Understanding the Discursive Development of Occupation: Historico‐Political Perspectives

Decolonising occupational science education through learning activities based on a study from the Global South

“…Occupational science curricula have been colonised by biomedical, individualised, and ethnocentric approaches, which have so far been taken for granted (Gerlach et al, 2018;Simaan, 2018). For example, most of the occupational science literature reports on research and theory production from the Global North (i.e., English-speaking white scholars); research and education centre on the idea of independence for the individual person; and scholars value the study of certain daily occupations such as those that produce income over those that do not (Kantartzis, 2017;Kantartzis & Molineux, 2012).…”

Experiences of occupational therapy education: contexts, communities and social occupational therapy

“…Broader perspectives of occupational performance and engagement, such as a transactional perspective of occupation (Cutchin & Dickie, 2013;Dickie et al, 2006;Lavalley, 2017), critical occupational therapy perspectives (Hammell, 2006(Hammell, , 2015aHammell & Iwama, 2012;Gerlach, 2015) and a capabilities approach to occupational therapy practice (Bailliard, 2016;Hammell, 2015b) are then introduced and subsequently the contexts (social, cultural, physical, institutional) are explored, from the micro to the macro, in order for students to understand the situatedness (Galvaan, 2015;Madsen & Josephsson, 2017) of occupational performance and engagement. Students are introduced to neoliberalism as an all-pervasive ideology (Ganti, 2014), capitalism as an economic system, and the Protestant work ethic (Kantartzis & Molineux, 2012), and are guided through a process of understanding how these aspects of Western society (and their historical development) interact with other contextual factors to impact occupational performance and engagement and occupational therapy practice (Kantartzis & Molineux, 2012;Hammell, 2010). Students are first guided in critically reflecting on how these concepts impact their own occupational performance and engagement as well as how they may impact occupational performance and engagement for marginalized groups within society, such as refugees and asylum seekers, Australia's First Nations People, disabled people, women, people of cultural and racial diversity, and people living in poverty.…”

Occupational therapy and occupational science: building critical and transformative alliances

“…This model of science has reinforced the dichotomy of science and practice, setting limits on what has come to be viewed as the legitimate role or domain of occupational science and creating tensions when attempting to address issues of occupational and social injustice FRANK, 2012). As well, an apolitical, ahistorical approach has been dominant, so that occupations are most often understood as they appear in the here-and-now and as separate from political considerations, with a neglect of how historical conditions shape occupational possibilities, social power relations produce inequities, or how occupation itself is used as means to govern particular groups (GALVAAN, 2012;RUDMAN, 2014;KANTARTZIS;MOLINEUX, 2012). It also has been argued that given historical and contextual features of occupational science, including the dominance of English, geographical and professional roots, and its largely female composition, assumptions guiding research, particularly regarding occupations that are seen as worthy of study and those that are de-valued or neglected, have been tied to a feminized, Anglophonic and middle class view (GALHEIGO, 2011;KIEPEK;PHELAN;MAGALHÃES, 2014;KANTARTZIS;MOLINEUX, 2012).…”