TCHR5003 Principles and Practices in Early Childhood Education: Assessment 1 Critical Review

Context

Southern Cross University delivers TCHR5003 as a core unit in early childhood education programs. This assessment, Assessment 1: Critical Review, carries a 50% weighting and requires a 1500-word written response to three professional scenarios. The task tests application of the Early Years Learning Framework V2.0 (AGDE, 2022) and the National Quality Standard (ACECQA, 2020) to real-world early childhood settings. The 2026 iteration maintains the three-scenario architecture used in previous years while refining scenario details to reflect contemporary service contexts. The due date is Monday of Week 4 at 11:59pm AEDT. Submission is through Turnitin as a single Word document.

Summary

• Title: Assessment 1: Critical Review
• Due Date: Monday, Week 4, 11:59pm AEDT
• Length: 1500 words (500 words per scenario, plus references)
• Weighting: 50%
• Submission: One Word document to Turnitin

Unit Learning Outcomes

Successful completion demonstrates:

• ULO 1: Describe and apply the key principles and practices of the Early Years Learning Framework (AGDE, 2022).
• ULO 2: Analyse the importance of relationships with children, families, staff, and the community while respecting diverse histories and backgrounds.

Task Description

Develop a professional response to each of the three scenarios below. Each response must be 500 words and must draw on the unit materials, the National Quality Standard (ACECQA, 2020), the Early Years Learning Framework V2.0 (AGDE, 2022), and peer-reviewed academic literature. The scenarios reflect events that occur in early childhood settings and connect to the principles and practices explored in Modules 1 to 3.

Task Instructions

Write a critical response to each scenario. Each response must demonstrate understanding of relationships with children, families, staff, and the community. Justify every claim with specific references to the EYLF, the NQS, and scholarly sources. Use APA 7th edition referencing throughout.

Scenario 1: Children’s Agency in the Toddler Room

You are the early childhood teacher in the toddler room. Several colleagues consistently demonstrate a deficit view of the toddlers in their care. Their behaviours suggest they believe toddlers cannot make choices or complete routines independently. Critically analyse this learning environment in relation to (a) the need for children’s agency and (b) the practices you would implement to improve children’s agency in this setting. Justify your analysis with one NQS Quality Area (ACECQA, 2020), one EYLF Principle, one EYLF Practice (AGDE, 2022), and academic literature.

Scenario 2: Healthier Eating Program and Family Diversity

As the early childhood teacher responsible for the preschool room in a long day care service, you want to introduce a healthier eating program. Your goal is to involve families and the community in this initiative. The service caters to families from diverse cultural backgrounds, including recent arrivals and families with limited English proficiency. Each family has unique dietary requirements and preferences. Explain how you would effectively implement the program while respecting cultural diversity and fostering genuine partnerships. Support your response with the NQS, the EYLF, and academic literature.

Scenario 3: Community Connections and Staff Collaboration

You are a new early childhood teacher in a community-based kindergarten. The service has limited connections with local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Some staff members express uncertainty about embedding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives into everyday practice. Analyse how you would build respectful relationships with the local community and support staff to integrate these perspectives. Refer to the EYLF Principle of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives, the NQS, and relevant academic sources.

Marking Rubric

Sample Response: Children’s Agency and Deficit Views

Deficit assumptions about toddlers often stem from developmentalist thinking that frames young children as incomplete beings rather than competent agents. Research on educator understandings of agency shows that many early childhood professionals struggle to recognise agency in children under three because they equate agency with verbal reasoning or independent decision-making. A critical response to this scenario begins by naming the deficit discourse and then replacing it with an image of the child as capable and resourceful, consistent with the EYLF Principle of secure, respectful, and reciprocal relationships. The NQS Quality Area 1 (Educational program and practice) requires educators to promote each child’s agency, and this obligation applies equally to toddlers. Practical changes include offering genuine choices during routines, allowing toddlers to serve their own food, and creating accessible spaces where children can retrieve materials without adult intervention. Staff can document small moments of agency to challenge colleagues’ assumptions and build a shared understanding of capability. Leadership here means modelling respectful interactions and using professional conversations to unpack why deficit views persist.

