University of Western Sydney

School of Science and Health

Professional Reasoning: 400177 LEARNING GUIDE

Unit coordinator: Dr Rosalind Bye

Teaching session: Autumn 2012 Contact person for students who are experiencing difficulties with the unit:
Dr Rosalind Bye Telephone: 4620 3353 Email: r.bye@uws.edu.au Office Location: Building: 24 Room No: 4.23

Campus: Campbelltown

Director of Academic Program: Dr Rosalind Bye

. Student Consultation: Available by appointment Monday-Thursdays. I do not work for UWS on Fridays.
.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 1 of 16

Introduction
This final year unit focuses on the transition from student to practitioner. The aim of this unit is to provide students with learning opportunities that will consolidate and enhance their competence in professional practice throughout their career. Professional competencies of central concern include advanced clinical reasoning skills, evidence basedpractice, reflective practice, personal and career management strategies, self-directed and life long learning. These competencies contribute positively to the effective management of graduates clinical practice in various work contexts, and their future career paths. Acquisition of such skills will allow the graduate to direct and adapt to change in these areas.

Learning Outcomes
At the completion of this unit students will be able to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Identify various models and classifications of clinical reasoning and analyse their use in practice Apply occupational therapy theories and conceptual models to guide clinical reasoning in practice scenarios Apply the occupational therapy problem solving process to practice scenarios and reflect on clinical reasoning during the different stages of problem solving. Explain the benefits of evidence based practice and its role in clinical reasoning Critically reflect on their own clinical reasoning skills and identify strategies to move from a novice to expert reasoning Apply principles of ethical reasoning to various practice scenarios

Schedule of learning and teaching activities

The complete unit timetable is available at: http://platformweb.uws.edu.au/pweb_tt/tt/displaysubjects.asp

Students should, ensure that they are available to attend all scheduled class hours. The table below outlines the weekly schedule. Activity Week & Date Week 3 Monday March 12th Unit Overview Introduction to clinical reasoning Focussing on core OT business Types of clinical reasoning Clinical reasoning specific to occupational therapists Case application of different reasoning types Clinical reasoning using occupational therapy theory Developing personal practice frameworks Reviewing case study applications for assignments Ethical and moral reasoning Planning your future evolving from novice to expert reasoner

Week 5 Monday March 26th

Week 6 Monday April 2nd

Week 10 Monday April 30th

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 2 of 16

Assessment Information
There are two (2) assessments in this unit designed to enable you to demonstrate that you have achieved the learning outcomes outlined above. 1. Item 1. Assessment details: Title Case Study Viva (10 minutes) Please note students who are also completing unit 400176 (Occupation and ageing) will be allocated a 20minute viva slot to allow time to assess for both units. Learning outcomes addressed 1,3,4 Due / Weight

Week 7, Wednesday (11/4) Friday (12/4) Weight: 50%

2.

Case Study report 2000 wds

1,2,5,6

Week 13, Fri 9am Weight: 50%

Final marks and grades are subject to confirmation by the School and College Assessment Committee which may scale, modify or otherwise amend the marks and grades for the unit, as may be required by University policies.

Study and attendance expectations:

Student workload: For a 10-credit point unit students are expected to work 10 hours per week. In this unit, students attend 3-4 hours of class per week. As such, students are expected to work for 6-7 hours out of class. Supplementary reading will be provided to students to enhance their knowledge on topics included in this unit. Students are expected to read supplementary material and access other relevant information to prepare them for assessment tasks and to assist them successfully complete this unit. Attendance requirements: Students are expected to attend all scheduled hours as a requirement of this unit. Non-attendance is likely to affect the students ability to effectively meet unit objectives.

vUWS
Learning resources such as lecture and tutorial notes will be available on the vUWS website for this unit.
http://elearning.uws.edu.au/webct/entryPageIns.dowebct

Literacy resources
The Student Learning Unit has developed some good online resources to assist students with skills necessary for studying at university. Have a look at the SLU's online resources page: http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/getting_help/online_study_resources2 You can self-register for these resources by clicking on the site name (e.g. Language and Learning Links) and then logging in to vUWS. Thereafter the site will be available through the Course List on the My vUWS page.

