L'enseignement formel de la science de l'occupation en ergothérapie : un vecteur de changement et de développement pour la profession
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. L’enseignement des sciences de l’occupation s’inscrit souvent dans des cours portant sur les fondements de l’ergothérapie ou sur les interventions fondées sur l’occupation. Rares sont les programmes où ce contenu fait l’objet du cours en soi. S’attarder de manière formelle aux avancées dans ce domaine pose des défis, qui valent la peine d’être relevés, tant sur le plan de l’enseignement, du programme que de la profession. Objectif. Cet article fait état de l’expérience d’un programme d’enseignement, où un tel cours est intégré à la formation initiale en ergothérapie depuis sept ans. Méthodes. Les constats qui seront dressés découlent d’une synthèse de groupes de discussion focalisée réalisés auprès d’étudiants et de cliniciens, des processus formels d’évaluation du cours et du programme, ainsi que de l’expérience de l’équipe enseignante. Résultats. Les défis relevés sont nombreux : 1) introduire des dispositifs andragogiques qui sensibilisent les milieux cliniques aux avancées du domaine ; 2) construire un espace de dialogue entre cliniciens, étudiants et chercheurs pour débattre et développer des applications cliniques ; 3) Présenter aux étudiants, dont l’identité professionnelle est en développement, des avancées qui remettent en cause ce qu’ils tenaient pour acquis ; et 4) arrimer de manière cohérente ce contenu aux autres cours, dans une approche programme. Conclusion. Malgré les défis, une telle démarche mène à des résultats porteurs, soient : 1) une consolidation de l’identité professionnelle des étudiants ; 2) un réinvestissement du paradigme occupationnel ; 3) des possibilités accrues de soutien aux milieux cliniques associés ; et 4) un développement formel d’un créneau de recherche. Mots-clés. Science de l’occupation, ergothérapie, formation, éducation, identité professionnelle ___________________________________________________ The formal education of occupational science in occupational therapy : a vehicle for change et development of the profession Abstract Introduction. Occupational science is often integrated in curricula within courses that focus on foundations in occupational therapy or on occupation-based interventions. Few occupational therapy programs offer a full course that focuses only on advances in occupational science. Several challenges await in building such a course, namely selecting educational methods, maintaining coherence throughout the curriculum and questioning assumptions of the profession. Objectives. This article describes the experience of an occupational therapy program where such a course was introduced eight years ago. Methods. The findings rests on the synthesis of focus groups conducted with students and clinicians, formal course and program evaluation processes, and debriefing sessions amongst the teaching team. Results. since its inception, stakeholders identified four main challenges: 1) introducing educational strategies that raise awareness of clinicians on advances in occupational science; 2) building a safe space for dialogue amongst stakeholders to share ideas and develop clinical applications; 3) exposing students (who are still establishing their professional identity) to new ideas that challenge occupational therapy assumptions; and 4) coherently aligning this content with other courses of the program. Conclusion. In spite of these challenges, introducing occupational science content in the curriculum leads to promising results namely: 1) a consolidation of students' professional identity; 2) a reinvestment of the occupational paradigm; 3) opportunities for supporting the clinical community; and 4) the formal development of a research niche. Keywords. Occupational science, occupational therapy, education, professional identity
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".