TCHR3001: Early Childhood Matters Assessment 2 Position paper

• Get this paper written from scratch within 48hours for $115AUD. No AI, and plagiarism score below 10%.

Assessment Brief

TCHR3001: Early Childhood Matters

Summary

Title: Assessment 2
Type: Position paper
Due Date: Friday, April 12th at 11:59 pm AEST/AEDT (end of Week 6)
Length: 1500 words
Weighting: 50%
Submission: Word document submitted to Turnitin (do NOT submit PDF documents)

TCHR3001 Early Childhood Matters Assessment 2: Position Paper on Play-Based Learning in Early Childhood Education

Unit Learning Outcomes

• 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.

Part 1: Analysis and Evaluation of Positions on the Issue of Play-Based Learning

Students approaching TCHR3001 Assessment 2 on the issue of play-based learning will find the scholarly terrain both well-populated and contested — a sign that the topic carries genuine professional and political significance. The role of play in early childhood education has been a topic of extensive discussion and debate. Unit materials and recorded tutorials explore various perspectives on play-based learning, highlighting its significance and potential challenges in contemporary Australian ECEC contexts.

A prominent position emphasises the developmental benefits of play. Numerous scholars argue that play fosters cognitive, physical, social, and emotional growth in young children (Pyle et al., 2017; Yogman et al., 2018). Through play, children develop problem-solving skills, creativity, language abilities, and social competencies. The neurological evidence reinforcing this position has strengthened considerably over the past decade: longitudinal neuroimaging studies suggest that children who experience high volumes of open-ended, self-directed play in the preschool years show measurably stronger prefrontal cortex connectivity — the neural substrate of self-regulation, planning, and flexible thinking — at school entry than age-matched peers with more restricted play histories (Center on the Developing Child, Harvard University, 2018). This view aligns with the Early Years Learning Framework’s (EYLF) recognition of play-based learning as a crucial pedagogical practice (AGDE, 2022).

However, some argue that an overemphasis on play may compromise academic readiness. This perspective contends that structured, teacher-directed activities better prepare children for formal schooling. Critics suggest that play-based approaches lack rigour and may hinder children’s acquisition of essential academic skills. This position, while losing traction in the peer-reviewed literature, retains considerable influence among some policymakers, media commentators, and sections of the parent community — particularly in contexts where standardised assessment of school readiness is used to benchmark service quality.

Reconciling these positions, a balanced approach emerges, advocating for intentional integration of play and structured learning experiences (Pyle & Danniels, 2017). This perspective recognises play’s developmental benefits while acknowledging the need for explicit instruction in specific areas. Guided play — in which educators design environments and ask questions that steer children toward particular learning objectives without constraining their agency — has emerged as a particularly well-supported middle position (Weisberg et al., 2016). The EYLF endorses this balanced approach, emphasising the importance of intentional teaching alongside play-based pedagogy (AGDE, 2022).

Part 2: Personal Position and Its Relevance to Professional Practice

Reflecting honestly on my own position on play-based learning requires acknowledging both conviction and uncertainty. I hold, on the basis of the available evidence, that play is the most appropriate primary mode of learning for children from birth to five years — not because it is pleasant or child-friendly, but because it is the context in which children’s developing brains are most fully activated and most receptive to new learning. Having observed, during practical placements, the difference in engagement, language production, and collaborative problem-solving between children working within a play-based program and children directed through worksheet-based activities, my own experience as a developing practitioner aligns with the research literature on this point.

At the same time, I am aware that my personal position must be communicated and enacted in ways that respect families’ diverse expectations and cultural frameworks around children’s learning. Families from educational traditions where early literacy and numeracy instruction are prioritised before school entry are not wrong to hold those expectations — they are drawing on experiences and values that are legitimate and meaningful. As a teacher and educator working with children, families, and other relevant stakeholders in the Australian early years sector, my role is not to simply assert the superiority of play-based approaches but to build trust with families through transparent communication, pedagogical documentation, and the demonstration of how play-based experiences deliver real, observable, and meaningful learning outcomes.

Part 3: Justification of Personal Position Through Scholarly Literature

The justification for a play-centred early childhood curriculum rests on converging evidence from developmental psychology, neuroscience, and longitudinal educational research. Yogman et al.’s (2018) systematic review, published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, concluded that play promotes the development of executive function, social-emotional competence, and language — exactly the capacities that predict successful school engagement and long-term wellbeing. Pyle et al.’s (2017) research with Canadian preschool and kindergarten educators demonstrates that the most effective practitioners do not choose between play and learning but hold both simultaneously, using pedagogical documentation and intentional curriculum planning to ensure that play experiences are rich, progressive, and purposeful.

Within the Australian context, the evidence from the Effective Early Educational Experiences (E4Kids) longitudinal study suggests that the quality of early childhood program processes — including the depth of educator-child language interaction, the richness of the learning environment, and the degree of child choice and agency — predicts children’s cognitive and social-emotional outcomes at age eight more reliably than the type of service attended (Tayler et al., 2018). These findings provide direct empirical support for the prioritisation of play-based, relationship-rich early childhood pedagogy over academically-oriented instruction, and they locate the argument for play squarely within Australian data rather than solely in international research.

Ethical Dimensions of Play-Based Learning in Australian ECEC

Any position on play-based learning in contemporary Australian early childhood education must also engage with its ethical dimensions. Children’s right to play is codified in Article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child — a convention Australia has ratified and is therefore obligated to uphold in its domestic education policies and practices. When ECEC services under commercial or budgetary pressures reduce play time in favour of more easily measurable instructional activities, they are not merely making a pedagogical choice; they are making an ethical one. Advocacy for play-based learning, therefore, is not merely a professional preference but a matter of children’s rights, and early childhood educators who understand this framing are better equipped to make persuasive cases to directors, governing bodies, and policymakers when play-based curriculum is under threat.

References

Australian Government Department of Education (AGDE). (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

Center on the Developing Child, Harvard University. (2018). Brain architecture. https://developingchild.harvard.edu/science/key-concepts/brain-architecture/

Pyle, A., & Danniels, E. (2017). A continuum of play-based learning: The role of the teacher in play-based pedagogy and the fear of hijacking play. Early Education and Development, 28(3), 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1220771

Pyle, A., Poliszczuk, D., & Danniels, E. (2017). The challenges of promoting literacy integration within a play-based learning pedagogy: Teacher perspectives and implementation strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 32(2), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2017.1414064

Tayler, C., Ishimine, K., Cloney, D., Cleveland, G., & Thorpe, K. (2018). The quality of early childhood education and care services in Australia. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(2), 13–21.

Weisberg, D. S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2016). Guided play: Where curricular goals meet a playful pedagogy. Mind, Brain, and Education, 7(2), 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12042

Yogman, M., Garner, A., Hutchinson, J., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2018). The power of play: A pediatric role in enhancing development in young children. Pediatrics, 142(3), e20182058. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-2058