| Course Code and Name | |
| EDM8018 Leading in Early Childhood | |
| Assessment Item Number and Name | AssessmentItem Type |
| Assignment 1: Inquiry Task | Essay |
| Due Date& Time | Length |
| Week 5: 27 June,2025 11:59 pm | 2500 words |
| Marks and Weighting | Assessed Course Learning Outcomes |
| Marks out of 50; Weighting 50% of 100. | CLO 1, 2 & 6 |
| Rationale | |
Description: Critique professional practices through inquiry This Inquiry task consists of two interrelated parts.
| |
| Task Instructions | |
Part 1: Report (1500words) Develop a report for centre owners clarifying children’s wellbeing and safety in early childhood contexts. Critically reflect on topics from current literature that are relevant to children’s wellbeing and safety in early childhood contexts through inquiry and professional conversations with reference to
Support this critical reflection with authoritative literature and examples from practice. Shape this critical reflection into a report for centre owners clarifying children’s wellbeing and safety in early childhood contexts. (APST: 4.4, 7.2) Assignment Format: WORD
Apply the information gathered in Part 1 design an information brochure for centre directors to address current issues associated with the safe and responsible use of age-appropriate ICT in administration, learning and teaching. Include a justification for leadership of ethical and professional practices in relation to confidentiality of information in the ICT environment. (APST: 4.5, 7.1) Assignment Format: WORD
| |
| Acceptable AI Use Level |
| For this Assessment Item, acceptable AI use is set at: |
Level 0: No AI to be Used Description: Artificial intelligence (AI) is not to be used in this Assessment Item beyond basic editing features (spelling, grammar and text prediction) in Microsoft Word, Apple Pages, Grammarly and similar tools. There are many websites and apps that use AI text generation. Some websites will make small changes to ensure your grammar is correct, however, use of any websites or applications to re-write or paraphrase your work for you is poor academic practice and is an inappropriate and unauthorised use of AI. Additional Information Required: It is good practice to regularly save drafts of your Assessment Items as you work on them, as these can be used by you to support any claims that you have not used AI beyond what is permitted for this level. |
| Academic Integrity |
| Students should be familiar with, and abide by, UniSQ’s policy on Academic Integrity and the definition of Academic Misconduct. Penalties apply to students foundto have breached these policies and procedures. Please ensure you have completed the mandatory Academic Integrity training and have familiarised yourself with Academic Integrity at UniSQ. |
| Relevant Information and Resources |
| Referencing and presentation:https://www.unisq.edu.au/library/study-support/start-toolkit/referencing-academic-integrity |
| Assessment Marking Criteria |
| Knowledge and comprehension: 40% / Critical analysis and evaluation: 50% / Communication and referencing: 10% |
| Refer to the Rubric / Marking Guide/ OSCE for this Assessment Item below. |
| Submission Information |
| Submit your assignment via the Assessment tab on the study desk. Retain as one WORD document (do not submita PDF). Name your assignment with your last name, course code and assignment number eg Turner EDM8018 A1. Turn it in is activated for this course. |
| Return of Assessment Items and Feedback for Learning |
| Markers have 3 weeks from the published due date to complete the marking and provide resultsto students. All feedback and results are returned to students via the Submission space on the study desk.It is the student's responsibility to retain copies of their original assignment documents. |
| Extensions and Penalties for Late Submission |
| Information on extensions can be found here here, and late penalties here. |
| (Additional information can be add edhere if required. If no text to add, please delete this line) |
EDM8018 | Leading in Early Childhood | Assessment 1 | Inquiry Task | Rubric
Student Name: Possible marks: 50
| Evidence in student work/cognitions | HD 100-85% | D 84-75% | C 74-65% | P 64-50% | F <50% |
| Part A: Develop a report for centre owners | |||||
| Critically reflects on, current literature in relation to children’s wellbeing and safety. | Comprehensive analysis and reflection. Succinctly discusses the empirical and theoretical contexts relevant to the main stakeholders. | Well-developed analysis and reflection. Clearly discusses the empiricaland theoretical contexts relevant to the mainstakeholders | Sound analysis and reflection. Discussion on the empirical and theoretical contexts relevant to the main stakeholders provided. | Satisfactory analysis and some reflection. Some discussion on the empirical and theoretical contexts relevant to the main stakeholders. | Limited analysis and reflection. Limited discussion on the empirical and theoretical contexts relevant to the main stakeholders. |
| /10 | 10-8.5 | 8-7.5 | 7-6.5 | 6-5 | 4.5-0 |
| Critical reflection refers to historical & comparative perspectives, legislation, policies, administrative systems and organisational requirements, relevant curriculum, ethics & professional conduct | Comprehensively refers to:
| Well-developed refers to:
| Soundly refers to:
| Satisfactorily refers to:
| Insufficient reference to:
requirements
|
| /10 | 10-8.5 | 8-7.5 | 7-6.5 | 6-5 | 4.5-0 |
