TCHR2002 Children, Families and Communities: Assessment 1 Portfolio of Short Responses

Unit Context and Purpose

Southern Cross University delivers TCHR2002 Children, Families and Communities as a 12 credit point early childhood unit inside the Bachelor of Education and the Graduate Diploma of Education (Early Childhood). Assessment 1 for TCHR2002 is a portfolio of short responses to unit content worth 50 per cent of the final grade, and the unit outline schedules it in Week 4 with a second 50 per cent portfolio later in the term. Pre-service teachers in this unit test their reading of historical and contemporary constructions of childhood against the lived conditions of Australian families, then convert that reading into professional decisions about curriculum, environment and communication with families. Assessment 1 carries the first two unit learning outcomes, which cover comparison and critique of changing constructions of childhood including First Nations perspectives, and the way children build identity while teachers build belonging, being and becoming.

Assessment Snapshot

Assessment Task: Three Short Responses

Complete three responses of approximately 500 words each. Every response must draw on the unit modules for Weeks 1 to 3, the unit required text, the Early Years Learning Framework V2.0, and at least one peer reviewed source of your own choosing. Headings for each response are required.

Response 1: Historical Childhood Influences

Choose one or two issues that shape children’s lives today and trace how the same issue operated between twenty and fifty years ago. Compare and critique whether contemporary conditions enhance or hinder outcomes for children and families, with attention to how childhood is constructed in Australian and global contexts. Frame the whole response through the nested levels of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, and explain what proximal processes are doing inside the microsystem. Generic claims about technology or busy families will not score. Anchor the analysis in a named setting, a named policy, or a documented change in Australian family life.

Response 2: First Nations Childhoods

Respond to both prompts. Explain why Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children need to see their identities and cultures reflected in the learning environment, and explain why an intercultural space matters for all children and families, not only for First Nations families. Use the Early Years Learning Framework V2.0 (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022) throughout the response, and link specific framework principles and practices to specific curriculum decisions an educator would make. Treat the topic as curriculum design rather than as symbolism.

Response 3: Gender Equity Scenario

You are the teacher in an early childhood setting where a family has enrolled their four year old daughter, Eliza. On arrival one morning, other children ask whether Eliza is a boy or a girl, and when Eliza answers that she is a girl the group tells her she does not look like a girl and cannot play. Address three points. Explain the language and strategies you would use to protect the children’s being, belonging and becoming in that moment. Give examples of how gender equity is taught within an anti-bias curriculum for children aged three to five years. Explain how you would communicate the principles of anti-bias curriculum and gender equity to families in the service.

Submission Requirements

• Use the TCHR2002 Assessment 1 cover sheet from the assessment folder, and record the extent of any generative AI use on it.
• Apply APA 7th formatting to the whole document, including the title page, in text citations and the reference list.
• Set the body text in a 12 point font with 1.5 or double line spacing, and indent the first line of every new paragraph.
• Insert a clear heading before each of the three responses, and number them to match the task.
• Attach evidence of any approved special consideration to the submitted document.
• Place the reference list on a new page with a minimum of ten sources, and include the unit required text, the unit readings and the Early Years Learning Framework V2.0.
• Keep the word count within ten per cent of 1,500 words. Reference lists and the cover sheet sit outside the count.

Response Architecture

1. Open with a claim sentence that answers the prompt directly, then name the framework or policy you will use.
2. Move into the analysis, and attach each analytical point to a specific level of the ecological model, a specific EYLF principle, or a specific curriculum decision.
3. Close each response with one sentence stating the professional implication for an early childhood teacher.
4. Keep a single reference list at the end of the document rather than one per response.

Marking Rubric

Academic Integrity and Generative AI

Generative AI tools are permitted for preparation in this assessment, provided the use is acknowledged in writing on the cover sheet and does not replace your own analysis. Fabricated sources, invented statistics and unattributed text copied from AI output breach the Southern Cross University academic integrity policy. Follow the SCU library guide for APA 7th referencing when citing AI output itself.

