GDECE 102 Learning and Development birth to two years Assessment 2 rubric
Task description:
Based on analysis of the case study provided, design appropriate learning and teaching strategies for the child in an early childhood education setting. The needs of the child should be understood through Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. The learning and teaching strategies should also be justified through ecological systems theory. Draw upon a range of literature to support your analysis and decision making.
Criteria:
· Explain your understanding of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (300 – 500 words)
· Apply the theory to analyse the focus child in the case study provided. (300 – 500 words)
· Develop a range of teaching and learning strategies to address the developmental needs of the child (800 – 1000 words)
This assignment should include a brief introduction and conclusion.
Word count: 2000 words +/- 10%
NOTE: SCEI-HE requires its students to observe the highest ethical standards in every aspect of their academic work. SCEI-HE actively demonstrates its commitment to academic integrity by recognising scholarly work and penalising all forms of academic dishonesty. Please refer to the Institute’s HEPP01 Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure for further information or speak to your lecturer, Academic Support Coordinator or Librarian.
Formatting: 12-point serif font (eg. Times New Roman). 1.5 or double line spacing.
Referencing: APA7 (please refer to this guide for referencing guidelines)
Due Date: FRIDAY 2nd February, 2024 11:59PM
Grading Scale:
Grade
Criteria
High Distinction
Distinction
Credit
Pass
Not Meeting Requirements
C1.
Explain your understanding of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems
theory
(15 marks)
1.1
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is explained in detail,
with some critical reflection.
1.2
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is clearly explained.
1.3
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is clearly described.
1.4
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is accurately outlined
but may lack detail.
1.5
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is outlined, may contain
minor mis-understandings.
1.6
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is discussed but
contains key mis-understandings and/or inaccuracies.
1.7
Bronfen-brenner’s ecological systems theory is absent, or barely
mentioned.
C2.
Apply the theory to analyse the focus child in the case study
provided.
(10 marks)
2.1
Child is clearly introduced, and ecological systems theory is
applied to the case with detailed explanation and critical reflection.
2.2
Child is clearly introduced, and ecological systems theory is
applied to the case with detailed explanation.
2.3
Child is clearly introduced, and ecological systems theory is
clearly applied to the case, with relevant details included to support
understanding.
2.4
Child is clearly introduced, and ecological systems theory is
clearly applied to the case.
2.5
Child is clearly introduced, and a clear attempt has been made to
analyse the case through ecological systems theory.
2.6
Discussion of the child is brief, with no reference to the theory.
2.7
Discussion of the child is either absent or mostly inaccurate.
C3.
Develop a range of teaching and learning strategies to address the
needs of the child
(15 marks)
3.1
Teaching and learning strategies are explained in detail in terms of
ecological systems theory and connected to the analysis of the case. Critical
reflection on the strategies included.
3.2
Teaching and learning strategies are clearly explained in terms of
ecological systems theory and connected to the analysis of the case.
Teaching and learning strategies are clearly explained and connected
to the analysis of the case.
3.4
Teaching and learning strategies are clearly described and meet the
needs of the child.
3.5
Teaching and learning strategies are stated but may not clearly
address the needs of the child.
3.6
Teaching and learning strategies are noted, but unclear or
irrelevant.
3.7
Teaching and learning strategies are absent or mostly inaccurate.
C.4
Relevant academic literature is drawn upon
to support explanations and arguments presented.
(5 marks)
4.1
A broad range of academic literature is
drawn upon to justify argument
4.2
A broad range of academic literature is
drawn upon to clarify argument
4.3
A range of academic literature is drawn
upon to support argument.
4.4
A range of academic literature is drawn
upon, but only superficially supports argument.
4.5
Minimal academic literature drawn upon.
4.6
Academic literature drawn upon, but
irrelevant to target content.
4.7
No literature drawn upon or literature
drawn upon is not from appropriate sources.
C5. Assignment is
formatted according to requirements and written clearly and cohesively. APA 7
referencing is used. Word limit is adhered to.
(5 marks)
C4.1 The
assignment is clear and free of typographical and structural features that hinder
understanding. There is no confusion between author voice and that of
sources. The assignment is formatted according to stated requirements. The
assignment is formatted according to stated requirements. Accurate mechanics
of in-text and end-of-text APA (7th Ed.) referencing style were used.
Word
limit met.
C4.2 The
assignment is clear with minor typographical and structural features that may
hinder understanding. There is minimal confusion between author voice and
that of sources. The assignment is mostly formatted according to stated
requirements. Accurate mechanics of in-text and end-of-text APA (7th Ed.)
referencing style were used with minor inconsistencies (no more than 2
errors).
Word
limit met.
C4.3 The
assignment is clear with typographical and structural features that may
hinder understanding. There is minor confusion between author voice and that
of sources. The assignment is partly formatted according to stated
requirements. Mechanics of in-text and end-of-text APA (7th Ed.) referencing
style were used with inconsistencies (no more than 4 errors).
Word
limit met.
C4.4 The
assignment has typographical and structural features that significantly
hinder understanding. There is confusion between author voice and that of
sources.
The
assignment is minimally formatted according to stated requirements. Mechanics
of in-text and end-of-text APA (7th Ed.) referencing contain several errors.
Word
limit met.
C4.5 The
assignment has typographical and structural features that prohibit
understanding. There is confusion between author voice and that of sources,
or author’s voice is absent. The assignment is not formatted according to
stated requirements.
Mechanics
of in-text and end-of-text APA (7th Ed.) referencing style were not used
appropriately.
Word
limit not met.