Merrill June Turpin1, Sylvia Rodger, Anna R Hall. 1. Division of Occupational Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia. m.turpin@uq.edu.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: An understanding of students' perceptions of occupational therapy on entry is required to recognise how professional socialisation occurs through curriculum. Findings pertain to a qualitative study investigating students' perceptions of occupational therapy upon entry to two occupational therapy programmes in Australia. METHODS: Students commencing Bachelor of Occupational Therapy and Masters of Occupational Therapy Studies programmes participated in the study (n = 462). A purpose-designed questionnaire was distributed to students in the first lecture of each programme. Preliminary analysis comprised identification of keywords/phrases and coding categories were generated from patterns of keywords. Frequency counts and percentages of keywords/phrases within categories were completed. RESULTS: Students' responses were categorised as 'what' occupational therapists do; 'how' they do it; 'why' they do it; and 'who' they work with. In 'what' occupational therapists do students frequently described 'helping' people. Both undergraduate and graduate entry masters students used the term 'rehabilitation' to describe how occupational therapy is done, with graduate entry students occasionally responding with 'through occupation' and 'modifying the environment'. Students perceived the 'why' of occupational therapy as getting back to 'everyday activities', with some students emphasising returning to 'normal' activities or life. Regarding the 'who' category, students also thought occupational therapists worked with people with an 'injury' or 'disability'. CONCLUSIONS: Students entered their occupational therapy programmes with perceptions consistent with the general public's views of occupational therapy. However, graduate entry students exposed to a pre-reading package prior to entry had more advanced occupational therapy concepts than undergraduate students.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: An understanding of students' perceptions of occupational therapy on entry is required to recognise how professional socialisation occurs through curriculum. Findings pertain to a qualitative study investigating students' perceptions of occupational therapy upon entry to two occupational therapy programmes in Australia. METHODS: Students commencing Bachelor of Occupational Therapy and Masters of Occupational Therapy Studies programmes participated in the study (n = 462). A purpose-designed questionnaire was distributed to students in the first lecture of each programme. Preliminary analysis comprised identification of keywords/phrases and coding categories were generated from patterns of keywords. Frequency counts and percentages of keywords/phrases within categories were completed. RESULTS: Students' responses were categorised as 'what' occupational therapists do; 'how' they do it; 'why' they do it; and 'who' they work with. In 'what' occupational therapists do students frequently described 'helping' people. Both undergraduate and graduate entry masters students used the term 'rehabilitation' to describe how occupational therapy is done, with graduate entry students occasionally responding with 'through occupation' and 'modifying the environment'. Students perceived the 'why' of occupational therapy as getting back to 'everyday activities', with some students emphasising returning to 'normal' activities or life. Regarding the 'who' category, students also thought occupational therapists worked with people with an 'injury' or 'disability'. CONCLUSIONS: Students entered their occupational therapy programmes with perceptions consistent with the general public's views of occupational therapy. However, graduate entry students exposed to a pre-reading package prior to entry had more advanced occupational therapy concepts than undergraduate students.