Referencing
The Schools referencing requirement is the APA (American Psychological Associati on) style 6th edition. Full details of referencing systems can be found at: http://library.uws.edu.au/citing.php?arg=1&p=ug. A full range of resources for searching and citing references is available at: http://library.uws.edu.au/training.phtml

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 3 of 16

Assignment information in detail: 1. Client Case study For student completing units 400176 & 400177
***Important note: If students are only studying one of the above units, a tailored assessment will be used that focuses on the unit being studied. This will be distributed individually to each student in this situation. Students will complete a case study which will be the basis for their viva assessment. The viva will focus on patient assessment and identification of problems, goal setting and intervention planning, incorporation of Evidence Based Practice (EBP), clinical evaluation and clinical reasoning. This viva will be used as the assessment task for 400176 Occupation and Ageing as well as unit 400177 Professional Reasoning. The marking guide outlines how marks will be used from the viva for the two units. This viva will require students to present information relevant to the case study and provide comment on their clinical reasoning. In the viva, the assessor will take on the role as your senior therapist. You are to assume the role of a newly graduated occupational therapist. The viva will run in the format of a supervision session where your senior therapist has asked you to present and explain your involvement with one of your current clients. You may bring written notes into the viva, like you might in a real case discussion situation. The assessment task will be discussed in detail in class. Please note that the mark allocation described in this learning guide applies to this unit only. For details about the marking allocation for unit 400176 (Occupation and Ageing), students should refer to the learning guide for that unit. Components of the assessment for students studying both units: 1. In week 1, students will sign up on the Ageing unit vUWS site for a case study. An overview of the two case studies is provided below. Case study 1 (Marco): You have been asked to assess Marco (74) who has been admitted to your medical ward post fall. He has Parkinsons Disease and moderate dementia. He lives with his wife Sylvia who is 75. They are originally from Italy but speak reasonable English. OR Case study 2 (Elsie): You have been asked to assess Elsie (84) who has been admitted for pain management to the palliative care ward. She has previously had chemotherapy for lung cancer and yesterday she was informed that her cancer has re-occurred and her condition is palliative. Doctors are expecting rapid deterioration. She lives alone but has a supportive daughter nearby.

2.

On the Tuesday 6 March (Week 2), all students will participate in vUWS discussion as per the Ageing unit learning guide. At the end of the vUWS discussion, students will be asked to consider a clinical scenario posed by the client/family. This will require a review of research evidence and to make recommendations for the client. See Literature Review section for more detail.

th

3.

vUWS interaction: (nb. there is no mark for this section for Professional Reasoning) The vUWS discussion allows further insight into the client. Students will ask individual questions but participate as a group to facilitate a greater understanding of the client. The vUWS discussion simulates real life clinical practice where therapists may speak to a range of people (the client, the next of kin, and other health professionals) to obtain a full picture of their client. This extra detail will help with your reasoning about this client.

The marking criteria for 400177 Professional Reasoning follows and will be done in a global way rather than apply marks for each aspect of the viva. The unit 400176 Occupation and Ageing has separate marking criteria and standards as outlined in the 400176 unit outline.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 4 of 16

VIVA details Identification of client problems and therapy plan: Students will need to review the content of the entire vUWS discussio n to identify the clients occupational performance problems. Students should identify the occupational problems that would be addressed by an occupational therapist. Students may like to use an initial interview format they have seen on clinical placement to assist in the presentation of the vUWS content. This will assist to organise the information obtained during the vUWS discussion and to identify key problems. Students should base the information on an occupational therapy model of practice (either the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance or the Occupational Performance Model (Australia)). It is anticipated that there will be several functional problems identified for the client. This may look as follows: Identified occupational problems: 1. Client is unable to independently transfer from the chair due to weakness in their quadriceps. 2. Client will be unable to prepare meals at home once discharged due to fatigue and pain levels. 3. Client is at risk of falls due to poor balance and left foot drop. Students should develop an OT plan that is, what would need to happen with this client in subsequent OT sessions. This plan may look as follows: OT Plan: 1. Liaise with team about discharge plan 2. Energy conservation education with client and family 3. Home visit with client prior to discharge to assess needs for safe return home 4. Prescription of bathroom equipment to ensure safety with self care activities The identification of problems and a plan allows students to demonstrate their ability to identify relevant information and to present it in a format congruent with OT theory and with a clinical focus. Students should give consideration to the clinical setting of their client to ensure that their plans are achievable within length of stay time frames and clinical caseloads (such as acute care, palliative care or community care). In preparation for the viva, students would benefit from developing: A brief overview of their clients primary medical condition(s) and make comment on how the diagnoses may i mpact on occupational performance. An initial interview report based on the information gathered from the vUWS discussion. The report should be based on a format consistent with that seen on clinical fieldwork and be based on a model (CMOP or OPM(A)). The report should identify client problems and a plan for therapy. In the viva, questions related to client problems and therapy plan will centre around: 400176 Occupation and Ageing 400177 Professional Reasoning Your ability to use different types of reasoning to Your understanding of your clients diagnoses and hypothesise relevant OT problems and rationalise how these would impact on performance your clinical reasoning (ie How you came to your Your ability to apply an OT model to clinical practice conclusions and the type of reasoning that was used Your ability to accurately identify client problems that in this stage of the problem solving process eg. did could be addressed by OT you use diagnostic or some other type of reasoning Your ability to formulate a comprehensive OT plan and why that type of reasoning worked best) which demonstrates consideration of the clinical Your ability to articulate the clients narrative a nd your setting, time frames for therapy, patients wishes and OT role in the future life story of the client/family and therapist skill level. formulate plans that are congruent with this life story Treatment plan and rationale: Students are required develop a treatment plan for the client. This includes identifying appropriate assessments, goals, interventions and appropriate outcome measures. To develop the treatment plan, students should review the occupational problems identified during completion of the initial interview report. Students may choose to select one (complex) problem to address or two (simpler) problems to work on. Once the problems are established, consider whether further assessments would be required to determine the clients performance in that area. The flow diagram at the end of this document should be used as a template for the viva. Students must bring their own treatment plan to the viva in this format. There should be congruence between the problems, goals, interventions and outcome measures. In this part of the viva, students will be asked to justify their selection of assessments, interventions and outcome measures using clinical reasoning and literature. Students should also consider why they did not use certain (common) tools / interventions in the plan. The following (references excluded) presents examples of how this information may be presented:

