Leadership and Advocacy in ECEC: A Critical Review of Educational Leadership Practices<\/p>\n
TCHR3004 LEADERSHIP AND ADVOCACY IN EARLY CHILDHOOD
\nAssessment Two: Portfolio
\nAssessment Brief
\nAssessment name: Portfolio
\nDue Date: 4th October 2024 (Week 6)
\nWeighting: 50% of final grade
\nLength: 1500 words (10% leeway above and below) <\/p>\n
Unit Learning Outcomes
\nYou will demonstrate the following Unit Learning Outcomes on the successful completion of this task: <\/p>\n
Demonstrate knowledge of the key principles of leadership and management in practice in early childhood education and care services and settings underpinned by theoretical and practical perspectives on administration, management and leadership.
\nThis includes an analysis of how these principles influence day-to-day operations and decisions. <\/p>\n
Demonstrate an understanding of how to build supportive and collaborative environments for children, parents, community and staff.
\nConsideration of inclusivity and cultural responsiveness is a key factor in creating these environments. <\/p>\n
Critically reflect on the role that advocacy plays in early childhood education (locally, nationally and internationally) and identify the skills that a strong advocate for the ECEC profession should display.
\nAdvocacy efforts must also align with professional ethical standards and emerging global trends. <\/p>\n
Critically analyse and understand the role of the educational leader: including relationships, responsibilities, expectations, ethical practice and transition to an educational leader.
\nThis role requires balancing leadership with collaboration to achieve high educational standards.<\/p>\n
Task Description:
\nThree interviews with educational leaders in ECEC have been provided under the assignment 2 information link. <\/p>\n
Choose ONE interview with an educational leader and prepare a critical review of the role, responsibilities and challenges of the early childhood educational leader.
\n Your review should provide critical insights while demonstrating a deep understanding of leadership frameworks. <\/p>\n
The information collected from the interview is to be analysed to describe the educational leader\u2019s position with respect to: <\/p>\n
key roles and responsibilities of the educational leader
\nthe leadership style, and link this to early childhood leadership theory
\nEstablish clear connections between theoretical frameworks and observed practices.
\nDiscuss the challenges faced by the early childhood educational leader with respect to leadership style, processes and practices employed; provide examples in practice.
\n Be sure to consider systemic and policy-related factors that contribute to these challenges. <\/p>\n
Present and discuss measures the educational leader takes to advocate for children\u2019s learning and development.
\n Highlight practical examples to support your analysis of the advocacy strategies described. <\/p>\n
Critically review what quality means in terms of the leadership role regarding educational outcomes for children; provide examples in practice.
\n This should align with relevant quality frameworks such as the National Quality Standard. <\/p>\n
Rationale:
\nAs an early childhood educator, it is important you have an understanding about leadership and your role as a leader. <\/p>\n
It is also helpful to have a good understanding of interview expectations for the role of the educational leader.
\n This includes familiarity with behaviors and traits associated with successful leadership. <\/p>\n
Referencing:
\nAPA 7th referencing format is required in Faculty of Education assessment tasks \u2013 link to SCU Libguide here: APA 7 Referencing. <\/p>\n
A minimum of 10 references must be included in this assessment task, including the set text, National Quality Standard and the Early Years Learning Framework (V2.0).
\n Make sure your references are recent, credible, and relevant to leadership in early childhood education. <\/p>\n
Support Resources: <\/p>\n
Academic Integrity \u2013 SCU guidelines
\nLearning Zone \u2013 workshops, Quick Guides, videos, study hub
\n These resources are essential for ensuring clarity and quality in your final submission. <\/p>\n
Submission:
\nSubmission of your assessment is via TURNITIN. The submission link can be found in the Assessment Tasks and Submission Tab in the TCHR3004 Blackboard site. <\/p>\n
Please note: <\/p>\n
It is YOUR responsibility to ensure that you have submitted the correct file and the FINAL version of your assessment for marking BEFORE the due date\/time. <\/p>\n
After you have followed the TurnItIn submission it is essential you download the Digital Receipt.
