Academic innovation in service of” what? The scope of North American occupational science doctoral graduates’ contributions from 1994–2015

Bibliographic Data

ID12644152
AuthorsRebecca M Aldrich (0000-0002-1297-3788, Associate Professor, Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Saint Louis University, Missouri, USA, corresponding author), Jyothi Gupta (Professor and Chair, Department of Occupational Therapy, A.T. Still University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, corresponding author), Debbie Laliberte Rudman (0000-0002-5486-8994, Professor, School of Occupational Therapy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume25
Issue2
Pages270-282
Publication date2017-08-17
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Occupational Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1442-7591 • E-ISSN: 2158-1576
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/14427591.2017.1365257
OpenAlexW2749826431
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited23

More than 100 people have graduated with occupational science doctoral degrees in North America. Accordingly, there is a body of work that can be examined to assess what qualities have characterized doctoral-level occupational science inquiry to-date. In this preliminary study, we performed a directed content analysis of 101 dissertation abstracts published between 1994 and 2015 from four occupational science doctoral programs in the United States and Canada. Our analysis explored the extent to which the 101 doctoral studies, as evidenced by their abstracts, directly contributed to knowledge of occupation or humans as occupational beings. Our findings suggested that 40 studies made a direct contribution, 29 made an indirect contribution, and 32 made no contribution to the study of occupation or humans as occupational beings. Additional analyses revealed that studies in the direct and indirect categories relied heavily (80% and 69%, respectively) on qualitative methodologies, whereas studies in the no contribution category were more evenly split across qualitative (37%) and quantitative (47%) methodologies. A variety of topics and themes characterized studies in each category, and further research on 92 doctoral students’ post-graduation publications showed that 50 made contributions to occupational science’s knowledge base through published articles or book chapters. The findings from this preliminary inquiry provide a basis to critically reflect on the goals, outcomes, and functions of occupational science doctoral education as well as how the discipline has developed through doctoral work within evolving academic, scientific, and political landscapes

Doctoral dissertation · Engineering ethics · Graduation (instrument · Higher education · Knowledge base · Medical education · Occupational science · Political science · Qualitative research · Scope (computer science · Social science · Sociology · Variety (cybernetics · Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders · Delphi Technique in Research · Engineering · Medicine · Occupational Therapy Practice and Research · Psychology · Occupational Therapy

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub