Search

Occupational therapy education accreditation standards require lived experience involvement in curriculum design, delivery and evaluation, and alignment with contemporary policy and practice. Current mental health policy emphasises recovery and lived experience involvement in services, policy, research and education. Lived experience involvement in education requires significant investment, but there is limited evidence, and the added value for consumers’ recovery remains unclear. The aim of this research was to explore how lived experience involvement might add value to curriculum design and evaluation in occupational therapy education. A two phase participatory exploratory mixed methods design was employed. First mental health consumers’ curriculum priorities and preferred modes of involvement in occupational therapy education were explored through an eDelphi (n=28) and qualitative interviews (n=16). Interview data were analysed using thematic analysis. Building on this, an outcome measure was developed through an iterative process of pilot testing with students and content validity evaluation using a content validity index. The researchers partnered with a Lived Experience Expert Reference Group whose views were privileged throughout the research. A core capability framework comprising knowing, doing and being/becoming was developed through the eDelphi and qualitative interviews. Consumers desired active and influential roles in all stages of the curriculum. An outcome measure reflecting the core capabilities and curriculum priorities was developed, was acceptable to students in pilot testing and had satisfactory content validity (S-CVI=0.9). The Lived Experience Expert Reference Group model reflected good practice principles. The core capabilities offer a lived experience informed approach to curriculum design, address important gaps in occupational therapists’ priorities and contribute to curricula that integrate professional and lived experience knowledge. The outcome measure has potential to evaluate learning and promote curriculum coherence, deepening students’ learning about capabilities to support recovery. University investment in mental health lived experience involvement is warranted and adds value for students, educators, employers and consumers.

All professional preparation programs need to ensure that university curricula remain reflective of current practice, and also prepare graduates for practice in the future. Upon formation, the Australia and New Zealand Occupational Therapy Mental Health Academics (ANZOTMHA) network identified that there was insufficient or poorly organised information available about how well current occupational therapy curricula prepared students for practice in the field of mental health. One of the first priorities established by ANZOTMHA was to undertake a program of research to examine this issue. The aim of this report is to summarise and integrate the outcomes of two inter-related studies to explore the extent to which current occupational therapy university curricula in Australia and New Zealand match educational priorities identified by practising occupational therapists in mental health.

usc Refereed/Peer-reviewed Introduction: Recovery-oriented practice policies and occupational therapy education accreditation standards require that consumers are engaged in the design, delivery and evaluation of curricula. This consumer involvement (sometimes referred to as service-user involvement or patient involvement in other contexts) should go beyond consumers simply ‘telling their stories’ to more meaningful collaboration in curricula. This study was designed to map the current patterns of consumer involvement in occupational therapy programs across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. Method: A survey was distributed to all occupational therapy programs across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. The survey included questions related to: (a) perceived enablers and barriers to consumer involvement in education; (b) organisational structures and support; (c) ways in which consumer are involved in the design, delivery and evaluation of curricula; (d) access to remuneration for consumers; (e) overall ratings of the level of consumer involvement in curricula; and (f) academic confidence in working with consumers. Results: Usable responses were received for 23 programs from 19 universities (83% response rate). Every program reported some consumer involvement in the curriculum. Consumer participation tended to be mainly focussed on curriculum delivery with less frequent involvement in curriculum design or evaluation. The most common barrier to consumer involvement in curricula was ‘funding/remuneration for consumers’ and the most common enabler of consumer involvement was ‘positive attitudes of teaching staff’. Conclusion: In comparison to previous reports, consumer involvement in occupational therapy curricula has increased over the past decade. However, ongoing effort is required to support true collaboration in all aspects of curriculum design, delivery and evaluation. While this will require attention and effort from academic teams, changes at a university level to establish systems to engage and effectively remunerate consumers for their involvement (especially in design and evaluation elements) are also required.

Background/aim: Occupational therapy programs must prepare graduates for work in mental health. However, this area of practice is complex and rapidly changing. This study explored the alignment between educational priorities identified by occupational therapists practising in mental health and level of coverage of these topics in occupational therapy programs in Australia and New Zealand. Methods: Surveys were distributed to heads of all occupational therapy programs across Australia and New Zealand. The survey included educational priorities identified by occupational therapists in mental health from a previous study. Respondents were requested to identify the level of coverage given to each of these priorities within their curriculum. These data were analysed to determine a ranking of educational topics in terms of level of coverage in university programs. Results: Responses were received for 19 programs from 16 universities. Thirty-four topics were given High-level coverage' in university programs, and these were compared against the 29 topics classified as Essential priorities' by clinicians. Twenty topics were included in both the Essential priorities' and High-level coverage' categories. Topics considered to be Essential priorities' by clinicians which were not given High-level coverage' in university programs included the following: mental health fieldwork experiences; risk assessment and management; professional self-care resilience and sensory approaches. Conclusion: While there appears to be overall good alignment between mental health curricula and priorities identified by practising occupational therapists, there are some discrepancies. These discrepancies are described and establish a strong foundation for further discussion between clinicians, academics and university administration to support curriculum review and revision. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

The aim of this report is to summarise and integrate the outcomes of two inter-related studies to explore the extent to which current occupational therapy university curricula in Australia and New Zealand match educational priorities identified by practising occupational therapists in mental health.