\n This receipt serves as confirmation of a successful submission, helping to avoid disputes. <\/p>\n
If you have any difficulty submitting your assignment, please contact Technology Services and make sure that you log a job with them so you have evidence of your attempted submission. To avoid any last-minute problems, make sure you submit well before 11:59pm on the due date. <\/p>\n
As per SCU Rules Relating to Awards – Rule 3 – Coursework Awards – Student Assessment and Examinations: Section 6 – Assessment Resubmission, there are NO resubmissions for this unit.
\n A thorough proofing and review process can reduce the chance of errors before submission.<\/p>\n
Late Submission\/Extension:
\nIf you need to apply for special consideration you may do so HERE <\/p>\n
If your special consideration application is approved you will need to include a copy of the approval in your assessment task.
\n Make requests for extensions as early as possible to avoid penalties. <\/p>\n
According to SCU Policy, late penalties apply. More information found HERE <\/p>\n
Academic Integrity:
\nAt Southern Cross University academic integrity means behaving with the values of honesty, fairness, trustworthiness, courage, responsibility and respect in relation to academic work.
\n These values serve as the cornerstone for your professional growth as an educator. <\/p>\n
The Southern Cross University Academic Integrity Framework aims to develop a holistic, systematic and consistent approach to addressing academic integrity across the entire University.
\n Upholding these principles ensures the authenticity of your academic and professional work. <\/p>\n
For more information see the SCU Academic Integrity Framework <\/p>\n
TCHR3004 LEADERSHIP AND ADVOCACY IN
\nEARLY CHILDHOOD
\nAssessment Two: Portfolio
\nAssessment Brief
\nAssessment name: Portfolio
\nDue Date: 4th October 2024 (Week 6)
\nWeighting: 50% of final grade
\nLength: 1500 words (10% leeway above and below)
\nUnit Learning
\nOutcomes
\nYou will demonstrate the following Unit Learning Outcomes on the successful completion
\nof this task:
\n1. Demonstrate knowledge of the key principles of leadership and management in
\npractice in early childhood education and care services and settings underpinned
\nby theoretical and practical perspectives on administration, management and
\nleadership.
\n2. Demonstrate an understanding of how to build supportive and collaborative
\nenvironments for children, parents, community and staff.
\n3. Critically reflect on the role that advocacy plays in early childhood education
\n(locally, nationally and internationally) and identify the skills that a strong advocate
\nfor the ECEC profession should display.
\n4. Critically analyse and understand the role of the educational leader: including
\nrelationships, responsibilities, expectations, ethical practice and transition to an
\neducational leader.
\nTask Description: Three interviews with educational leaders in ECEC have been provided under the
\nassignment 2 information link.
\nChoose ONE interview with an educational leader and prepare a critical review of the role,
\nresponsibilities and challenges of the early childhood educational leader.
\nThe information collected from the interview is to be analysed to describe the educational
\nleader\u2019s position with respect to:
\n\u2022 key roles and responsibilities of the educational leader
\n\u2022 the leadership style, and link this to early childhood leadership theory
\nDiscuss the challenges faced by the early childhood educational leader with respect to
\nleadership style, processes and practices employed; provide examples in practice.
\nPresent and discuss measures the educational leader takes to advocate for children\u2019s
\nlearning and development.
\nCritically review what quality means in terms of the leadership role regarding educational
\noutcomes for children; provide examples in practice.
\nRationale As an early childhood educator, it is important you have an understanding about leadership
\nand your role as a leader. It is also helpful to have a good understanding of interview
\nexpectations for the role of the educational leader.
\nReferencing APA 7th referencing format is required in Faculty of Education assessment tasks \u2013 link to
\nSCU Libguide here: APA 7 Referencing.
\nA minimum of 10 references must be included in this assessment task, including the set
\ntext, National Quality Standard and the Early Years Learning Framework (V2.0).
\nSupport Resources Academic Integrity \u2013 SCU guidelines
\nLearning Zone \u2013 workshops, Quick Guides, videos, study hub
\nSubmission Submission of your assessment is via TURNITIN. The submission link can be found in
\nthe Assessment Tasks and Submission Tab in the TCHR3004 Blackboard site.
\nPlease note:
\n\u2022 It is YOUR responsibility to ensure that you have submitted the correct file and
\nthe FINAL version of your assessment for marking BEFORE the due date\/time.
\n\u2022 After you have followed the TurnItin submission it is essential you download the
\nDigital Receipt.
