Enseignement des sciences de l'occupation: soutenir le déploiement des compétences et organiser les situations cliniques dans une approche occupationnelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article porte sur l’enseignement des sciences de l’occupation dans un cursus fondé sur le développement des compétences à l’Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (UQTR), qui comprend un baccalauréat de trois ans, suivi d’une maîtrise d’un an et demi. La première section décrit les fondements théoriques et le cadre de l’enseignement des sciences de l’occupation. Ceux-ci ont permis de déployer les compétences de manière évolutive pour la formation en ergothérapie. Les principes de formation dans une approche par compétences posent qu’il ne suffit pas d’enseigner uniquement les concepts, mais aussi « quand » et « comment » les utiliser. Les étudiants développent ainsi des compétences pour agir en étant centrés sur le client et ses occupations. Le recours à des situations cliniques occupationnelles représente un élément important pour que ceux-ci s’imprègnent d’une conception de la personne comme un être occupationnel. La deuxième section présente les résultats d’un sondage mené auprès de 73 ergothérapeutes diplômés portant sur la perception de leurs compétences reliées au rôle d’expert en habilitation de l’occupation et sur la fréquence à laquelle ils y recourent. On y constate que la majorité des répondants rapportent une préparation « très adéquate » ou « adéquate » pour intervenir auprès des clientèles présentant des problèmes de santé. Plus des trois quarts de ceux-ci affirment agir quotidiennement en étant centrés sur le client et ses occupations alors que la totalité se perçoivent comme ayant une très bonne maîtrise de leurs compétences pour ce qui est d’agir en étant centré sur le client et ses occupations. Ces résultats témoignent d’une préoccupation occupationnelle des clients. Mots-clés. enseignement, compétences, expert, habilitation aux occupations, diplômés ___________________________________________________ Teaching occupational science : supporting competencies development and providing occupational clinical situations Abstract This paper describes the occupational science teaching experience within a competency-based approach at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières Occupational Therapy Program. This program includes a three year baccalaureate degree and a one and half year master’s degree. The first section describes the theoretical principles and framework used for competencies deployment throughout the occupational therapy curriculum. Principles of a competency-based approach relate to the fact that this is not only a matter of teaching concepts, but also helping the students becoming aware of when and how to use those. Students then develop the competencies to practice in a client-centered as well as occupation-based manner. The use of clinical situations in an occupational approach is an important element for students to develop the conception of humans as occupational beings. The second section presents results from a survey of 73 graduates on the perception of their use of key competencies related to the role of expert in enabling occupation and on the frequency of this use. Results show that the majority report a « very adequate » and « adequate » preparation to intervene with clients with health problems. More than three quarters of them say they intervene daily with a great awareness for the clients’ occupations while all of them perceive themselves as having good competencies related as well, as enabling occupations. These results reflect an occupational concern for the clients. Keywords. teaching, competencies, expert, enabling occupations, graduates
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Theoretical or conceptual | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
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 | 0.021 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".