The second part of this article presents arguments for the value of models for practice in occupational therapy and suggests some of their limitations. The article concludes by inviting readers to reflect on these two positions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarnittR.Knowledge, skills and attitudes: What happened to thinking?Br J Occup Ther1990; 53(11): 450–56.
2.
ReedK.Models of practice in occupational therapy.Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1984: 24.
3.
Blom-CooperL.Occupational therapy: An emerging profession in health care.London: Duckworth, 1989.
4.
ShannonPD. The derailment of occupational therapy. Am J Occup Ther1977; 31(4): 229–34.
5.
MocellinG.An overview of occupational therapy in the context of the American influence on the profession. Br J Occup Ther1992; 55(1): 7–12.
6.
ReedK.Models of practice in occupational therapy.Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1984: 25.
7.
JoiceACoiaD.A discussion on the skills of the occupational therapist working within a multidisciplinary team. Br J Occup Ther1989; 52(12): 466–68.
8.
ParhamD.Toward professionalism: The reflective therapist. Am J Occup Ther1987; 41(9): 555–61.
9.
MoseyAC. Psychosocial components of occupational therapy.New York: Raven Press, 1986.
10.
ØvretveitJ.Organisation of multidisciplinary community teams.Uxbridge: Brunel University (BIOSS), 1986. Quoted in: JoiceACoiaD.Br J Occup Ther1989; 52(12): 466–68.
11.
KreftingLH. The use of conceptual models in clinical practice. Can J Occup Ther1985; 52(4): 173–78.
12.
ClarkPN. Human development through occupation: Theoretical frameworks in contemporary occupational therapy practice, part 1. Am J Occup Ther1979; 33(8): 505–14.
13.
EngelhardtHT. Defining occupational therapy: The meaning of therapy and the virtues of occupation. Am J Occup Ther1977; 31(10): 666–72.
14.
MocellinG.A perspective on the principles and practice of occupational therapy. Br J Occup Ther1988; 51(1): 4–7.
15.
KielhofnerG, ed. A model of human occupation.Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1985.
16.
ClarkFAParhamDCarlsonME. Occupational science: Academic innovation in the service of occupational therapy's future. Am J Occup Ther1991; 45(4): 300–10.
17.
YerxaEJClarkFFrankG. An introduction to occupational science, a foundation for occupational therapy in the 21st century. Occup Ther Health Care1989; 6(4): 1–17.
18.
KielhofnerGNicolM.The model of human occupation: A developing conceptual tool for clinicians. Br J Occup Ther1989; 52(6): 210–14.
19.
MartinJ.Bulimia: A review of the medical, behavioural and psychodynamic models of treatment. Br J Occup Ther1990; 53(12): 495–500.
20.
BennerP.From novice to expert. Am J Nurs1982; 82 (March): 402–407.
21.
DreyfusSDreyfusH.A five-stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill acquisition.US Air Force Office of Scientific Research/University of Southern California, Berkeley, 1980.
MoseyAC. Eleanor Clarke Slagle Lecture: A monistic or pluralistic approach to professional identity?Am J Occup Ther1985; 39(8): 504–509.
24.
MocellinG.Beware of gurus OTs warned. Lecture given at Queen Margaret College, Edinburgh. Reported in: Therapy Weekly, 1991; Nov 7.
25.
MastermanM.The nature of a paradigm. In: LakatosIMusgraveA, eds. Criticism and the growth of knowledge.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970: 74.
26.
AlaszewskiA.Rehabilitation, the remedial therapy professions and social policy. Soc Sci Med1979; 13A: 431–43.
27.
GreenS.Shaking our foundations, part 2: Into the future. Br J Occup Ther1991; 54(2): 53–56.
28.
BarnittR.The Casson Memorial Lecture: Through a glass darkly. Br J Occup Ther1991; 54(6): 208–15.
29.
MayersC.Occupational science. Letters to the editor. Br J Occup Ther1990; 53(12): 508.
