ECHE8320 – Contemporary Approaches to Infant and Toddler Theory and Practice

2021 – Session 1, Fully online/virtual


As part of Phase 3 of our return to campus plan, most units will now run tutorials, seminars and other small group activities on campus, and most will keep an online version available to those students unable to return or those who choose to continue their studies online.

To check the availability of face-to-face and online activities for your unit, please go to timetable viewer. To check detailed information on unit assessments visit your unit's iLearn space or consult your unit convenor.

General Information

Download as PDF
Unit convenor and teaching staff Unit convenor and teaching staff
Sheila Degotardi
Credit points Credit points
Prerequisites Prerequisites
[Admission to MTeach(0-5) and (ECED603 or ECHE6030) and (ECED602 or ECHE6020) and (ECED824 or ECHE8240)] or [admission to MEChild or MEd or MEdLead or MIndigenousEd or MSpecEd or GradCertEdS]
Corequisites Corequisites
Co-badged status Co-badged status
Unit description Unit description
The recognition of the importance of children's first three years of life has led to an increasing awareness of the specialist nature of infant-toddler education and care services. This unit covers contemporary perspectives that can inform educational programs that aim to support infant-toddler development and learning. Students will build on prior knowledge about children's learning and development to critically reflect on research-based literature and examine its relevance in a range of infant-toddler early childhood programs. Students will design and implement an inquiry-based project to deepen their understanding of the applicability of this knowledge to infants and toddlers, their families and educators.

Important Academic Dates

Information about important academic dates including deadlines for withdrawing from units are available at

Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:

  • ULO1: Demonstrate an advanced and critical understanding of the range of philosophical and theoretical approaches that inform infant-toddler services.
  • ULO2: Identify the implications of these approaches for specialised infant-toddler services and practitioners.
  • ULO3: Design and implement an inquiry project to enhance your theoretical and practical understanding of a chosen approach.
  • ULO4: Demonstrate professional responsibility of your own and others’ learning by providing and responding to supportive, informed and reflective feedback.

General Assessment Information

Full assignment instructions

This Unit Guide provides a brief description only of each required assessment piece. Full instructions are provided via an assessment and assignment guide, available on the iLearn site. An assessment rubric will be available to students for each assessment piece prior at least 2 weeks prior to submission.

Assignment expectations

In order to achieve a passing grade, it is expected that all assignments are completed, and that all assignments demonstrate a serious attempt to address the assignment task.

Presentation and submission Guidelines

Assignment 1 is submitted via the VoiceThread link on ilearn, with accompanying files submitted via the Assignment links on the ECHE8320 iLearn site. Assignments 2, 3 and 4 are submitted via the assignment link. These assignment submission links assess the documents via TURNITIN, which permits online assessment as well as the detection of material copied from other sources. Please ensure that all material is written and referenced according to standard academic conventions.

Assignments are due before midnight on the specified date.


When preparing your assignments, it is essential that:

  • Students regularly save a copy of all assignments before submission,
  • Unless there are exceptional circumstances, no assessment will be accepted after the date that the assessment has been returned to other students.
  • If an assessment is considered to be below passing standard, another staff member on the unit will provide a second opinion. No failed assessment may be re-submitted. 

Assignment presentation and submission

All written submissions are to be legible and professionally presented. Please follow these guidelines when you submit each assignment:

  • Allow a left and right-hand margin of at least 2cm in all assignments. 

  • Please type all assignments using 12-point font and 1.5 spacing. 

  • All assessments must be submitted through Turnitin in .doc or .pdf format  

  • It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that all assessments are successfully submitted through Turnitin. 

  • Faculty assignment cover sheets are NOT required. 

  • Use APA 7th referencing style to acknowledge your sources and support your ideas with in-text referencing, and include a full reference list of all works that are cited within your assignment.

Draft Submissions & Turnitin Originality Reports

  • Students may use Turnitin’s Originality Report as a learning tool to improve their academic writing if this option is made available in the unit. 

  • Students are strongly encouraged to upload a draft copy of each assessment to Turnitin at least one week prior to the due date to obtain an Originality Report. 

  • The Originality Report provides students with a similarity index that may indicate if plagiarism has occurred. Students will be able to make amendments to their drafts prior to their final submission on the due date. 

