Hello Sam: Here is my input, although, I will also admit to some confusion.
Theory: Seen as the foundation for frames of references. Theory often comes from outside the profession and may include such theories as: human development, physiology, biomechanical, adult learning, etc. These are the "building blocks" for our frames of references. Frame of reference: A FOR takes a theory (or several theories) and makes it relevant to our professional domain, which is the domain of human occupation. For example, Bandura's social learning theory has nothing to do with OT until it's coupled with a behavioral FOR. So, the FOR, is a bridge between theory and practice. FOR's generally identify to major points; 1. Postulates of Change and Function/Dysfunction continuums. The two points basically tell readers what types of behaviors are functional and what is/are the motivating factors which contribute to changing dysfunctional behaviors so they are more functional. FOR's tend to be narrow in focus and look at specific areas of human occupation. Often, FOR are theoretical in nature and do NOT address how to achieve desired outcomes. Approach: A specific treatment approach which addresses HOW to accomplish specific treatment objectives or how to implement postulates of change. Model: Not quite sure of differences Paradigms: Again, not quite sure. Hope this helps. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On 11/26/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Fac> Hello to all, Fac> Here is a question I would like to ask. I find much of the terminology in Fac> occupational therapy very confusing. What is the difference (and examples Fac> would be great) between frame of reference, models, theory, paradigms, and Fac> approach? I would love to hear some input. Fac> Sam *********��*********** Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist List messages are archived at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] *********��***********
