The Need for ‘Soft Skills’ in Occupational Therapy Curricula: A Descriptive Analysis of French Students’ Internship Comments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A competent occupational therapist needs soft skills. Although the French national occupational therapy (OT) curriculum lists 10 competences to be acquired, they do not include soft skills. The objectives of this study were to (a) Identify the proportion of soft skills in OT students’ internship comments written by internship tutors and (b) characterize the mentioned soft skills to help determine whether and which soft skills should be included in the new OT curriculum nationwide in France. This was a qualitative descriptive analysis of tutors’ comments on internship evaluations based on the framework method. Of the 1060 internship reports, 1035 (98%) for 217 students mentioned at least one soft skill. Taking initiatives was the most frequently mentioned (65%), followed by accountability (62%) and adaptability (46%). Taking initiatives, communication, and organization were the most negatively mentioned (respectively in 36%, 18% and 17% of the comments). The 36% of negative comments about taking initiatives concerned 86% of the students. Although soft skills are not taught in the French OT curriculum, most internship reports mentioned them. If students were taught these soft skills during their OT education, they may be better able to improve them throughout their training.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".