  • Generally, one Originality Report is generated every 24 hours up to the due date. 

Please note: 

  • Students should regularly save a copy of all assignments before submission, 

  • Students are responsible for checking that their submission has been successful and has been submitted by the due date and time. 

Word or duration limit

All sections of the assignment, apart from references and appendices, are included in the word or duration limit.  If your assignment seriously exceeds the limit, it will be marked only to the point at which the limit is reached. 

Academic integrity and plagiarism

The nature of scholarly endeavour, dependent as it is on the work of others, binds all members of the University community to abide by the principles of academic honesty.

Plagiarism is a matter of particular importance. Plagiarism is defined as using the work or ideas of another person and presenting this as your own without clear acknowledgement of the source of the work or ideas. This includes, but is not limited to, any of the following acts. Please see for a comprehensive list of unacceptable academic activities:

  • copying out part(s) of any document or audio-visual material or computer code or website content without indicating their origins;
  • using or extracting another person's concepts, experimental results, or conclusions;
  • summarising another person's work;
  • submitting substantially the same final version of any material as another student in an assignment where there was collaborative preparatory work;
  • use of others (paid or otherwise) to conceive, research or write material submitted for assessment; and
  • submitting the same or substantially the same piece of work for two different tasks (self-plagiarism).

The University’s Academic Integrity Policy can be found on the Policy Central website:

TURNITIN is used to assist students with appropriate referencing and paraphrasing, and to detect plagiarism. The system also serves as a digital repository if anything should happen to your hard copy submission or personal backup. Please ensure you have stated your TURNITIN receipt number on your coversheet. A link to TURNITIN is embedded in iLearn. 

Assignment extensions and late penalties 

  • Applications for extensions must be made via AskMQ according to the Special Consideration policy. Extensions can only be granted if they meet the Special Considerations policy and are submitted via This will ensure consistency in the consideration of such requests is maintained.  

  • Late submissions: Unless a Special Consideration request has been submitted and approved, (a) a penalty for lateness will apply – two (2) marks out of 100 will be deducted per day for assignments submitted after the due date – and (b) no assignment will be accepted more than seven (7) days (incl. weekends) after the original submission deadline. No late submissions will be accepted for timed assessments – e.g., quizzes, online tests. Late penalties are applied by unit convenors or their delegates after tasks are assessed. 

  • If a student is still permitted to submit on the basis of unavoidable disruption, an alternative topic may be set.  

  • Students should keep an electronic file of all assessments. Claims regarding "lost" assessments cannot be made if the file cannot be produced. It is also advisable to keep an electronic file of all drafts and the final submission on a USB untouched/unopened after submission. This can be used to demonstrate easily that the assessment has not been amended after the submission date. 

Requesting a remark of an assignment

If you have evidence that your task has been incorrectly assessed against the grade descriptors you can request a re-mark.  To request a re-mark you need to contact the unit convenor within 7 days of the date of return of the assignment and provide a detailed assessment of your script against the task criteria. Evidence from your assignment must be provided to support your judgments.


  • Please do not request a re-mark for a Failed assessment as they are all double-marked as a part of the moderation process.  

  • The outcome of a re-mark may be a higher/lower or unchanged grade.  

  • Grades are standards referenced and effort is NOT a criterion.  

University policy on grading

Criteria for awarding grades for assessment tasks

Assignments will be awarded grades ranging from HD to F according to guidelines set out in the University's Grading Policy. The following descriptive criteria are included for your information.

Descriptive Criteria for awarding grades in the unit 

In order to meet the unit outcomes and successfully pass this unit, students must make a genuine attempt at all assessment tasks. Where any submitted assessment task is considered to be unsatisfactory in this regard, the highest possible final grade that can be awarded for the unit will be 45. 

Students will be awarded grades ranging from HD to F according to guidelines set out in the policy:

The following generic grade descriptors provide university-wide standards for awarding final grades.




(High Distinction) 

Provides consistent evidence of deep and critical understanding in relation to the learning outcomes. There is substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critical evaluation of problems, their solutions and their implications; creativity in application as appropriate to the discipline. 


Provides evidence of integration and evaluation of critical ideas, principles and theories, distinctive insight and ability in applying relevant skills and concepts in relation to learning outcomes. There is demonstration of frequent originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and providing solutions; and the use of means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience. 



