Today,  in  my  human occupation class, I spent a solid hour discussing
occupational  performance as it relates to role competence. The theory,
as   written   in  Christiansen  and  Baum's,  "Enabling  Function  and
Well-being",  is  that  humans  engage  in  occupation  in  order to be
competent  at  their  roles.  And that role competence is a fundamental
drive  of  healthy humans. The point of the lecture is to help students
begin  to  gather  some  understanding of the necessity, complexity and
depth of enabling occupation in their future clients.

At  the  completion  of  class,  a  student  held  up a poster that was
requesting  volunteers  or  announcing a presentation or something. The
research and poster were about UE Muscle Strength. I asked the students
if  they  were  confused by this dichotomy that we had just had a class
about  human  occupation  and  why  OT  should  not  be  practiced like
upper-extremity PT and then to be doing research on UE function.

One  student  responded  that  it  was  confusing and the other student
seemed  confused.  And  frankly, I'm confused!! It seems like some OT's
see  UE function as our trademark practice pattern while other OT's see
occupation  as  our  trademark.  I  am  confused by this situation, can
anyone help??????

Thanks,

Ron

*********��***********

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]

*********��***********

Reply via email to