References and Learning Materials

Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2023). National Quality Standard. 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

Kimura, A. M., Antón-Oldenburg, M., & Pinderhughes, E. E. (2022). Developing and teaching an anti-bias curriculum in a public elementary school: Leadership, K-1 teachers’, and young children’s experiences. Journal of Research in Childhood Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2021.1912222

Navarro, J. L., & Tudge, J. R. H. (2023). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: Neo-ecological theory. Current Psychology, 42(22), 19338-19354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3

Smith, K. M., Hurst, B., & Linden-Perlis, D. (2023). Using professional development resources to support the inclusion of gender equity in early childhood teaching and curriculum planning. Gender and Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2022.2142530

Sample Answer for Response 1: Historical Childhood Influences

Contemporary Australian childhoods sit inside a denser set of influences than childhoods of the nineteen seventies and eighties, largely because digital platforms now carry interactions that once happened face to face. Bronfenbrenner’s framework still organises that argument, although a technologized reading of the model adds virtual microsystems beside physical ones so that proximal processes can be traced through screens as well as through rooms (Navarro & Tudge, 2023). Family employment patterns have compressed the time adults spend in sustained play with children, and scheduled extracurricular activity now occupies hours that unsupervised neighbourhood play once filled. Such changes may strengthen language and organisational confidence for children whose families can pay the fees, while narrowing the same opportunities for children in lower income households. Remote service delivery during the pandemic pushed routine developmental checks and early intervention sessions onto video calls, which suited some families and locked out others. Gains inside one ecological layer do not transfer automatically to the next, and a supportive home microsystem can still meet a brittle exosystem at the point of service access. Teachers who map a child’s supports across home, service and community settings usually anticipate where friction will appear at transition points, such as the move from long day care into the first year of school. Worth noting is the risk of treating the past as a golden standard, since the neighbourhood childhoods of earlier decades also carried unsupervised risk, thinner disability support and narrower cultural representation. A defensible comparison holds gains and losses in the same frame rather than trading one nostalgia for another.

Sample Answer for Response 3: Gender Equity Scenario

Eliza’s morning greeting is a curriculum moment rather than a behaviour problem, and the teacher’s response will shape how every child in that room reads belonging. Language that names the exclusion without shaming the group works best, for instance telling the children that Eliza is a girl and can play here, then inviting the group to find a way for everyone to join. Naming the rule rather than labelling the children as cruel keeps the group’s sense of safety intact while making the boundary explicit. Anti-bias teaching then moves beyond the single exchange, because equity becomes visible in what the environment invites children to do. An audit of dress-up resources, picture books, block play invitations and the roles adults assign during group time will expose patterns that a one off lesson cannot shift. Professional development resources for gender equity in early childhood show that whole of service approaches change planning practice and resource selection more reliably than isolated activities (Smith, Hurst & Linden-Perlis, 2023). Communication with Eliza’s family should open with the service’s commitment to belonging, describe the language used with the children, and invite the family to describe what they want for their daughter. Families receive that conversation better when it arrives as shared planning than as a report of an incident.

Quality Area One Under Pressure

The historical analysis in the first response sharpens once the National Quality Standard is read as an operating document rather than a compliance checklist. Quality Area 1 asks services to adopt an approved learning framework and to attend to each child’s learning and development, which places the educator’s decision making at the centre of the argument (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority, 2023). Remote service delivery changed how those decisions reach families, and neo-ecological theory gives a workable vocabulary for the change because it treats virtual settings as genuine contexts where proximal processes occur. Reading family circumstances through that lens discourages the deficit language that creeps into case notes when a household misses two appointments. Sustained, reciprocal interaction remains the mechanism that drives development, and a household can sustain those interactions over video as readily as in a clinic when the service designs for it. Assessors and mentors who ask what changed in the child’s immediate setting, rather than what changed in the policy document, tend to get better evidence. Turning that evidence into a defensible 500 word response requires one clear claim, one framework, and two or three carefully chosen examples.

Does Anti-Bias Teaching Work With Three-Year-Olds

Children interpret gender categories well before school entry, and research in United States classrooms indicates that race conscious and gender conscious curriculum can be developmentally appropriate for kindergarten and first grade cohorts (Kimura, Antón-Oldenburg & Pinderhughes, 2022). The recurring misconception in student responses is that anti-bias work means correcting children or delivering a lesson about fairness. A stronger reading treats it as environmental design plus adult language plus family partnership, and the four moves below cover what markers look for.