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 5 of 16

Examples: Assessment: The COPM was selected as the assessment and outcome measure as it is client centred and has been documented as an appropriate tool for clients with arthritis. The COPM was not selected as the client has dementia and thus was not able to identify and prioritise personal goals for therapy. A non-standardised assessment was chosen as it was anticipated that a more formal assessment tool would cause undue stress and anxiety for the client.

Intervention: Equipment, as a compensatory intervention, was prescribed as physical improvement was not expected. The treatment plan consisted of 6 sessions of upper limb activities as an increase in range of motion was potentially possible for this client.

Outcome measure: A pain likert scale was appropriate for this client as it is quick to administer and results could easily be compared to the baseline measurements taken. The FIM was not selected as an outcome measure as it would not be sensitive enough to change over the clients short admission.

Tips for this part of the assessment: 1. Ensure that the problems selected are OT specific that is, it is an aspect of the clients occupational performance that OT intervention could impact on. Mobility is NOT a typical OT role and should therefore not be the focus of the OT treatment program. 2. Additional assessments are identified that would give a more accurate understanding of the clients problems and needs. Remember that the initial interview is based on self report or opinions from family or other health professionals. If the client reports difficulty completing cooking tasks, you might wish to objectively observe this through a cooking assessment thus giving you a greater insight into the specific aspects of the task that the client is having difficulty with and an understanding of where interventions may need to be targeted. 3. Ensure that goals specifically address the problems identified in the initial interview report. For example, the treatment program should not focus on pressure care if you have not identified that the client has / is at risk of pressure areas. 4. Goals should be Specific, Measurable, Activity based, have a Review schedule and a Time frame for completion (SMART). Goals should also consider the clinical setting of the client for example, if the client is on an acute care ward, goals should be achievable within a very short time frame. If the client is in the community setting, goals could be more long term based on the expectation that therapy would be able to continue over an extended period of time. 5. Proposed interventions should be directly related to the identified goals. Students need to think about what interventions would need to be provided to ensure the client achieves identified goals. Students also need to consider the time schedule implementation of the intervention. Students should also comment on whether intervention sessions involve other members of the clients family. Interventions may occur over several sessions over several days. Consider what intervention sessions would look like where would they be held? Who would be there? How long would they go for? What equipment would be required? How would you manage slow improvement / deterioration in function? 6. Ensure that selected outcome measures are appropriate for the client are they sensitive enough to detect change? Have they been used with this client population before? Is your client capable of completing the tool? In preparation for the viva, students would benefit from developing: A detailed treatment plan for their client to address identified problems which specifies appropriate assessments, 2 specific OT goals (using the SMART formula), intervention and appropriate outcome measures. A brief summary on the rationale for the selection of assessment tools, interventions and outcome measures based on literature. What students need to bring to the viva: A one page treatment plan (as illustrated previously) which identifies the client, their identified problems, and an overview of the treatment plan (Assessments / Goals / Interventions / Evaluation) In the viva, questions related to treatment plan and rationale will centre around: 400176 Occupation and Ageing 400177 Professional Reasoning Your ability to articulate the type(s) of reasoning that The specific details of every aspect of your treatment dominated/influenced your thinking during this stage plan of the problem solving process ie. do you know Congruence between problems / goals / interventions which reasoning you should use during this stage and outcome measures and are you able to rationalise this choice with Need for additional assessments examples specific to the client? Intervention choices The congruence between your reasoning processes Outcome measurement selection and the chosen plan and rationale ie. does your plan Your ability to provide justification for your choices match what youve said during your discussion of your reasoning process?