Provides evidence of learning that goes beyond replication of content knowledge or skills relevant to the learning outcomes. There is demonstration of substantial understanding of fundamental concepts in the field of study and the ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; convincing argumentation with appropriate coherent justification; communication of ideas fluently and clearly in terms of the conventions of the discipline. 


Provides sufficient evidence of the achievement of learning outcomes. There is demonstration of understanding and application of fundamental concepts of the field of study; routine argumentation with acceptable justification; communication of information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline. The learning attainment is considered satisfactory or adequate or competent or capable in relation to the specified outcomes 


Does not provide evidence of attainment of learning outcomes. There is missing or partial or superficial or faulty understanding and application of the fundamental concepts in the field of study; missing, undeveloped, inappropriate or confusing argumentation; incomplete, confusing or lacking communication of ideas in ways that give little attention to the conventions of the discipline. 

Note: If you fail a unit with a professional experience component, the fail grade will be on your transcript irrespective of the timing of  the placement. 

Withdrawing from this unit 

If you are considering withdrawing from this unit, please seek academic advice via before doing so as this unit may be a co-requisite or prerequisite for units in the following sessions and may impact on your progression through the degree. 


Results shown in iLearn, or released directly by your Unit Convenor, are not confirmed as they are subject to final approval by the University. Once approved, final results will be sent to your student email address and will be made available in eStudent. For more information visit

Assessment Tasks

Name Weighting Hurdle Due
Video-Log Reading Reflection 25% No 12th March and 1st April
Project Proposal 0% Yes 23rd April
Presentation and peer feedback 20% No Week 11
Project final report 55% No 6th June

Video-Log Reading Reflection

Assessment Type 1: Participatory task
Indicative Time on Task 2: 15 hours
Due: 12th March and 1st April
Weighting: 25%

Students complete two 5-8 minute video-log critical reflections on a chosen reading

On successful completion you will be able to:
  • Demonstrate an advanced and critical understanding of the range of philosophical and theoretical approaches that inform infant-toddler services.
  • Identify the implications of these approaches for specialised infant-toddler services and practitioners.
  • Demonstrate professional responsibility of your own and others’ learning by providing and responding to supportive, informed and reflective feedback.

Project Proposal

Assessment Type 1: Project
Indicative Time on Task 2: 10 hours
Due: 23rd April
Weighting: 0%
This is a hurdle assessment task (see assessment policy for more information on hurdle assessment tasks)


Students submit a written proposal for an individual inquiry project (Approximately 500 words using a provided pro-forma)


On successful completion you will be able to:
  • Demonstrate an advanced and critical understanding of the range of philosophical and theoretical approaches that inform infant-toddler services.
  • Design and implement an inquiry project to enhance your theoretical and practical understanding of a chosen approach.
  • Demonstrate professional responsibility of your own and others’ learning by providing and responding to supportive, informed and reflective feedback.

Presentation and peer feedback

Assessment Type 1: Presentation
Indicative Time on Task 2: 20 hours
Due: Week 11
Weighting: 20%

Students complete a 10-minute presentation on their project progress and provide written peer feedback

On successful completion you will be able to:
  • Demonstrate an advanced and critical understanding of the range of philosophical and theoretical approaches that inform infant-toddler services.
  • Identify the implications of these approaches for specialised infant-toddler services and practitioners.
  • Design and implement an inquiry project to enhance your theoretical and practical understanding of a chosen approach.
  • Demonstrate professional responsibility of your own and others’ learning by providing and responding to supportive, informed and reflective feedback.

Project final report

Assessment Type 1: Project
Indicative Time on Task 2: 60 hours
Due: 6th June
Weighting: 55%


Students complete a final report and critical discussion of their project findings (Approximately 2200 words)


On successful completion you will be able to:
  • Demonstrate an advanced and critical understanding of the range of philosophical and theoretical approaches that inform infant-toddler services.
  • Identify the implications of these approaches for specialised infant-toddler services and practitioners.
  • Design and implement an inquiry project to enhance your theoretical and practical understanding of a chosen approach.
  • Demonstrate professional responsibility of your own and others’ learning by providing and responding to supportive, informed and reflective feedback.