Sample Response: Family Partnerships and Cultural Diversity

Building a healthier eating program in a culturally diverse service requires more than translating menus into multiple languages. Genuine partnership means inviting families to shape the program from the outset, not informing them of decisions already made. Research on culturally inclusive family–school partnerships emphasises that trust grows when professionals acknowledge power differences and create spaces for families to share knowledge about food, health, and cultural practices[reference:1]. The EYLF Principle of partnerships with families and the NQS Quality Area 6 (Collaborative partnerships with families and communities) both require this reciprocal approach. Practical strategies include forming a family advisory group, hosting cooking sessions where families demonstrate familiar dishes, and co-designing nutritional guidelines that accommodate cultural and religious requirements. Community health organisations and local cultural groups can provide additional expertise and credibility. The program succeeds when families see their cultures reflected in the service’s food practices rather than treated as obstacles to a predetermined healthy eating agenda.

Why Deficit Discourses Persist in Toddler Rooms

Deficit views of toddlers often survive because they are embedded in routine practices that go unexamined. A study on educator understandings of agency found that many professionals working with children under three default to directive, compliance-focused interactions because they associate agency with risk or disorder. This pattern is not simply a matter of individual attitude; it reflects workplace cultures where efficiency and behaviour management outrank relational pedagogy. Changing those cultures requires sustained professional learning, not one-off workshops. Educators need opportunities to observe and discuss video recordings of everyday routines, identify moments where agency could have been supported, and practise alternative responses. The most effective interventions combine individual reflection with collective norm-setting. Without that structural support, deficit assumptions resurface even when individual educators know better.

Addressing a Common Misconception About the EYLF

Many students assume that referencing the EYLF means quoting its Principles and Practices without explaining how they apply. A rubric criterion that asks for “application” expects something different: it expects you to take a specific Principle or Practice, show how it operates in the scenario, and explain what changes when it is implemented well. For example, citing “secure, respectful and reciprocal relationships” is insufficient. You must describe what those relationships look like in the toddler room, how they differ from the colleagues’ deficit approach, and what evidence would demonstrate that the alternative is working. The same standard applies to the NQS. Naming Quality Area 1 without analysing a specific element or standard carries little weight. Read the rubric carefully: “application” means contextual translation, not label-dropping.

Balancing Cultural Responsiveness with Nutritional Guidelines

Students sometimes frame cultural responsiveness and nutritional guidelines as competing priorities. That framing is a trap. The EYLF and the NQS both expect educators to hold both commitments simultaneously. A healthier eating program can respect cultural food practices while still promoting nutrition. The key is negotiation rather than imposition. Families from diverse backgrounds bring knowledge about ingredients, preparation methods, and mealtime routines that can enrich the program. At the same time, educators have a responsibility to ensure that food provided meets basic nutritional standards. The resolution lies in dialogue: asking families what they value, explaining why certain nutritional parameters exist, and co-designing menus that satisfy both sets of concerns. Research on healthy eating interventions with family engagement shows that programmes succeed when parents are treated as partners rather than recipients of advice[reference:3].

Conclusion

This assessment rewards specificity over generality. Each scenario asks for a professional response grounded in the EYLF, the NQS, and credible literature. Students who describe abstract principles without translating them into concrete practices will struggle to meet the higher rubric bands. Students who analyse the scenario, name the relevant framework elements, and show how their proposed response changes outcomes for children and families will perform well. The three scenarios share a common thread: relationships and agency are not add-ons but the core of early childhood practice. Prepare responses that treat each scenario as a real professional dilemma, not an academic exercise.

References

Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2020). National Quality Standard. ACECQA. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard

Australian Government Department of Education. (2022). Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia V2.0. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf

McWayne, C. M., Melzi, G., & Mistry, J. (2022). A home-to-school approach for promoting culturally inclusive family–school partnership research and practice. Educational Psychologist, 57(4), 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2022.2129642

Sirasa, F., Mitchell, L., Azhar, A., Chandrasekara, A., & Harris, N. (2021). A six-week healthy eating intervention with family engagement improves food knowledge and preferences but not dietary diversity among urban preschool children in Sri Lanka. Public Health Nutrition, 24(14), 4562–4573. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980021002730

Vlok, M., & de Wet, C. (2021). From birth to three: Exploring educators’ understandings of agency. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 46(4), 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/18369391211041775

===============================================

Children’s Agency, Family Partnerships and Community Relationships in Early Childhood Education

Early childhood education depends on educators recognising children as capable participants, families as knowledgeable partners, and communities as sources of cultural knowledge. The three scenarios require a response that moves beyond naming the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) and National Quality Standard (NQS). Each response must explain how relationships, professional judgement and everyday practice can change children’s experiences. Across the scenarios, the central argument is that high-quality early childhood practice begins with respectful relationships: educators who trust toddlers’ capability, families’ expertise and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities’ authority create conditions for children to belong, participate and learn.