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 6 of 16

Literature review At the end of the vUWS discussion, students will be presented with a scenario which will require them to review available literature and present information back to the client. Students will need to complete a comprehensive literature review about the topic in preparation for the viva. Students should search for evidence paying particular attention to the details of the information required. For example, if the review requests searching for information about falls prevention strategies for clients with visual impairment, then students should be searching specifically for evidence which relates to managing falls for people with vision impairment. It is likely that students will need to search through OT journals in addition to information from other areas of health practice. Once information is found, students should determine which is the best level of evidence available. This part of the assessment simulates the incorporation of evidence-based practice into clinical practice. Occupational therapists are expected to familiarise themselves with relevant literature to ensure that they are providing the most effective interventions for the clients. On occasion, literature / evidence is not available to specifically address clinical questions. In these situations, therapists still need to determine an appropriate intervention for their client. In the absence of evidence, therapists should make decisions using sound clinical reasoning. This may include having an in-depth understanding of the functional implications of the diagnosis, a sound understanding of the OT role within health settings and a consideration of evidence that may be transferrable from other client populations. Students should develop a concluding statement about the evidence available on the topic. The following is an example of how this may be presented: There is insufficient evidence to either support or refute the effectiveness of hand splinting for adults following stroke (Lannin & Herbert, 2003, p.1). In the second section, students need to state what information they would provide to the client. If evidence is available, this should be use to shape the intervention. If evidence is not available, then clinical reasoning should shape the intervention. The following is a fictional example of how this section may be presented: Given that there is insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of splinting following stroke but there is level 4 evidence to support stretching, I would recommend that the family incorporate a wrist based stretching program, three times a day. I would demonstrate to both the client and next of kin the types of stretches to complete and the duration for which to hold the stretch. I would recommend that the client complete the stretches after each meal In preparation for the viva, students would benefit from developing: A list of the articles read to develop the literature review A concluding comment about the available evidence An overview of what information would be provided to the client In the viva, questions will centre around: 400176 Occupation and Ageing Your ability to make recommendations to the client/family based on: A comprehensive review of the literature The realm of OT practice Your skill as a new graduate Sources of information used in the literature review Levels of evidence 400177 Professional Reasoning Your ability to use evidence at this stage of the problem solving process and articulate how that evidence influenced your clinical reasoning Your ability to translate your evidence-based clinical findings into educational reasoning ie. What a client/family needs to know

***Final Viva Question - Reflection on Clinical Reasoning related to 400177 Professional Reasoning
Clinical reasoning develops overtime and you will eventually move from a novice to an expert reasoning style. The final question in the viva will ask you to reflect on your clinical reasoning development to date and the strategies that you will put in place to develop your clinical reasoning skills/style.

Style guide:
Students should use a scholarly style to the viva and materials prepared and brought into the viva ensuring the outline of their treatment plan is proof-read and that electronic spell checking systems are set to Australian or British versions of English. APA referencing should be used where appropriate. Verbal communication should be professional and use occupational therapy or medical terms to present your ideas as you would in clinical practice.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 7 of 16

CLIENT

Joan, 69 year old lady with Osteoarthritis

IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS THROUGH INITIAL INTERVIEW

Has difficulty completing cooking tasks due to pain in right hand and thumb

TREATMENT PLAN: ASSESSMENTS

1. COPM to determine the importance of problem for client and to establish client- centred goals. 2. Cooking assessment in OT kitchen 3. Visual analogue scale to measure hand pain

TREATMENT PLAN: GOAL

Within 3 weeks, Joan will be able to cook dinner with tolerable levels of pain (less than 3 on a visual analogue scale) using ADL equipment and joint protection techniques at home. Progress will be reviewed weekly.

TREATMENT PLAN: INTERVENTION

Week 1 Monday - education session in OT department about joint protection focussing specifically on how to protect hand / thumb joints during meal preparation. Week 1 Friday - cooking session in OT department allowing client to try a range of ADL equipment / provision of ADL equipment / review of progress incorporating joint protection techniques at home Week 2 Tuesday attendance at group arthritis education program

TREATMENT PLAN: EVALUATION

1. Reassess using COPM 2. Verbal feedback from client about performance and effectiveness of prescribed equipment 3. Repeat cooking assessment 4. Visual analogue scale to measure hand pain

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 8 of 16

1. Client Case study For students who are only completing unit 400177
Students who are completing unit 400177 (Professional Reasoning) BUT NOT 400176 (Occupation and Ageing) will still complete the case study viva. These students will use a case study from their previous FW placement for their assessment. The length of the viva will be 10 minutes and only focus on the Professional Reasoning aspects noted above. 1. Present an overview of your client and their medical history of your client and describe the type/s of clinical reasoning that you use to understand this aspect of your client? Identify your clients problems and the therapy plan that was developed. Identify the type/s of clinical reasoning used during this stage of the OT process. I will be looking at: Your ability to hypothesise relevant OT problems and rationalise your clinical reasoning (ie How you came to your conclusions and the type of reasoning that was used in this stage of the problem solving process) Your ability to understand the clients narrative and your OT role in the future life story of the client/family and formulate plans that are congruent with this life story The congruence between your reasoning processes and the chosen plan and rationale.