1 If you need help with your assignment, please contact:

  • the academic teaching staff in your unit for guidance in understanding or completing this type of assessment
  • the Learning Skills Unit for academic skills support.

2 Indicative time-on-task is an estimate of the time required for completion of the assessment task and is subject to individual variation

Delivery and Resources

ECHE8320 is delivered fully online. 

The unit content, delivered via unit readings and assignment tasks, is supported by VoiceThread interactive discussion / presentation forums, Zoom online webinar meetings and regular ilearn discussion forum tools.

This unit has a full web presence through iLearn.  Students will need regular access to a computer and the Internet to complete this unit.  

Weekly access to iLearn is compulsory for all students. Important assessment information will be posted here, as will other relevant unit notices and materials, including a reading template and guide to lecture note taking to assist your studies. 

Various activities and materials for discussion and critical reflection are included and external students especially are encouraged to use this web component. Electronic links and suggested references will be included in the Resources section. Please check the iLearn unit regularly.  

The process for attending small group or individual Zoom meetings will be arranged at the beginning of the session. It is expected that students will engage in one Zoom session with the unit convener before their submission of assignment 2: Project proposal.  The precise date and times of these sessions will be determined early in the study session, and will depend upon the availability and time-zones of students and the unit convener. 

Individual consultations with the unit convener

The unit convener is available for individual consultations via email or Zoom. Please contact her via the ilearn dialogue for an appointment to chat.

Unit web-page

There is a website for this unit. Access to this unit is available online through iLearn (  You will need to login using your Macquarie ID. This site is an essential unit resource. You are required to check this website at least twice per week for any announcements. In addition, it has the following features and functions:

Study and assignment resources

Assignment submission links: For you to submit your assignment work

Dialogue: for private messages to teaching staff.

Please note that teaching staff will respond to dialogue emails in a timely manner. Please be aware that they have multiple teaching, research and administrative commitments so it may take a couple of days to respond. It is unrealistic to expect teaching staff to respond after work hours or during weekend. 

Study Resources

There is no required text for this unit. Instead, you will be provided with some research-based literature for weeks 1 to 6, and are then expected to source your own literature to assist with the completion of your assignments.

The required readings are listed in the Weekly content section of this Unit Guide. These readings can all be found using multisearch function, or by accessing the specific journal via the library website. A Leganto reading list has also been established for your convenience.  

There are also many pedagogical or development books about infant and toddlers in the library. The following list contains some research-based literature that pertains specifically to infant-toddler curriculum, pedagogy and development.

Research-based books

Abbott, L., & Langston, A. (2002) Birth to three matters: A framework to support children in their earliest years. London, DfES/Surestart.

Berthelsen, D., Brownlee, J. & Johansson, E. (Eds.) (2009). Participatory learning in the early years: Research and pedagogy, Oxon, UK, Routledge.

Degotardi, S., & Pearson, E (2014). The relationship worlds of infants and toddlers: Multiple perspectives from early years research and practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.

Elfer, P., Goldschmied, E., & Selleck, D. (2003). Key persons in the nursery: Building relationships for quality provision. London: David Fulton Publishers.

Gandini, L. & Edwards, C. P. (2001) Bambini: The Italian approach to infant/toddler care, New York, Teachers College Press.

Goouch, K., & Powell, S. (2013). The baby room: Principles, policy and practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press

Gopnik, A. (2009) The philosophical baby, New York, NY, Farra, Straus and Giroux.

Johansson, E., & White, E.J (2011). Educational research with our youngest: Voices of infants and toddlers. Dordrecht: Springer

Lamb, M. E., Bornstein, M. & Teti, D. M. (2002) Development in infancy, Mahwah, N.J, Erlbaum.

Nelson, K. (2007) Young minds in social worlds: Experience, meaning, and memory Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Rochat, P. (2001) The infant's world, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Harrison, L., & Sumsion, J. (2014). Lived spaces of infant-toddler education and care: Exploring diverse perspectives on theory, research and practice. Dordrecht, The Nederlands: Springer.

Wittmer, D. (2008) Focusing on peers: The importance of relationships in the early years, Washington, DC, Zero to Three.

