1,308
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

The relationship between resilience, reflective thinking and professionalism in Australian undergraduate occupational therapy students

, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 229-241 | Received 27 Jan 2021, Accepted 22 Mar 2021, Published online: 08 Apr 2021
 

Abstract

Background

Professionalism is a key attribute that occupational therapy students must establish throughout their education. Resilience and reflective thinking are two skills that may underpin students’ professionalism.

Objective

To investigate whether resilience and reflective thinking are predictive of undergraduate occupational therapy students’ professionalism.

Methods

152 occupational therapy undergraduate students completed the Professionalism Assessment Tool (PAT); the Resilience at University Scale (RAU); and the Reflective Thinking Scale (RTS). Regression analyses with bootstrapping were completed.

Results

Regression models revealed that multiple domains of resilience and reflective thinking were predictive of the following professionalism variables: Reliability, Responsibility and Accountability (R2=0.080, p = 0.002); Lifelong Learning and Adaptability (R2=0.084, p = 0.01); Relationships with Others (R2=0.046, p = 0.03); and Citizenship and Professional Engagement (R2=0.110, p = 0.004). Common independent variables among these models included RTS Reflection, RAU Managing Stress and RAU Finding Your Calling.

Conclusions and significance

This preliminary evidence revealed that when working together, factors of resilience and reflective thinking were predictive of occupational therapy student professionalism. Incorporating a greater focus on these skills into the occupational therapy education curriculum may help enhance student professionalism. Further research on resilience and reflective thinking, and the potential links to professionalism, is recommended.

Acknowledgements

The authors of the study would like to acknowledge and thank the occupational therapy students who volunteered their time to participate in the study.

Author contributions

M. George, T. Brown, M. Yu: Conceptualization; Design; Data curation; Formal analysis; Investigation; Methodology; Project administration; Resources; Software; Supervision; Validation; Roles/Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing; Approval of final submitted version.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The data collection phase of this study was funded by the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences Learning & Teaching Research Grant Scheme 2019, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access
  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart
* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.