1. Audit resources and invitations so that materials show children and adults in non-stereotyped roles without removing the materials that children already love.
2. Script and rehearse a small number of responses for exclusion moments, since improvisation under pressure usually defaults to shaming the group.
3. Plan play based provocations that invite perspective taking, such as a clinic, workshop or kitchen scenario where children assign and swap roles.
4. Bring families into the design through documentation, so the curriculum rationale reaches home before a concern arrives at the gate.

Gender sensitive practice differs from gender neutral practice, and the distinction matters in the rubric. Neutral practice removes gendered language and materials on the assumption that children will then play freely, while sensitive practice keeps the materials in play and actively widens what children are invited to do with them. Evidence from Australian services points to planning shifts and resource changes as the practical levers that alter children’s participation over a term.

Getting First Nations Content Right

Intercultural space is created through curriculum decisions rather than through display, and the Early Years Learning Framework V2.0 supplies the language for that work in its principles on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives and in its emphasis on children’s identities (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022). Tokenism has a recognisable shape, and markers spot it quickly. A response that limits First Nations content to a national celebration week, a dot painting activity or a single acknowledgement of country reads as decoration rather than curriculum. Stronger responses describe local Country, local language and local community relationships, name the protocols followed when knowledge is shared, and show how a child’s identity is reflected in the everyday environment rather than in a special event. Assessment 2 in this unit returns to these themes with a photo based analysis of a learning environment, so the vocabulary built in Assessment 1 carries forward.

Closing Note on the Three Responses

The portfolio rewards precision more than volume. Three responses of 500 words leave little room for background summary, so each paragraph has to earn its place with evidence or analysis. Keeping one framework per response stops the writing from drifting into general commentary. The ecological model suits the historical question, the Early Years Learning Framework suits the First Nations question, and anti-bias curriculum theory suits the scenario. A short professional implication at the close of each response shows the marker that the theory has been converted into a teaching decision. Word count discipline matters as much as content, since exceeding the limit by a wide margin signals an inability to select. Drafting the reference list first tends to fix the evidence base before the prose hardens.

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

Children, Families and Communities: Historical Childhood, First Nations Perspectives and Gender Equity

Southern Cross University
Faculty of Education
Unit: TCHR2002 Children, Families and Communities
Assessment: Assessment 1 – Portfolio of Short Responses
Student: [Student Name]
Student ID: [Student ID]
Unit Assessor: [Assessor’s Name]
Submission Date: [Insert Date]

Response 1: Historical Influences on Contemporary Childhood

Access to early childhood education and care (ECEC) has become central to Australian childhood because it shapes children’s daily settings and families’ ability to combine paid work with care. The position has changed since the 1970s. Before 1972, long day care received almost no Commonwealth financial support, and provision relied largely on philanthropic and private organisations. The Child Care Act 1972 marked a shift in national responsibility and recognised the connection between women’s employment and childcare needs (Centre for Policy Development, 2023). Both parents were employed in about 40% of couple families with children in 1979, compared with 71% in 2022 (Baxter, 2023). Childhood therefore reflects public policy and labour-market change, not only private family choices.

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model explains how these changes reach children through connected settings. At the microsystem level, children experience daily relationships at home and in an early learning service. Proximal processes are repeated, reciprocal interactions through which development occurs, such as a caregiver responding to questions or an educator extending a pretend-play episode. Such exchanges become significant when they recur, grow in complexity and involve active responses from the child (Navarro et al., 2022). The EYLF links these interactions to secure relationships, responsiveness to children and play-based learning (Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE], 2022). ECEC attendance alone does not guarantee positive outcomes; the quality of relationships and learning experiences matters.

The mesosystem concerns relationships between the child’s immediate settings, particularly communication between families and educators. Shared information about a child’s interests, health and transitions helps adults provide consistent support. Limited communication, conversely, may leave educators unaware of family changes or make parents feel excluded. The exosystem includes settings that affect children indirectly, such as a parent’s workplace, work schedules, transport options and access to subsidised places. Although the Child Care Subsidy introduced in 2018 sought to improve affordability and workforce participation, access to high-quality services remains uneven. Children from socioeconomically disadvantaged and regional or remote families are under-represented in higher-quality services (Tang et al., 2024).

At the macrosystem level, public beliefs about gender, paid work, childhood and government responsibility influence how care is funded and valued. Australian arrangements sit within a global debate about ECEC as both a child-development service and support for family employment. OECD comparisons show substantial differences between countries in participation, public provision and costs; some systems provide stronger financial protection than others (OECD, 2021). The chronosystem captures change over time, including the move from limited Commonwealth involvement before 1972 to current subsidy and quality-regulation arrangements. The model therefore avoids treating historical childhood as a single, uniform experience.

ECEC expansion has created more opportunities for early learning, peer relationships and family employment than many families had in the 1970s. Gains remain uneven because affordability, local supply and service quality differ across communities. An early childhood teacher should examine each child’s relationships and access conditions across home, service and community settings, then work with families to support continuity and meaningful daily interactions.

Response 2: First Nations Childhoods and Intercultural Learning Environments

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children need to see their identities and cultures represented throughout the learning environment because recognition supports identity, belonging and participation. The EYLF V2.0 identifies Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives as a guiding principle and expects educators to embed these perspectives in everyday practice, not only special events (AGDE, 2022). Representation should reflect the diversity of First Nations peoples, communities, languages and contemporary lives. A generic display cannot represent that diversity, and one family’s knowledge should not stand for every Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child.

The EYLF principle of respect for diversity requires educators to value family histories, languages, beliefs and knowledge in curriculum decisions. Its practice of cultural responsiveness also requires educators to examine their assumptions and respond when unfairness occurs. These commitments shape book selection, conversations, learning environments and relationships with local communities. Webb’s (2022) study found that culturally informed educator-child conversations can support Aboriginal children’s communication and identity development. Lembit and Burgess (2024) likewise show that relationally responsive curriculum depends on relationships and place, not simply adding cultural content to an existing program.

Curriculum decisions should begin with respectful engagement with the local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community. Educators can seek guidance from local Elders, community-controlled organisations and families about Country, local histories, language resources and protocols for sharing knowledge. The service should recognise the time and expertise community members contribute. Educators can select books and music from First Nations creators, include local language where permission and accurate guidance support its use, and plan outdoor investigations that help children learn about Country. The EYLF and ACECQA guidance make clear that this responsibility applies whether or not First Nations children are enrolled (AGDE, 2022; Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2024).

An intercultural space matters for all children and families because every child forms ideas about whose knowledge counts and who belongs in Australian society. When First Nations perspectives appear throughout the year, children learn that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and living cultures are part of the present. Families from other cultural backgrounds also see that the service respects different ways of knowing, communicating and relating to place. Acker and Nyland (2025) argue that early childhood pedagogy can either challenge or reproduce inherited exclusions. Educators should avoid presenting First Nations knowledge as an optional addition to a supposedly neutral curriculum.

The AIATSIS Code of Ethics (2020) offers a standard for respectful engagement because it emphasises meaningful participation, respect and accountability when working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge. Educators should apply the same care when documenting children’s learning or sharing community knowledge. An effective intercultural curriculum grows through relationships, local guidance and ongoing reflection. The professional responsibility is to make First Nations perspectives visible, accurate and sustained in everyday practice.

Response 3: Gender Equity and Anti-Bias Curriculum: Eliza’s Scenario

The teacher should respond to Eliza’s exclusion immediately, affirm her stated identity and make clear that every child has an equal right to participate. A calm response could be: “Eliza has told us she is a girl, and we respect what she tells us. Clothes, hair and interests do not decide who can play here. Everyone may choose the play area they enjoy.” The teacher should address the exclusion without calling the other children cruel or bad. The teacher must restore Eliza’s access to play before asking the group to examine its assumption. Eliza should not have to defend her identity or teach the group about gender.

The EYLF V2.0 outcomes of identity, connection and wellbeing provide a basis for protecting Eliza’s being, belonging and becoming (AGDE, 2022). Being requires respect for her feelings and dignity. Belonging requires the service to uphold her membership of the group rather than make acceptance conditional on her appearance. Becoming involves opportunities to develop confidence, agency and relationships through play. The teacher can ask Eliza privately whether she would like to join the activity, choose another space or receive support from a familiar educator. That choice protects her agency without implying that she should leave because others excluded her.