\n\u2022 If you have any difficulty submitting your assignment, please contact
\nTechnology Services and make sure that you log a job with them so you have
\nevidence of your attempted submission. To avoid any last-minute problems,
\nmake sure you submit well before 11:59pm on the due date.
\n\u2022 As per SCU Rules Relating to Awards – Rule 3 – Coursework Awards – Student
\nAssessment and Examinations: Section 6 – Assessment Resubmission, there are
\nNO resubmissions for this unit.
\nLate
\nSubmission\/Extension
\nIf you need to apply for special consideration you may do so HERE
\nIf your special consideration application is approved you will need to include a copy of the
\napproval in your assessment task.
\nAccording to SCU Policy, late penalties apply. More information found HERE
\nAcademic Integrity
\nAt Southern Cross University academic integrity means behaving with the values of honesty, fairness,
\ntrustworthiness, courage, responsibility and respect in relation to academic work.
\nThe Southern Cross University Academic Integrity Framework aims to develop a holistic, systematic and consistent
\napproach to addressing academic integrity across the entire University.
\nFor more information see the SCU Academic Integrity Framework<\/p>\n
Assessment Two<\/p>\n
Student\u2019s Name
\nCourse Department, University
\nCourse Code: Course Name
\nInstructor\u2019s Name
\nDue Date
\n\u2003
\nCritical Review of the Early Childhood Educational Leaders’ Role
\nEducational leadership in ECEC settings has emerged and grown more important since its formulation in 2013, as suggested by Sims et al. (2018). This paper aims to review the responsibilities, issues of concern, and opportunities in the capacity of an early childhood educational leader that has been assumed by Samantha who is a team leader at a Community Kindergarten that caters to 66 children daily across three rooms. The analysis will focus on critical roles and responsibilities, leadership style, challenges, advocacy for children’s learning and development, and the concept of quality concerning educational outcomes.
\nRoles and Responsibilities of the Educational Leader
\nSamantha’s perception of her role corresponds with the explanation of educational leadership in ECEC environments described in the literature. They consider her the ”leader of pedagogy,” thus enhancing the appointments of an educational leader in the direction of practice, as noted by Colmer et al. (2015). It requires working to educate staff, families, and the community that children are learning all the time and that play per se has educational value. Another part of Samantha’s responsibilities is to focus on the development of both team and personal growth and culture improvement. Education leaders should continue to learn and practice reflectiveness (Fleet et al., 2015). An example is during the weekly meetings with the educational leader team to review programs and specific child concerns and when she initiates contacting other team members to support them.
\nSamantha principally enhanced the sound practice of reflective practice by enforcing a system of peer observation and feedback where students record and review each other’s practice. This approach sits well with Waniganayake et al.’s (2017) recommendation that educational leaders need to foster reflective spaces and discursive communities for teacher learning. Moreover, Samantha daily applies her duties of looking for the latest publications and sharing them with teachers and staff as an essential job of an educational leader who is expected to practice and introduce research-informed solutions in ECEC environments (Sims et al., 2018). Indeed, the way she described herself as more of a ‘coach or mentor’ not a program checker, is in line with the modern thrust of educational leadership where directors and principals take more supportive and more team-oriented roles as opposed to supervisors and evaluators (Heikka et al., 2019).
\nLeadership Style and Early Childhood Leadership Theory
\nSamantha’s leadership style can be characterised as collaborative and distributive, which aligns closely with contemporary early childhood leadership theories. Her approach to empowering team members to take on leadership roles based on their knowledge, experience, and skills exemplifies the principles of distributed leadership (Heikka et al., 2019). This is evident in her description of how she supported her colleague Sue in leading the garden design project, providing resources and regular check-ins while allowing Due to exercise her expertise and community connections. In the concept of catalytic leadership, leaders facilitate shared decision-making and empower others to contribute to the organisation’s direction and growth (Siraj-Blatchford & Hallet, 2014). The collaborative nature of Samantha’s leadership is further demonstrated through the team’s collective approach to vision-setting, goal-setting, and strategic planning.