2.

3. Was the OT intervention for this client evidence-based? Select one of the OT problems above and examine the evidence underpinning what occurred with this client. Does the evidence support the intervention or in hindsight, should something different have been done? I will be looking at: Your ability to use evidence at this stage of the problem solving process and articulate how that evidence influenced your clinical reasoning Your ability to translate your evidence-based clinical findings into educational reasoning ie. What a client/family needs to know 3. Reflection: Clinical reasoning develops overtime and you will eventually move from a novice to an expert reasoning style. The final question in the viva will ask you to reflect on your clinical reasoning development to date and the strategies that you will put in place to develop your clinical reasoning skills/style. I will be looking for your ability to reflect on your clinical reasoning development to date and the strategies that you will put in place to develop your clinical reasoning skills/style.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 9 of 16

400177 Professional Reasoning: Viva Marking Criteria

Criteria Standards and marking bands People receiving a pass 25-32/ 50 These people will have done a standard job in the viva, answering all the questions, but in a fairly basic way. They may have not applied their ideas very closely to their case study. They have not used terms well or have read references that were not very authoritative. They will have used the clinical reasoning terms correctly and applied these to their case, but done so in a fairly descriptive level. There may be some errors in logic ie. their reasoning jumps around a bit. There may be some errors in grammar, expression, logical flow etc. There might be limited evidence that students have read relevant material and so explanations might stay at a descriptive level. People receiving a credit 32.5 37 / 50 These people will have done a better job of analysing their case and the persons experiences and issues and then applied the clinical reasoning and OT problem solving process to their case in a very specific way. They will correctly use the clinical reasoning terms and understand the OT problem solving process. Their expression of ideas will be good and largely free from errors. The logical progression of their ideas as demonstrated in the viva is very sound. Their explanations will show that they have read up to date clinical reasoning references that give their ideas authority. There still may be some errors in style of explanation eg. with grammar or hesitation, but these are minor and they do not detract from marking. People receiving a distinction 37.5 - 42 / 50 These people will do a very good analysis of their case study and will be consistent in their specific application of ideas about reasoning and the OT process to their case. They will have used OT concepts well, will have their ideas underpinned by authority references and have presented their ideas with minimal errors and excellent logic. They will show an excellent understanding OT concepts and reasoning styles and will be able to apply these well to their case analysis. There will be a reflective element throughout their work that shows they have insight into their reasoning. People receiving a HD 42.5 50 / 50 All of the above, but this will be done to a superior level. No errors in reasoning, excellent grasp of OT concepts/clinical reasoning concepts, excellent suggestions. Presentation of ideas will be very logical and clear. Great logic, critical insights and well analysed, reflective throughout.

Identification of client problems and therapy plan:

Your ability to hypothesise relevant OT problems and rationalise your clinical reasoning (ie How you came to your conclusions and the type of reasoning that was used in this stage of the problem solving process) Your ability to understand the clients narrative and your OT role in the future life story of the client/family and formulate plans that are congruent with this life story

Treatment plan and rationale: Your ability to articulate the type(s) of reasoning that dominated/influenced your thinking during this stage of the problem solving process The congruence between your reasoning processes and the chosen plan and rationale.

Literature review for EBP based education for clients/carers Your ability to use evidence at this stage of the problem solving process and articulate how that evidence influenced your clinical reasoning Your ability to translate your evidence-based clinical findings into educational reasoning ie. What a client/family needs to know

Evaluation Your ability to articulate an evaluation strategy that is congruent with your overall OT reasoning and focus for this client.

Reflection Your ability to reflect on your clinical reasoning development to date and the strategies that you will put in place to develop your clinical reasoning skills/style.

Final Mark:
Comments:

/ 50

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 10 of 16

2. Case study report Model development for client caseload group

Item: Length: Weight: Due: Case study report designing your own theoretical framework for reasoning for a client caseload group 2000 words 50% Fri 9am Week 13