An anti-bias curriculum for children aged three to five makes gender equity part of ordinary learning. During dramatic play, educators can offer uniforms, tools, dolls, construction materials and dress-up clothes without assigning them to boys or girls. Stories can show women and men in varied family and work roles, then invite children to discuss who can care for babies, repair objects, lead a team or build a house. Group conversations can introduce simple language about fairness, stereotypes and choice. Educators should avoid dividing children into boys’ and girls’ groups or assuming that interests follow gender categories.

The physical environment also teaches children which activities and identities a service values. Educators can review books, posters, puzzles, dramatic-play props and everyday language to identify stereotypes or gaps in representation. Smith et al. (2023) found that a whole-of-service gender-equity approach changed educators’ planning and the resources available in children’s learning spaces. Kimura et al. (2022) describe how anti-bias curriculum requires leadership and shared teacher practice, although their study focused on early primary classrooms rather than an Australian preschool. Prioletta’s (2020) study of preschool classrooms warns that educators may reproduce gendered power relations when they overlook how play is organised. A single fairness lesson cannot replace regular reflection on the learning environment.

Communication with families should explain the service’s anti-bias principles before concerns arise. Educators can outline the approach during enrolment, include it in the service philosophy and discuss it through newsletters, meetings and curriculum records. In conversation with Eliza’s family, the teacher should describe the incident, explain the response and ask what language and support best respect Eliza. Discussions with other families should focus on dignity, safe participation and fair access without exposing Eliza. Families may hold different views about gender, so educators should listen respectfully while maintaining the service’s responsibility to prevent exclusion. The professional task is to make equity visible in adult language, daily curriculum and respectful family partnerships.

References

Acker, A., & Nyland, B. (2025). Early childhood pedagogy, human values and the social contract. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491241308593

Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority. (2024). Belonging, being and becoming: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives [Information sheet]. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-11/InformationSheet_EYLF-Aboriginal%20and%20Torres%20Strait%20Islander%20perspectives_v2.pdf

Australian Government Department of Education. (2022). Belonging, being and becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (Version 2.0). https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf

Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2020). AIATSIS Code of Ethics for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research. https://aiatsis.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-10/aiatsis-code-ethics.pdf

Baxter, J. (2023). Employment patterns and trends for families with children. Australian Institute of Family Studies. https://aifs.gov.au/all-research/research-reports/employment-patterns-and-trends-families-children

Centre for Policy Development. (2023). A brief history of Commonwealth government involvement in early childhood education and care in Australia. https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/CPD-History-Commonwealth-ECEC-1.pdf

Kimura, A. M., Antón-Oldenburg, M., & Pinderhughes, E. E. (2022). Developing and teaching an anti-bias curriculum in a public elementary school: Leadership, K-1 teachers’, and young children’s experiences. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 36(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2021.1912222

Lembit, N. D., & Burgess, C. (2024). Non-Indigenous teachers’ understandings of relationally responsive curriculum through an Indigenous standpoint. Curriculum Perspectives, 44, 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-024-00260-z

Navarro, J. L., Stephens, C., Rodrigues, B. C., Walker, I. A., Cook, O., O’Toole, L., Hayes, N., & Tudge, J. R. H. (2022). Bored of the rings: Methodological and analytic approaches to operationalizing Bronfenbrenner’s PPCT model in research practice. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 14(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12459

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). Starting strong VI: Supporting meaningful interactions in early childhood education and care. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en

Prioletta, J. (2020). Patriarchy in the preschool classroom: Examining the effects of developmental ideologies on teachers’ perspectives and practices around play and gender. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 21(3), 242–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949119831461

Smith, K., Hurst, B., & Linden-Perlis, D. (2023). Using professional development resources to support the inclusion of gender equity in early childhood teaching and curriculum planning. Gender and Education, 35(3), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2022.2142530

Tang, A., Rankin, P., Staton, S., & Thorpe, K. (2024). Access to high-quality early care and education: Analysis of Australia’s national integrated data. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 67, 352–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2024.02.001

Tong, P., & An, I. S. (2024). Review of studies applying Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory in international and intercultural education research. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1233925. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1233925

Webb, G. (2022). Cultural connections in early childhood: Learning through conversations between educators and children. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 51(2). https://doi.org/10.55146/ajie.v51i2.43