Children’s Agency in the Toddler Room

A deficit view of toddlers limits both children’s learning and educators’ professional practice. When colleagues assume that toddlers cannot make choices or complete routines independently, they are likely to organise the room around adult control, speed and compliance. Such assumptions may appear practical in a busy toddler room, but they reduce opportunities for children to test ideas, communicate preferences and develop confidence. Research with Australian educators working with children under three found that many held limited or confused understandings of agency, often treating it as verbal reasoning rather than recognising infants’ and toddlers’ embodied, relational and everyday expressions of choice (Burr & Degotardi, 2021). The issue is therefore not simply individual attitude; it reflects a professional culture that can privilege order over children’s participation.

The EYLF V2.0 positions children as capable and competent, with agency understood as their capacity to make choices and influence what happens to them (Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE], 2022). The relevant EYLF Principle is secure, respectful and reciprocal relationships. Toddlers are more likely to act independently when educators respond predictably, acknowledge their communication and treat routine moments as opportunities for connection rather than management. For example, an educator who crouches beside a child, waits for a response and offers two clear options is doing more than managing a nappy change or mealtime. The educator is demonstrating that the child’s preferences matter.

The relevant EYLF Practice is learning environments. A toddler room can be arranged so that children can reach resources, choose materials and participate in predictable routines without constant adult direction. Low shelves, duplicate resources, visual cues, child-sized furniture and unhurried transitions make independence possible. These changes do not remove educator responsibility. Instead, they redistribute responsibility: educators prepare an environment that supports safe exploration, then observe and respond to what children do with it. Agency is therefore not a reward for mature behaviour; it is a right that educators enable through the physical and relational design of the setting.

NQS Quality Area 1, Educational program and practice, directly supports this response. Element 1.2.3 requires that each child’s agency is promoted, enabling children to make choices and decisions that influence events and their world (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2020). In practice, this means toddlers should have meaningful decisions during arrival, play, meals, toileting and rest. A child might choose between two bibs, select a book, decide whether to join a group experience or indicate a need for help. These choices must be genuine. Offering a choice only when the educator has already decided the outcome teaches children that their voice is decorative rather than influential.

Improving agency requires deliberate changes to colleagues’ assumptions as well as children’s routines. The teacher could begin with short, focused professional conversations during planning time. Colleagues could observe one routine, identify moments where children were interrupted unnecessarily and discuss alternative responses. Video reflection can be useful because it shifts discussion from opinion to observable practice. Educators might notice, for instance, that a child who appears to refuse a transition is communicating a need for time, reassurance or a more predictable sequence. Reframing such behaviour as communication challenges the deficit view that toddlers are deliberately difficult.

Documentation can also make children’s capability visible. Educators could record brief observations of children serving food, choosing play materials, helping pack away or using gestures to express a preference. These records can then inform planning and team discussion. Rather than describing toddlers as “not ready” for independence, the team can ask what environmental, relational or scheduling barriers prevent participation. The distinction matters because it locates responsibility with adults and systems, not with children.

A critical response must also acknowledge risk. Greater independence can create mess, slower routines and occasional conflict. These outcomes are not evidence that agency should be withdrawn. They are opportunities for educators to teach safety, cooperation and problem-solving in age-appropriate ways. An educator might provide two serving utensils, demonstrate a simple routine and remain nearby to support children who need help. The aim is neither total independence nor adult control; it is supported participation.

The proposed response would improve the setting by changing both practice and professional culture. Children would experience more choice, more responsive interactions and more opportunities to influence their day. Educators would develop a shared language for recognising agency in non-verbal children. Most importantly, the service would align its daily practice with the EYLF image of the child as capable and the NQS expectation that agency is promoted for every child, including toddlers (ACECQA, 2020; AGDE, 2022). Agency, in this setting, becomes a daily professional commitment rather than an abstract principle.

Healthier Eating and Family Diversity

A healthier eating program succeeds when families help shape it, rather than being asked to accept a menu designed without them. In a culturally diverse preschool, food carries meanings connected to identity, religion, family routines, health beliefs and memories of home. A program that treats cultural food practices as problems to correct is likely to damage trust. Conversely, a program that begins with families’ knowledge can improve nutritional quality while strengthening children’s sense of belonging. The central task is to create a genuine partnership in which families, educators and community members share decision-making.