Select a client group you would like to work with in the future eg. older people being discharged from acute care hospital, young people with brain injury in community rehabilitation settings. Use literature and research to justify your answers to the following clinical reasoning questions: (i) Outline the potential occupational needs of your client group. Eg. do they have a need for increased productivity role, learning to live independently in the community, or teaching of play skills for children with disabilities? (500 words) (ii) Present the context demands of your work setting that may influence your clinical reasoning. Eg. how will working in the community or an acute care setting impact on your reasoning? (500 words). (iii) Develop your own personal theoretical framework to guide your clinical reasoning with this client group. Eg. Consider which philosophical paradigm will underpin your model (humanism, reductionism), whether you wish to incorporate other generic models such as the ICF or social model of disability to guide your reasoning, the OT theoretical model that you feel aids you best in your clinical reasoning (eg. MOHO), and whether you would use other theoretical approaches to guide intervention (eg. biomechanical frame of reference to underpin reasoning re home modifications). You may feel that certain concepts (eg. enablement, independence, dignity of risk) will also shape your reasoning and underpin your unique model to guide your reasoning. Justify your choices in your discussion of your framework and present a diagrammatic representation of your personal theoretical framework. Your diagram should indicate clearly the relationship between different concepts eg. using arrows, circles etc. (1000 words plus diagram)

Case Study Model Development - Assignment Standards and Criteria

People receiving a pass 50-64%: These people will have done a standard job, answering all the questions, but in a fairly basic way. They may have not applied their ideas very closely to their client group and clinical context. They have not defined terms well or have used references that were not very authoritative. They will have analysed the needs of the client group in a fairly descriptive level. Their model may be unclear, or lack some of the key concepts that would be beneficial to their focus with their client group. They have not fully justified their decision and used literature to do so. There may be some errors in logic ie. the assignment jumps around a bit. There may be some errors in style, grammar, expression, logical flow etc. There might be limited use of referencing (eg. only used 5 references) and so the assignment might stay at a descriptive level. People receiving a credit 65-74%: these people will have done a better job of analysing the occupational needs of their client group, understood the context and developed a logical model to assist and focus their clinical reasoning. They will correctly use the clinical reasoning terms and understand the OT concepts relevant to their client group. Their model is well reasoned and their decisions are justified with literature. Their writing and expression will be good and largely free from errors. The logical progression of their assignment is very sound. They will use up to date references (beyond web sites) that give their ideas authority and have around 10 references at least. There still may be some style errors eg. in referencing or punctuation, but these are minor and they do not detract from marking. People receiving a distinction 75-84%: these people will do a very good analysis of the occupational needs of their client group and will have understood how the work context impacts on the focus of the OT role. As a result their model is well developed, with key concepts linked to meeting their client groups occupational needs, and all of this is backed up with authority references (10+). The written work has minimal errors and excellent logic. They will show an excellent understanding OT concepts and will be able to apply these well to their client group. People receiving a HD 85-100%: all of the above, but this will be done to a superior level. Lots of references used (eg. 10-15), no errors, excellent grasp of OT concepts/clinical reasoning, client group needs, excellent suggestions, may have included additional material in an appendix. Writing will be very logical and clear. Great logic, critical insights and well analysed.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 11 of 16

Assignment cover sheet:

Hard copy assignments must be accompanied by a signed Assignment Cover Sheet (below) http://pubsites.uws.edu.au/student/forms/ASSIGNMENT_COVER_SHEET.doc and submitted as outlined below.

Submission of assessment tasks:

Hard copy assignments are submitted to the Assignment Box located in the ground floor of Building 24 Campbelltown, by the due date and time as specified in this outline. If you are submitting into an assignment box after the due time/date, you are advised to get a member of the school staff to sign, time and date the front cover. An assignment cover page is attached to the end of this outline. You will need to attach a copy of this to the FRONT of each assignment submitted. The cover sheet must be signed by the student prior to submission. This is an assignment submission requirement. (Please do NOT use plastic folders or slips). All assignments are to be typed. Typing must be doubled-spaced, with wide margins and printing on one side of the page ONLY. Originals only may be submitted. Photocopies even of your own work - are NOT acceptable. Students are required to keep a copy of all written work submitted.

Resubmission:
In the event of a resubmission being granted by the unit coordinator the highest possible mark for a resubmitted assignment can be equal to, but no higher than the lowest passing mark awarded for that same assignment. In the first instance, students should consult the Unit Co-ordinator for an explanation or remarking. If the grievance is unresolved refer to UWS Policy 3.2.9-3.2.13.

Late submission:
A student who submits a late assessment without approval for an extension will be penalised by 10% per day up to 10 days, i.e. marks equal to 10% of the assignments weight will be deducted as a flat rate from the mark awarded. For example, for an assignment that has a possible highest mark of 50, the students awarded mark will have 5 marks deducted for each late day. Saturday and Sunday each count as one day. Assessments will not be accepted after the marked assessment task has been returned to students who submitted the task on time

Extension of due date for assessment task:

Applications for Special Consideration to request accommodations for a specific assessment task must be submitted to the student centre with appropriate supporting documentation no later than 5.00pm on the 2nd working day after the due date of the assessment. Students should be aware that an application for Special Consideration does not automatically mean that it will be granted. Please refer to the UWS Special Consideration policy for further details. For special consideration for part or the whole of the teaching session, the application should be submitted to the Unit Coordinator as soon as the student is aware that he/she has extenuating circumstances that will affect studies for the session. Applications for Special Consideration are available on UWS Website or from the Student Centre.

