|
About this database
Welcome to the ENOTHE Terminology Project Group webpage. Here you can have access to the outcome of the work developed so far.
Further languages are welcome. If you want to include your language in this database website you should follow the protocol for translation available at ENOTHE webpage for Terminology project 2 under Tuning and Quality theme.
Background
In the ENOTHE publication, An exploration of OT (2000), one of the biggest problems for the profession was identified as language differences between members and the lack of uniformity in occupational therapy terminology. Most of the occupational therapy literature is written in English, making it difficult for non-English speakers to access, and translations have not always been consistent.
One of the stated objectives of ENOTHE for the years 2001-2004 was 'to create uniformity and make the terminology accessible for non-English speaking occupational therapists and lecturers by producing 'a glossary of occupational therapy terminology in four languages'. This glossary should 'relate to the most used models and theories at the moment in education in at least four languages'. In order to carry out this work programme, ENOTHE decided to organise a working group of occupational therapists from several countries in Europe to work on terminology.
This project fitted within the theme of harmonisation and quality assurance in occupational therapy education and was carried out from 2001 to 2004. The work was intended to be the first step in an ongoing programme of terminology development.
According to the new ENOTHE projects for the period 2005-2008, since autumn 2004 the Terminology Project Group has continued their previous work under a new project name: Conceptual Basis of European Occupational Therapy Terminology.
Aims
To develop a common understanding and harmonization of occupational therapy terminology to enhance the communication of occupational therapists in Europe.
The specific goals to reach this overall aim are:
1. Create consensus definitions in English of essential terms used in occupational therapy, based on occupational therapy literature in different languages;
2. Translate these consensus definitions into the languages represented by the group members;
3. Develop an interactive web site to make the resulting information accessible via the Internet. This website will provide a valuable resource to enable clearer communication and comparison between national and international terminology.
The aim is not to create a new framework of occupational therapy terms, or to achieve uniformity, but to reach consensus on individual definitions.
Methodology used by the group
1. Choice of language for the working group.
At the first meeting of the group, the decision was taken to use English as the working language of the group and to produce the consensus definitions in English.
2. Selection of terms to define.
The decision was taken not to use a specific model or theory to frame the discussions. Group members also agreed not to define terms, such as model, frame of reference and reasoning that are not core occupational therapy terminology. The group chose five terms representing core concepts in occupational therapy to begin their work. These were: activity, function, occupation, occupational performance and occupational therapy. Once work began, the group decided not to define occupational therapy because each country already has its own national definition. When consensus definitons had been agreed for the first four terms, seven new ones were selected. These were: task, skill, occupational performance component, occupational performance environment, role, occupational performance area and ability.
3. Sources of definitions.
Literature is used from national occupational therapy associations, the World Health Organization and the World Federation of Occupational Therapists. Group members then identify the textbooks and journal articles that are commonly used within their own schools that include definitions of the terms.
4. Collection of definitions.
Definitions of the selected terms are sought from the available literature. Original definitions in languages other than English are translated into English. Definitions in other languages that are direct translations of English definitions are not used.
5. Collation of definitions.
Definitions collected in the participating countries are collated on spreadsheets so that they can be compared and analysed.
6. Identification of elements.
Members of the group identify key concepts contained within each definition. These concepts are listed and compared with other concepts, within the same definition and across definitions, in order to produce a comprehensive list of concepts from all the definitions.
7. Construction of consensus definitions.
Through analysis of the elements, the group construct a definition of each term that contains the concepts that appear most frequently in the original definitions.
8. Translation.
Consensus definitions are translated into the languages of the working group by group members. Validation of the translations is achieved by consulting national experts drawn from national associations, educational institutions and clinical settings. In some languages, more than one word can be substituted for the key term. For example, occupation can be translated in German as Handlungen, Betätigungen and Tätigkeiten.
9. Development of protocol for including further languages.
In order to enable the inclusion of further languages, a procedure has been designed to facilitate the process of translation, quality assurance and inclusion on the website. This procedure includes identifying experts who are recognised by the ENOTHE Board, approving the translation by national associations and/or ENOTHE member schools and providing a back translation if required by ENOTHE.
10. In recent years, the theory base of occupational therapy has been developing and expanding rapidly, driven by changes in modes of service delivery, advances in the discipline of occupational science and an increasing political awareness within the profession. New terms are being coined or adopted to represent the new concepts that underpin these theoretical developments: for example, occupational alienation, occupational justice and occupational apartheid. Some of these terms have come into use so recently that there is not yet, within occupational therapy, a substantial body of literature from which consensus definitions can be constructed. Until consensus definitions are developed, a definition of each term has been selected from the occupational therapy literature for use within the terminology project.
Group members
Joaquim Faias (since October 2001)
Escola Superior de Tecnologia da Saúde do Porto, Portugal.
Johanna Stadler-Grillmaier (since April 2002)
Akademie fur Ergotherapie, Vienna, Austria.
Sylvie Meyer (since April 2002)
HES-SO Haute école de travail social et de la santé, Switzerland.
Miguel Brea (since October 2002)
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Jennifer Creek (since July 2003)
Freelance, England, United Kingdom.
Hilde Pitteljon (since September 2005)
Katholieke Hogeschool Brugge-Oostende, Belgium.
Sarah Kantarzis (since October 2001 until October 2006)
Technological Educational Institution of Athens, Greece.
Lylia Todorova
Link person to the Board, Bulgaria.
View registered terms
- Consensus terms in English: Here
- Choose another language: Here
|
|