White, E.J & Dalli, C. (Eds.). Under-three Year Olds in Policy and Practice. Singapore: Springer

Some suggested book chapters (although see above for edited books in infant-toddler ECEC):

Brooker, L. (2009) Just like having a best friend: How babies and toddlers construct relationships with their key workers in nurseries. In Papatheodorou, T. & Moyles, J. (Eds.) Learning together in the early years: Exploring relational pedagogy. Oxon, UK, Routledge.

Degotardi, S. (2015) Expressing, interpreting and exchanging perspectives during infant-toddler social interactions: The significance of acting with others in mind. In L. Harrison and J Sumsion (Eds). Lived spaces of infant-toddler education and care: exploring diverse perspectives on theory, research and practice, pp187-199.. Dordrecht, The Nederlands: Springer.

Hay, D. F., Caplan, M. & Nash, A. (2009). The beginnings of peer relations. In Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M. & Laurson, B. (Eds.) Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups. New York, The Guilford Press.

Mitchelmore, S., Degotardi, S., & Fleet, A. (2017). The richness of everyday moments: Bringing visibility to the qualities of care within pedagogical spaces (87-99). In White, E.J and Dalli, C. (Eds.). Under-three Year Olds in Policy and Practice. Singapore: Springer

Singer, E. & De Haan, D. (2007) Social life of young children: Co-contruction of shared meanings and togetherness, humour, and conflicts in child care centres. In Spodek, B. & Saracho, O. N. (Eds.) Contemporary perspectives on research in early childhood social learning. Charlotte, N.C., Information Age Publishers.

Journal Special Issues

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 18(4): Special Issue: (Re)-conceptualising relationships in infant-toddler pedagogy

Early Education and Development, 27 (2): Special Issue: Infants and toddlers in group care

Early Years: An International Research Journal, 32 (2): Special issue: Professional issues in work with babies and toddlers

European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19 (2): Special Issue – Birth to three

International Journal of Early Childhood, 10 (1): Special issue on children under 3

Access and technical assistance  

Information for students about access to the online component of this unit is available at You will need to enter your student username and password. 

Please do NOT contact the Unit Convenor regarding iLearn technical help.  

No extensions will be given for any technical issues. Allow enough time for your submissions.  

Assistance is available from IT Helpdesk ph: 1800 67 4357, or log a request at OneHelp is the online IT support service for both students and staff. 

This unit requires students to use several ICT and software skills: 

  • Internet access: The iLearn site contains materials for this unit; it is also required for the online submission of all Assessment Tasks, and for the use of Turnitin submission for ALL tasks.   

  • Word processing, visual representations, and document formatting: You are required to use an appropriate form of software to present your assignments.  

  • Uploading of assessment tasks to iLearn. 

Unit Schedule

22 Feb

Conceptualisations of ‘quality’ in infant-toddler early childhood programs

Read at least 3 from:

Degotardi, S., Han, F., & Torr, J. (2018). Infants’ experience with ‘near and clear’ educator talk: individual variation and its relationship to indicators of quality. International Journal of Early Years Education, doi: 10.1080/09669760.2018.1479632

King, E. K., Pierro, R. C., Li, J., Porterfield, M. L., & Rucker, L. (2016). Classroom quality in infant and toddler classrooms: impact of age and programme type. Early Child Development and Care, 25, 875-893. doi:10.1080/03004430.2015.1134521

La Paro, K. & Gloeckler, L. (2016). The context of child care for toddlers: The “experience expectable environment”. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44, 147-153. doi: 10.1007/s10643-015-0699-0

Li, W., Farkas, G., Duncan, G., Burchinal, M. R., & Vandell, D. (2013). Timing of high quality child care and contiive, language, and preacademic development. Developmental Psychology, 49(8), 1440-1451. doi:10.1037/a0030613

Pessanha, M., Peixoto, C., Barros, S., Cadima, J., Pinto, A. I., Coelho, V., & Bryant, D. M. (2017). Stability and change in teacher-infant interaction quality over time. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 40, 87-97. doi:

Thomason, S. A., & La Paro, K. (2009). Measuring the quality of teacher-child interactions in toddler child care. Early Education and Development, 20, 285-304. doi: 10.1080=10409280902773351

1 March

Challenges and debates

Read at least 3 from:

Cheeseman, S. (2017). Narratives of infants’ encounters with curriculum: Beyond the curriculum of care. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 18(1), 55-66. doi:10.1177/1463949117692243

Cheeseman, S., Sumsion, J., & Press, F. (2015). Infants of the productivity agenda: Learning from birth or waiting to learn. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(3) 38-45.