\nSamantha’s focus on the importance of relationships in the team, as well as the sense of obligations shared within the team, is similar to the relational leadership model described by (Klevering and McNae, 2019). This approach acknowledges leaders to be formed from the social relations in the organisation environment. The demonstration of transformational leadership principles includes the passionate endorsement of lifelong learning by the educational leader and her encouragement of the same among her subordinates (Silaj-Blatchford & Hallet, 2014). Through the role-modeled emphasis on professionalism and also through encouraging professional development, Samantha helps a team to desire success in their practice.
\nChallenges Faced by the Educational Leader
\nSamantha has been very successful in developing a positive and collaborative culture in school; there are several problems that this tremendous educational leader encounters. The first is time management, which has also emerged as a significant problem in the literature on educational leadership in ECEC contexts. The hours, the tasks, and the coordination of different responsibilities sometimes cause burnout, as Samantha said. The other pressure that Samantha faces is on expectations and perceptions of other families and members of society. Heikka et al. (2019) stated that educational leaders increasingly have to manage the conflicting demands of stakeholders while upholding teaching and learning.
\nThe example with Samantha and pressures to adopt a phonics approach program and to contradict it with, is the obstacle that lies between community expectations in early childhood education and evidence-based practice. In response to these challenges, Samantha creates clear, positive messages about the education focus of the centre and shares them frequently with families and the community. She also collects information to substantiate the centre’s educational actions and provides the team with information about possible challenges and how to solve them. Also, she continues learning about early childhood education and leadership to build the ability to address challenges in her practice.
\nAdvocacy for Children’s Learning and Development
\nSome of the areas that bring out Samantha as an advocate for children’s learning and development are also well articulated in the description of her leadership practices. The fact that she always makes sure that others appreciate the learning aspect of what children do also shows her willingness and support in children’s educational play in early learning (AGDE, 2022). The child centred approach of the educational leader in advocating for the centre is epitomised by the emphasis on vision and goals for the centre based on consultation with children, families and the community of the centre. Through the engagement of all stakeholders in the direction of the center, Samantha is assured that the children’s needs and interests of the children are prioritized when making decisions (Waniganayake et al., 2017).
\nOther responsibilities in the category include the following; Samantha has demonstrated ways in how she has continued to practise research and evidence-based advocacy practice. In this way, she guarantees that the centre\u2019s practices are perfectly matched with the current research evidence about how children\u2019s learning and development should be supported (Sims et al., 2018). The use of assessments in order to identify children\u2019s learning requirements and their achievement progress proves an organisation\u2019s commitment to support the cause for children and best practices of learning. This follows requirement 2 of the National Quality Standard to provide a learning environment that promotes each child\u2019s interests and abilities (ACECQA, 2020).
\nQuality in Leadership and Educational Outcomes
\nThis paper revealed that Samantha has a systemic and broad perspective of quality in her leadership, and her perception of it is anchored on the education of children. Its congruence with ideas of the modern concept of quality in regard to ECEC settings is evident in her focus on the mandate for progress, the primacy of research, and the efficacy of teamwork (Nupponen, 2006). In this way, Samantha has encouraged the participants to create children-centred educational practices that will produce positive effects for the kids. One of the principal components of Samantha’s approach to work quality is the recovery of vision and the establishment of goals. Thus, by including all the essential stakeholders such as educators, families as well as children in envisioning the goals and objectives for the centre, Samantha enhances collective buy-in on quality results. This practice not only conforms to the proper strategies of leadership in early childhood development but also makes everyone involved in the nurture of these children feel as though they own the institution.
\nAnother aspect of Samantha’s quality-focused leadership is her commitment to proven practice. Through her professional practice of looking for new evidence and applying this evidence to practise, she is dedicated to high quality, cutting-edge practice in early childhood education. This dedication to keeping up to date with current research guarantees that the program of the centre incorporates current practices that are relevant in facilitating children learning and development (Sisson, 2021). That is why the acts of peer observation and feedback regarding the use of reflective practice demonstrate that Samantha continually tries to improve the quality of her work. This approach motivates the continuous growth and enhancement of educators and helps provide better teaching throughout the centre (Sisson, 2021). Samantha facilitates continuous improvement of the standard of education by developing a system where educators are encouraged to watch each other and provide feedback in order to enhance daily practice.