The relevant EYLF Principle is partnerships with families. The EYLF expects educators to recognise families as children’s first and most influential teachers and to build relationships based on trust, respect and open communication (AGDE, 2022). In this scenario, partnership should begin before menus are changed. The teacher could invite families to a short consultation, offered at different times and in several languages, to learn what foods matter to them, which dietary requirements must be met and what concerns they have about healthy eating. Interpreters, translated information and flexible meeting times are practical requirements, not optional additions. Families with limited English proficiency should not carry the burden of understanding a program designed in English.

A strengths-based approach is essential. McWayne, Melzi and Mistry (2022) argue that family engagement should move beyond school-centred models and draw on families’ cultural heritage, community strengths and funds of knowledge. Applied to food, this means educators should ask what families already know about nourishing meals, preparation, celebration foods and children’s preferences. A family may bring knowledge about legumes, rice dishes, seasonal vegetables, halal requirements, vegetarian practices or traditional ways of sharing meals. Rather than treating these practices as obstacles, the service can incorporate them into menu planning where nutrition, safety and cultural appropriateness allow.

The relevant NQS Quality Area is Quality Area 6, Collaborative partnerships with families and communities. Element 6.1.2 requires that families’ expertise, culture, values and beliefs are respected and that families share decision-making about their child’s learning and wellbeing (ACECQA, 2020). Element 6.2.3 also requires services to build relationships and engage with their community. A practical response would establish a small food and wellbeing advisory group including parents, carers, educators, the cook and, where possible, a local community health worker or cultural organisation. The group would review proposed menus, identify barriers to participation and suggest culturally familiar alternatives.

The program should combine family involvement with clear nutritional responsibility. Families can contribute recipes, ingredients and knowledge, while educators and the cook ensure that meals meet food-safety requirements, allergy management procedures and nutritional guidelines. This distinction prevents a false choice between cultural responsiveness and health. For example, a family recipe might be adapted by reducing added sugar or salt, changing a cooking method or including more vegetables, but only after consultation with the family concerned. Negotiation, rather than unilateral modification, protects dignity and maintains trust.

Cooking experiences can make the program visible and participatory. Families could be invited to share a simple dish, explain its cultural significance or join a child-and-family cooking session. Children could grow herbs, wash vegetables, compare foods from different cultures and discuss where food comes from. These experiences support learning across the EYLF outcomes, particularly children’s connection to community, wellbeing and confidence as learners (AGDE, 2022). They also allow children to see their home cultures represented in the service rather than treated as unusual or inferior.

Evidence suggests that family engagement can improve children’s food knowledge and preferences, although it does not automatically change dietary diversity. Sirasa et al. (2021) found that a six-week healthy eating intervention with family engagement improved food knowledge and preferences among urban preschool children in Sri Lanka, but did not improve dietary diversity. The finding is important because it warns against expecting a short program to change complex household food practices. A service should therefore measure progress carefully, using feedback from families, children’s engagement and practical indicators such as meal participation, rather than assuming that a healthy menu alone produces lasting dietary change.

Communication must remain ongoing. Menus, recipes, allergy information and program updates should be available in accessible formats and translated where needed. Educators should also create informal opportunities for conversation, such as mealtime discussions, noticeboard displays and short check-ins at arrival or collection. These approaches recognise that some families may not attend formal meetings because of work, caring responsibilities, language barriers or previous negative experiences with institutions.

The proposed program would be effective because it treats cultural diversity as a resource. Families would see their food practices respected, children would encounter familiar and new foods in a supportive environment, and the service would meet its obligations under the EYLF and NQS. Most importantly, healthy eating would become a shared project rather than a rule imposed on families. The program’s success would depend less on a perfect menu than on the quality of the relationships that shape it.

Community Connections and Staff Collaboration

A service with limited connections to local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities cannot build meaningful perspectives through tokens, posters or occasional cultural activities. Respectful engagement requires time, humility, reciprocity and a willingness to follow Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s leadership. The teacher’s role is not to speak for Community or to treat culture as content to be delivered. The role is to build conditions in which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices can inform the service’s philosophy, curriculum and relationships.

The relevant EYLF Principle is Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives. The EYLF states that embedding these perspectives in educators’ philosophy and practice is a key tool for advancing Reconciliation, and it directs educators to think deeply and seek assistance through engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (AGDE, 2022; ACECQA, 2024). This principle changes the starting point. Rather than asking, “What activity can we add for NAIDOC Week?”, educators should ask whose knowledge, protocols and relationships should guide the service’s ongoing practice. Cultural content without relationships risks becoming superficial or extractive.

