates to one issue from Modules 4-6
and is presented with or without references.

literature used is not relevant or is invalid.

Criterion 3:

Part 3,

Justification of personal position supported
by references to the EYLF (AGDE, 2022),

NQS
(ACECQA, 2023) and at least 4 relevant and current scholarly literature.

Achieves
all the criteria for a high distinction, with consistently outstanding
integration of a range of very relevant and current scholarly literature
sources and unit learning

The justification
of the personal positions is excellently linked to the personal position
presented and

reflects deep engagement

with
a range of scholarly literature with a minimum of 4 relevant and

The

justification of
the personal position is very clearly linked to the personal position

presented and

reflects clear engagement

with
a range of scholarly literature with a minimum of 4 relevant and

The

justification of
the personal position is clearly linked to the personal position presented
and

reflects good engagement

with
a range of scholarly literature. A minimum of 4 relevant and

The

justification of one
personal position is satisfactorily linked to the personal position presented
and supported by scholarly

literature. A minimum of 4 relevant and current

The

justification presented is only generally linked to the
personal position presented and/or a minimum of 3 relevant and current
scholarly sources as well as the EYLF

The

justification
presented is not relevant to the personal positions presented and/or does not
include references to relevant and/or valid sources of current

Not
attempted.

15%

materials/areas with no
errors.

current
scholarly sources as well as the EYLF (AGDE, 2022) and NQS (ACECQA, 2023)
integrated within the justification.

current
scholarly sources as well as the EYLF (AGDE, 2022) and NQS (ACECQA, 2023)
integrated within the justification

current scholarly sources
as well as the EYLF (AGDE, 2022) and NQS (ACECQA, 2023) provide good support
to the justification.

scholarly sources as well
as the EYLF (AGDE, 2022) and NQS (ACECQA, 2023) are referenced within the
justification.

(AGDE, 2022) and NQS
(ACECQA,

2023) are not referenced in
the justification.

scholarly literature.

Criterion 4: Standard of writing and
presentation – spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure,
appropriate word count, APA 7^th referencing. 5%

Achieves all the criteria for a high distinction to an
exemplary standard, without any errors.

Excellent standard of
writing and presentation with no errors in

spelling,
punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, or APA 7th referencing. Word count within +/- 10% of the set word
count.

Very
good standard of writing and presentation with very minor and very inconsistent
errors in spelling and punctuation and grammar and paragraph structure and
APA 7th referencing. Word count within
+/- 10% of the set word count.

Good
standard of writing and presentation with some minor and inconsistent errors
in one or two areas of spelling or punctuation or grammar or paragraph
structure, or APA 7th referencing.
Word count within +/- 10% of the set word count.

Satisfactory standard of writing and presentation with
errors in most areas of spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure,
APA 7th referencing or consistent errors in one or two of the above areas
and/or word count over/under +/-

Poor standard of writing
and presentation with consistent errors in most/all areas

of spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, and
APA 7th referencing and/or word count significantly under or over +/- 10% of
the set word count for the task

Significant

improvement needed in
writing and presentation with consistent errors in

spelling, punctuation, grammar, paragraph structure, and
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 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.