| Research Skills | Draws upon relevant, reliable and current evidence from a wide range of sources. Uses inquiry approaches, professional | Draws upon relevant, current and reliable evidence from a range of sources.Uses inquiry approaches, some interaction with professional | Draws upon relevant, current and reliable evidence from some sources. Uses some inquiry approaches, some interaction with professional conversations | Draws upon relevant evidence that may not be current and uses a limited numberof sources. Inquiry approaches not clear, limited interactions with prof | Draws up evidence that is irrelevant, unreliable and lacks currency.No indication of an approach to inquiry, engagement |
| conversations (internal and external) and practice examples | conversations (internal and external) and practice examples | (internal and external) and some practice examples | conversations and limited useof practice examples | inprofessional conversations or utilising practice examples. | |
| /5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2.5 | 0 |
| Part B: Design an information brochure | |||||
| Explanation of ideas and information | Sections include details that are of high quality and extremely relevant, comprehensive and interesting. Clear ideas are supported by facts. Links to relevant governance documents and target audience clearly evident. | Sections include well-developed details that are relevant, comprehensive, and interesting. Clear ideas supported by facts. Links to relevant governance documents and target audience is evident. | Sections include details that are relevant. The use of facts is sound. Links to relevant governance documents provided, information presented to target audience evident. | Sections include details. Satisfactory use of quality facts with inconsistency. Satisfactory links to governance documents and target audience unclear. | Little or no details present. Limiteduse of facts.Unclear or no links to appropriate or relevant governance documents. No relevance to target audience. |
| /10 | 10-8.5 | 8-7.5 | 7-6.5 | 6-5 | 4.5-0 |
| Evidence of a justification and rationale for inclusion of professional leadership practices relevant to the topic | Comprehensive justification and rationale for stakeholders and target audience to apply ethical leadership and professional practice in relation to the topic. | Well-developed justification and rationale for stakeholders and target audience to apply ethical leadership and professional practice in relation to the topic. | Sound justification and rationale for stakeholders and target audience to apply ethical leadership and professional practice in relation to the topic. | Satisfactory justification and rational was provided to stakeholders and targetaudience to apply ethical leadership and professional practice in relation to the topic. | Limited justification and rationale provided to stakeholders and target audience to apply ethical leadership and professional practice in relation to the topic. |
| /10 | 10-8.5 | 8-7.5 | 7-6.5 | 6-5 | 4.5-0 |
| Academic Communication | |||||
| Engagement with literature | Referencing (in text and reference list) and presentation conforms to APA style and is error free. | Referencing (in text and reference list) and presentation conforms to APA style with occasional minor formatting errors. | Referencing (in text and reference list) and presentation mostly conforms to APA style with some errors or inconsistencies | Referencing (in text and reference list) and presentation is recognisable as APA style, but contains many errors and inconsistencies | Referencing (in text and reference list) consistently missingessential information and/or non-APA style applied. Format is not APA style and does not meet the standard for use of current & correct APA referencing. |
| Structure, references, and | Purposeful, well integrated and succinct academic writing which clearly conveys key points. | Well integrated writing and succinct academic writing which clearly conveys key points. | Writing is generally academic in tone, but may occasionally lack some focus, integration and/or succinctness. | Several errors and instances of ineffective use of vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling, academic tone, | The degree or errors in vocabulary, grammar, word choice, academic tone, spelling and/or organisation is such that it |
| written quality and integrity | No errors in vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling or organisation. | Very minor errors in vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling or organisation which do not affect comprehension and readability | May have minor errors or instances of ineffective use of vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling and/or organisation. Overall comprehension and readability are good. | and/or organisation which obscure meaning. | is difficult to know what the writing it is trying to express. The work does not meet the standard for academic literacy skills. |
| written quality and integrity | No errors in vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling or organisation. | Very minor errors in vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling or organisation which do not affectcomprehension and readability | May have minor errors or instances of ineffective use of vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling and/or organisation. Overall comprehension and readability are good. | and/or organisation which obscure meaning. | is difficult to know whatthe writing it is trying to express. The work does not meet the standard for academic literacy skills. |
| /5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2.5 | 0 |
| Total /50 |
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