Davis, B., & Degotardi, S. (2015). Who cares: Infant educators' responses to professional discourses of care. Early Child Development and Care. doi:10.1080/03004430.2015.1028385

Davis, B. & Dunn, R. (2019). Professional identity in the infant room. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), 244-256. doi: 10.1177/1836939119855222

Leifield, L. (2020). Influential others: Infant/toddler teachers’ perspectives on entry into and retention in the infant/toddler workforce. Early Years: An International Research journal. Doi:10.1080/09575146.2020.1771546

Tesar, M, & Farquhar, S (2015). A day in the life of a newly qualified infant/toddler teacher. The First Years: Nga Tau Tuatahi. New Zealand Journal of Infant and Toddler Education. Volume 17(1), 17-21.

8th March

Conceptualising curriculum 1: Play and exploration

Read at least 3 from:

Degotardi, S., & Pearson, E. (2016). Infant Play: How Interactions Build and Support Relationships. In M. Ebbeck and M. Waniganayeke (Eds.), Children’s play in early childhood education: Facilitating learning in diverse contexts, 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press.  

Degotardi, S. (2013). "I think, I can": Acknowledging and promoting agency during educator-infant play. In O. F. Lillemyr, S. Dockett, & B. Perry (Eds.), Varied perspectives on play and learning: Theory and research on early years education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Morrissey, A (2014). Scaffolding, analysis and materials: Contributing factors in an unexpected finding of advanced infant/toddler pretend play. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 12(2), 195-213. doi: 10.1177/1476718X13515428

Ridgway, A., Li, L., & Quiñones, G. (2016). Visual narrative methodology in educational research with babies: triadic play in babies’ room. Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy1(1), 1. doi:10.1186/s40990-016-0005-0

Salamon, A., & Harrison, L. (2015). Early childhood educators' conceptions of infants' capabilities: the nexus between beliefs and practice. Early Years: An International Research Journal, 35(3), 273-288. doi:10.1080/09575146.2015.1042961

Shin, M. (2012) The role of joint attention in social communication and play among infants. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 10, 309-317.

Shohet, C., & Klein, P.S. (2010). Effects of variations in toy presentation on social behaviour of infants and toddlers in childcare. Early Child Development and Care, 180(6) 823-824, doi: 10.1080/03004430802460997

Video-Log entry 1 due Friday 12th March

15th March

Conceptualising curriculum 2: Routines, rituals and interactions

Read at least 3 from:

Degotardi, S., Torr, J., & Nguyen, N.T (2016). Infant-toddler educator’ language support practices during snack-time. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(4), 52-62

Degotardi, S. (2010). High-quality interactions with infants: Relationships with early childhood practitioners’ interpretations and qualification levels in play and routine contexts. International Journal of Early Years Education, 18(1), 27-41.

Girolametto, L., Weitzman, E., van Lieshout, R., & Dawna, D. (2000). Directiveness in teachers' language input to toddlers and preschoolers in day care. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 43, 1101-1114.

Klette, T., Drugli, M.B., & Aandahl, A.M (2018). Together and alone: a study of interactions between toddlers and childcare providers during mealtime in Norwegian childcare centres. Early Child Development and Care, 188(3), 287-298, Doi: 10.1080/03004430.2016.1220943

Mortlock, A. (2015). Toddlers’ use of peer rituals at mealtime: symbols of togetherness and otherness. International Journal of Early Years Education, 23(4), 426-435. doi: 10.1080/09669760.2015.1096237-1

Tamis-LeMonda, C.S., Custode, S., Kuchiriko, Y., Escobar, K., & Lo, T. (2018). Routine language: Speech directed to infants during home activities. Child Development, doi: 10.111/cdev.13089


22nd and 29th March

Relationship-based pedagogies





Read at least 6 from:

Degotardi, S. (2017). Joint attention in infant-toddler early childhood programs: Its dynamics and potential for collaborative learning. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 18(4), 409-421, doi: 10.1177/1463949117742786.