Return of assessment material:

The lecturer will return assignments in class as soon as they are marked. If there are no classes (in the case of an end of session assignment), the lecturer will give the class a time and venue when the assignments can be collected. There will be a common collection date for distribution of assignments at the end of the session. Alternatively, an appropriately sized, self-addressed, stamped envelope can be attached to your assignment upon handing it in, and your marked assignment will be returned to you via post. Any unclaimed work will be held for a period of one month after the end of the session, and then destroyed.

Links to key useful policies and information:

General student information: http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students Training resources: http://library.uws.edu.au/training.phtml The Current Students page of the UWS web site http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students contains many important links, including: Student Administration http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/managing_your_study. contains information necessary for the administration of your course throughout your study at UWS; This site

E-learning http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/using_uws_online_systems/e-learning: This is your entry to all aspect of e-learning at UWS Disability: http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/getting_help/disability_services

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 12 of 16

Course and unit rules http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/managing_your_study/enrolment: This site provides information on pre-requisites, co-requisites and other matters concerning how your course is structured. Policies http://policies.uws.edu.au/masterlist.php: This site includes the full details of policies that apply to you as a UWS student.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism For the full definition of academic misconduct and the consequences of such behaviour, students are advised to read the Academic Misconduct policy in its entirety, refer to: http://policies.uws.edu.au/view.current.php?id=00051 What is Academic Misconduct? Academic Misconduct may involve one or more of the following: Plagiarism Plagiarism involves submitting or presenting work in a unit as if it were the student's own work done expressly for that particular unit when, in fact, it was not. Most commonly, plagiarism exists when: a. the work submitted or presented was done, in whole or in part, by an individual other than the one submitting or presenting the work; b. parts of the work are taken from another source without reference to the original author; or c. the whole work, such as an essay, is copied from another source such as a website or another student's essay. Acts of plagiarism may occur deliberately or inadvertently a. Inadvertent plagiarism occurs through inappropriate application or use of material without reference to the original source or author. In these instances, it should be clear that the student did not have the intention to deceive. The University views inadvertent plagiarism as an opportunity to educate students about the appropriate academic conventions in their field of study. b. Deliberate plagiarism occurs when a student, using material from another source and presenting it as his or her own, has the intention to deceive. The University views a deliberate act of plagiarism as a serious breach of academic standards of behaviour for which severe penalties will be imposed. Collusion Collusion includes inciting, assisting, facilitating, concealing or being involved in plagiarism, cheating or other academic misconduct with others. Cheating Cheating includes, but is not limited to: a. dishonest or attempted dishonest conduct during an examination, such as speaking to other candidates or otherwise communicating with them; b. bringing into the examination room any textbook, notebook, memorandum, other written material or mechanical or electronic device (including mobile phones), or any other item, not authorised by the examiner; c. writing an examination or part of it, or consulting any person or materials outside the confines of the examination room, without permission to do so; d. leaving answer papers exposed to view, or persistent attempts to read other students' examination papers; or e. cheating in take-home examinations, which includes, but is not limited to: (i) making available notes, papers or answers in connection with the examination (in whatever form) to others without the permission of the relevant lecturer; (ii) receiving answers, notes or papers in connection with the examination (in whatever form) from another student, or another source, without the permission of the relevant lecturer; and (iii) unauthorised collaboration with another person or student in the formulation of an assessable component of work.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 13 of 16

Learning Resources Information

Text:

There is no set text for this unit as students are expected to draw upon multiple resources.
References: Asher, I.E. (1996). Occupational therapy assessment tools: An annotated index (2 Occupational Therapy Association.
nd

ed.). Bethesda: American

Basmajian, J. V. & Banerjee, S. N. (1996). Clinical decision making in rehabilitation. Melbourne: Churchill Living stone. Batavia, M. (2000). Clinical research for health professionals: A user friendly guide. Bostone: ButterworthHeinemann. Bell, C. R. (2002). Managers as mentors : building partnerships for learning (2nd, rev. and expanded ed.). San Francisco, Calif.: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Bennis, W. G., & Goldsmith, J. (2003). Learning to lead : a workbook on becoming a leader (3rd ed.). New York: Basic Books. Booher, D. D. (1996). Get a life without sacrificing your career : how to make more time for what's really important . New York: McGraw-Hill. Crepeau, E.B., Cohn, E.S., & Schell, B.A.B. (Eds). (2003). Willard and Spackmans occupational therapy (10 ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. Chapparo, C., Ranka, J. (Eds.). (1997). Occupational performance model (Australia): Monograph 1. Lidcombe, NSW: Occupational Performance Network. Christiansen, C., & Baum, C., & Basi-Haugen, J. (2005). Occupational therapy: Performance, participation and wellrd being (3 ed.). Thorofare: Slack. Dawes, M. (2005). Evidence based practice: A primer for health care professionals (2 Churchill Livingstone.
nd th

ed.). Edinburgh ; New York:

