Making connections between school and home: Exploring therapists’ perceptions of their relationships with families in partnering for change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction A recently developed service delivery model, called Partnering for Change, encourages collaboration between occupational therapists, educators and families, and aims to improve children’s participation across school, home and community settings. Partnering for Change has been successful in facilitating equitable access to services and eliminating wait lists; however, it could have a more significant impact through improved capacity-building with families. The purpose of this study is to describe the factors that therapists view as influencing the development of family–therapist relationships in Partnering for Change, and to explore their ideas to improve relationship-building. Methods Focus groups were completed with 15 occupational therapists who provided Partnering for Change school-based services. Qualitative description methodology and directed content analysis were utilized. Results Several factors were identified that influenced the development of family–therapist relationships including competing demands; consistency and availability; awareness, readiness and commitment; relationships with schools and educators; and sociodemographic characteristics. Increasing in-person interactions and awareness of occupational therapy services were suggested to improve relationship-building. Conclusions Therapists should consider innovative ways of overcoming competing demands, utilizing relationships with schools and educators, and participating in mentorship and communities of practice to address the current barriers of family–therapist relationships, and create better opportunities for collaboration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".