Degotardi, S. & Pearson, (2014). The relationship worlds of infants and toddlers: Multiple perspectives from early years theory and practice (Chapter 3, 4, 5 or 6 – up to p.81). Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Degotardi, S. (2015). Mind mindedness: Forms, features and implications for infant-toddler pedagogy. In S. Robson & S. F. Quinn (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Young Children's Thinking. London: Routledge.

Elfer, P. (2006) Exploring children's expressions of attachment in nursery. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14, 81-95.

Hannikainen, M., (2015). The teacher's lap - a site of emotional well-being for the younger children in day-care groups. Early Child Development and Care, 185(5), 752-765, doi: 10.1080/03004430.2014.957690

McGaha, C. G., Cummings, R., Lippard, B. & Dallas, K. (2012) Relationship building: infants, toddlers, and 2-year-olds. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13(1).

Shin, M. (2010). Peeking at the relationship world of infant friends and caregivers. Journal of early childhood research, 8(3), 294-302. doi: 10.1177/1476718X10366777

Recchia, S.L., Shin, M., & Snaider, C. (2018). Where is the love? Developing loving relationships as an essential component of professional infant care. International Journal of Early Years Education, 26(2), doi: 10.1080/09669760.2018.1461614

Williams, S. T., Mastergeorge, A. M. & Ontai, L. L. (2010) Caregiver involvement in infant peer interactions: Scaffolding in a social context. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 251-266.



Video-Log entry 2 due Thursday 1st April

5th and 12th April


Mid session recess 

7. 19th April

Project Preparation

Please ensure that you book a Zoom consultation with the unit convener prior to submitting Assignment 2: project proposal


Assignment 2: Project Proposal due Friday 23rd April

8. 26th April

Project implementation

9. 3rd May

Project implementation


10. 10th May

Prepare for Presentation


11. 17th May

Presentation week :

Assignment 3a: Presentation due during scheduled Zoom meeting in week 11

Assignment 3b: Peer Feedback due Friday 21st May

12. 24th May

Project completion and report writing

13. 31st May

Project completion and report writing

Assignment 4 due Sunday 6th June


Policies and Procedures

Macquarie University policies and procedures are accessible from Policy Central ( Students should be aware of the following policies in particular with regard to Learning and Teaching:

Students seeking more policy resources can visit Student Policies ( It is your one-stop-shop for the key policies you need to know about throughout your undergraduate student journey.

To find other policies relating to Teaching and Learning, visit Policy Central ( and use the search tool.

Student Code of Conduct

Macquarie University students have a responsibility to be familiar with the Student Code of Conduct:


Results published on platform other than eStudent, (eg. iLearn, Coursera etc.) or released directly by your Unit Convenor, are not confirmed as they are subject to final approval by the University. Once approved, final results will be sent to your student email address and will be made available in eStudent. For more information visit or if you are a Global MBA student contact

School of Education Procedures 

In addition, the following policies and procedures of the School of Education are applicable in this unit. 

Unit Expectations 

  • Students are expected to read weekly readings before completing tasks and attending zoom consultation and presentation meetings 

Note: It is not the responsibility of unit staff to contact students who have failed to submit assignments.  If you have any missing items of assessment, it is your responsibility to make contact with the unit convenor. 

Electronic Communication 

It is the student’s responsibility to check all electronic communication on a regular weekly basis.  Communication may occur via: 

  • Official MQ Student Email Address 

  • The Dialogue function on iLearn 

  • Other iLearn communication functions 

Student Support

Macquarie University provides a range of support services for students. For details, visit

Learning Skills

Learning Skills ( provides academic writing resources and study strategies to help you improve your marks and take control of your study.

The Library provides online and face to face support to help you find and use relevant information resources. 

Student Enquiry Service

For all student enquiries, visit Student Connect at

If you are a Global MBA student contact

Equity Support

Students with a disability are encouraged to contact the Disability Service who can provide appropriate help with any issues that arise during their studies.

IT Help

For help with University computer systems and technology, visit

When using the University's IT, you must adhere to the Acceptable Use of IT Resources Policy. The policy applies to all who connect to the MQ network including students.

Changes from Previous Offering

Assignment 2: project proposal, has been changed from a weighted assignment to a hurdle, non-weighted one. This has been done to reduce student workload, and to ensure that rapid feedback is able to be provided on the proposal.