Gray, J. A. M. (2001). Evidence-based healthcare : how to make health policy and management decisions (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. Hagedorn, R., Duncan, E. A. S., & Butler, J. (2006). Foundations for practice in occupational therapy (4th ed.). Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone. Hamer, S., & Collinson, G. (2005). Achieving evidence-based practice : a handbook for practioners (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Bailliere Tindall Elsevier. Helewa, A., & Walker, J. M. (2000). Critical evaluation of research in physical rehabilitation: Towards evidencebased practice. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders. Higgs, J. (2000). Clinical reasoning in the health professions (2
nd

ed.). Oxford : Butterworth-Heinemann.

Johnson, D. (1996). Occupational profile: An interview with Noelle Quinn chef and restaurant owner. Journal of Occupational Science: Australia, 3(3), p. 111-113. Law, M. C., Baum, C. M., & Dunn, W. (2005). Measuring occupational performance : supporting best practice in occupational therapy (2nd ed.). Thorofare, NJ: Slack Inc. Mattingly,C. & Fleming,M.H. (1994) Clinical reasoning; forms of inquiry in a therapeutic practice. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Co. McCluskey, A. & Cusick, A. (2002). Strategies for introducing evidence-based practice and changing clinical behaviour: A managers toolbox. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 49, 63-70. McColl, M.A., Law, M., & Stewart, D. (2003). NJ:Slack. Theoretical basis of occupational therapy (2
nd

ed.).

Thorofare, Journal of

Meyer, A. (1982). The philosophy of occupational therapy . Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 2, 79-86.

(Original work published in 1921).

Mocellin, G. (1992). An overview of occupational therapy in the context of the American influence on the profession Part 1. British Journal of occupational Therapy, 55, 7-12. Nelson, D. L. (1997). Why the profession of occupational therapy will flourish in the 21 century. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 51(1), 11-24. Noyce,J.A., & Schofield,J. (1997) (1996). Health outcomes for health care practitioners : the Australian perspective . Sydney: Australian Council of Healthcare Standards.
st

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 14 of 16

Pedretti, L. W., Pendleton, H. M., & Schultz-Krohn, W. (2006). Occupational therapy : practice skills for physical dysfunction (6th ed.). St. Louis, MI: Mosby. Radomski, M. V., & Latham, C. A. T. (2008). Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction (6th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Sackett, D. L., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W. & Haynes, R. B. (2000). Evidence based medicine: How to nd practice and teach EBM (2 ed.). Melbourne: Churchill Livinstone. Strauss, S. E. (2005). Evidence based medicine : how to practice and teach EBM (3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. Taylor, M. C. (2007). Evidence-based practice for occupational therapists (2
nd

ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Science.

Townsend, E. A., Polatajko, H. J., & Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. (2007). Enabling occupation II : advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being, & justice through occupation. Ottawa, Onc. : Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. Trombly, C. A., & Radomski, M. V. (2002). Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction (5 ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Turner, A., Foster, M., & Johnson, S. E. (2002). Occupational therapy and physical dysfunction: Principles, skills th and practice (5 ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. Unsworth, C. (2000). Measuring the outcome of occupational therapy: Tools and resources. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 47, 147-158. White, J. (1996). Occupational profile: An interview with David Hopper, financial manager of the Fringe Festival, Adelaide. Journal of Occupational Science: Australia, 3(1), 26-29. Young, M.E. & Quinn, E. (1992). Theories and principles of occupational therapy. London: Churchill Livingstone.
th

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 15 of 16

Assignment Cover Sheet

School of Science and Health
Student name: Student number: Unit name and number: Tutorial group: Tutorial day and time: Lecturer/Tutor: Title of assignment: Length: Date due: Date submitted: Campus enrolment:
Dr Rosalind Bye 400177 Professional Reasoning

Declaration: I hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged. I hereby certify that no part of this assignment or product has been copied from any other students work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made in the assignment. No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for me by any other person except where collaboration has been authorised by the subject lecturer/tutor concerned I am aware that this work may be reproduced and submitted to plagiarism detection software programs for the purpose of detecting possible plagiarism (which may retain a copy on its database for future plagiarism checking) Signature:______________________________________ Note: An examiner or lecturer/tutor has the right to not mark this assignment if the above declaration has not been signed.

Unit Number: 400177

Unit Name: Professional Reasoning

Semester: Autumn 2011

Page 16 of 16