The relevant NQS Quality Area is Quality Area 6, particularly Element 6.2.3, which requires the service to build relationships and engage with its community (ACECQA, 2020). Quality Area 1 is also relevant because curriculum decision-making should contribute to children’s identity, connection with community, wellbeing and confidence as learners (ACECQA, 2020). In practical terms, the service should begin by identifying local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations, Elders, community members and families already connected to the kindergarten. Initial contact should be respectful, transparent and free of expectation. The teacher might ask whether the community is interested in a partnership, what forms of engagement would be appropriate and what boundaries or protocols should guide the relationship.

Research indicates that sustainable engagement with Aboriginal communities depends on long-term relationships, clear communication and attention to the conditions that enable or restrict participation. Skattebol, Hind, Blaxland and Newton (2024) identify enablers and barriers for sustainable engagement with local Aboriginal communities, highlighting that relationships must be supported over time rather than treated as one-off consultations. For a kindergarten, this means allocating time, budget and staff responsibility to relationship-building. A single invitation to a community member is insufficient if the service cannot offer payment, flexibility, continuity or genuine decision-making power.

Staff uncertainty should be addressed through structured professional learning, not criticism. Some educators may worry about saying the wrong thing, using inappropriate language or presenting culture in stereotyped ways. These concerns are understandable, but avoidance can leave Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives absent from children’s everyday learning. The teacher could organise a professional learning session led by a local Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander educator, community member or cultural organisation. The session should focus on local histories, protocols, language, Country and practical curriculum approaches. Staff should leave with questions, not a script.

Team reflection should follow. Educators could examine current practices and ask whether Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives appear only during designated events or whether they inform book selection, outdoor play, language, art, storytelling and relationships with families. For example, rather than adding a generic “Aboriginal art” activity, educators might learn about local Country, seasonal knowledge or a story shared with permission by a Community member. The distinction lies in authorship and accountability. Content should be locally grounded, permission-based and connected to real relationships.

Curriculum planning should also make space for children’s questions and observations. Educators can introduce age-appropriate discussions about Country, caring for land and water, and the continuing presence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. These conversations should avoid treating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures as historical or static. Children need opportunities to see Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as contemporary community members, professionals, artists, storytellers and knowledge holders. Accurate representation matters because young children form early ideas about identity, belonging and difference.

The teacher should also create accountability structures. A reconciliation action plan, reviewed with community input, can identify practical commitments such as consulting on curriculum, employing or engaging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educators where possible, displaying appropriate acknowledgements of Country, and reviewing resources for authenticity. Progress should be documented and revisited. Without follow-through, partnership language can become another form of institutional performance.

Ethical practice requires educators to recognise the limits of their knowledge. A non-Indigenous teacher should not claim authority over Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge. Instead, the teacher should listen, seek guidance, acknowledge uncertainty and ensure that Community members are compensated appropriately for their expertise. Humility is not passivity. It enables educators to act responsibly while keeping Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in control of how their knowledge is shared.

A respectful response would change the kindergarten’s culture over time. Staff would move from uncertainty toward informed, accountable practice. Children would encounter Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives as part of ordinary life, not as an occasional theme. The service would develop relationships based on reciprocity, with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities recognised as partners rather than resources. This approach aligns with the EYLF’s expectation that educators engage deeply with Community and the NQS requirement that services build meaningful community relationships (ACECQA, 2020; AGDE, 2022).

References

Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2020). National Quality Standard. ACECQA. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard

Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2024). EYLF principle: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives. ACECQA. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/belonging-being-becoming-early-years-learning-framework/eylf-principles/eylf-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-perspectives

Australian Government Department of Education. (2022). Belonging, being and becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia V2.0. Australian Government. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf

Burr, T., & Degotardi, S. (2021). From birth to three: Exploring educators’ understandings of agency. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 46(4), 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/18369391211041775

McWayne, C. M., Melzi, G., & Mistry, J. (2022). A home-to-school approach for promoting culturally inclusive family–school partnership research and practice. Educational Psychologist, 57(4), 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2070752

Sirasa, F., Mitchell, L., Azhar, A., Chandrasekara, A., & Harris, N. (2021). A six-week healthy eating intervention with family engagement improves food knowledge and preferences but not dietary diversity among urban preschool children in Sri Lanka. Public Health Nutrition, 24(13), 4328–4338. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980021001877

Skattebol, J., Hind, P., Blaxland, M., & Newton, B. J. (2024). Smoke: Enablers and barriers for sustainable engagement with local Aboriginal communities. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 49(2), 124–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/18369391241236499

TCHR5003 Assessment 1 Critical Review: Children’s Agency, Family Partnerships and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Perspectives