\nConclusion
\nAs evidenced in this paper through examining critical aspects of Samantha’s practice profile as an educational leader in a Community Kindergarten, this paper finds that the role has evolved to assume a more complex status that is in tandem with modern theories of early childhood leadership. From a multidimensional and developmental perspective, her collaborative and distributive leadership style, together with her focus on improvement and commitment to the use of evidence, all point to a practical approach to strengthening education for children. The conflicts that occur in Samantha, such as time management and stakeholders put in front of the educator’s demands, show how challenging the role is in education leadership. Nevertheless, her approaches to the given challenges, such as communication and professional development, are helpful for the other leaders of ECEC institutions to get insights from this study. Samantha’s perspective towards early childcare advocacy, aspect, and quality improvement is well rooted in key basic quality standards and research-supported guidelines. Her rationale, like decision-making with clients, practice reflection, and child involvement, increases the quality of education and leads to better results for children.
\n\u2003
\nReferences
\nAustralian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA). (2020). Guide to the National Quality Framework. ACECQA.
\nAustralian Government Department of Education (AGDE). (2022). Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (v.2.0). Australian Government Department of Education for the Ministerial Council.
\nCheeseman, S. (2007). Pedagogical silences in Australian early childhood social policy. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(3), 244\u2013254.
\nColmer, K., Waniganayake, M., & Field, L. (2015). Implementing curriculum reform: Insights into how Australian early childhood directors view professional development and learning. Professional Development in Education, 41(2), 203-221.
\nFleet, A., Soper, R., Semann, A., & Madden, L. (2015). The role of the educational leader: Perceptions and expectations in a period of change. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(3), 29-37.
\nNupponen H. (2006). Leadership Concepts and Theories: Reflections for Practice for Early Childhood Directors. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/183693910603100107
\nHeikka, J., Pitk\u00e4niemi, H., Kettu Kangas, T., & Hyttinen, T. (2019). Distributed pedagogical leadership and teacher leadership in early childhood education contexts. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 24(3), 333\u2013348. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/13603124.2019.1623923
\nKlevering, N., & McNae, R. (2019). Making sense of leadership in early childhood education: Tensions and complexities between concepts and practices. Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 33(1), 5\u201317. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.21307\/jelpp-2018-002
\nSims, M., Waniganayake, M., & Hadley, F. (2018). Educational leadership: An evolving role in Australian early childhood settings. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(6), 960\u2013979.
\nSiraj-Blatchford, I., & Hallet, E. (2014). Effective and caring leadership in the early years. SAGE.
\nSisson, J. H., Lash, M., Shin, A. M., & Whittington, V. (2021). Co-constructed leadership in early childhood education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 27(4), 797\u2013819. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/13603124.2021.1914350
\nWaniganayake, M., Cheeseman, S., Fenech, M., Hadley, F., & Shepherd, W. (2017). Leadership: Contexts and complexities in early childhood education. Oxford University Press.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Leadership and Advocacy in ECEC: A Critical Review of Educational Leadership Practices TCHR3004 LEADERSHIP AND ADVOCACY IN EARLY CHILDHOOD Assessment Two: Portfolio Assessment Brief Assessment name: Portfolio Due Date: 4th October 2024 (Week 6) Weighting: 50% of final grade Length: 1500 words (10% leeway above and below) Unit Learning Outcomes You will demonstrate the following […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10065,5597,5611,10075,5598,5614,10069,5603,5616,10093],"tags":[10084,5392,10094,10095,10096,10097],"class_list":["post-76718","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-assignment-help-australia-best-assignment-writing-service","category-australia-early-childhood-education-assessment-help","category-australian-government-department-of-education-2023-early-years-learning-framework-for-australia-eylf","category-best-assignment-help-in-australia-assignment-helper","category-early-childhood-education-assessment-assignment-help-australia","category-help-writing-dissertation-in-early-childhood-education","category-online-assignment-help-australia-my-homework-help-service","category-uk-early-childhood-education-research-essay-service","category-write-an-essay-in-early-childhood-education","category-write-my-assignment-australia","tag-advocacy-in-ecec","tag-early-childhood-leadership","tag-educational-leadership-styles","tag-educational-outcomes-for-children","tag-leadership-and-advocacy-in-ecec-a-critical-review-of-educational-leadership-practices","tag-leadership-challenges-in-ecec"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76718","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=76718"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76718\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76718"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76718"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76718"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}