Abstract
In this study, the author reviewed 32 studies, published inThe Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling(AJRC) from 1995 to 2000, that examined the authors' theoretical perspectives and how the authors and/or rehabilitation counsellors (RCs) as research participants defined quality practice. Their theoretical perspectives ranged from systems, psychological and psychosocial theories and specific disability or minority group issues. These theoretical perspectives were examined in relation to the methods of quality practice advocated by AJRC authors and/or their RC-research participants, these being: relationship building, assessment, goal setting, affective and vocational counselling, case management, self-care, and evaluation of services. Notwithstanding a commendable diversity in the range of theory and quality practice reported, several AJRC authors observed a lack of clarity regarding the professional identity of RCs; and the research papers lacked consistency and clarity in defining the characteristics of RC-participants. There were also opposing views concerning where RCs stood in relation to other stakeholders in the rehabilitation process. Further research is recommended to better understand the diversity evident in the roles and functions of Australian RCs in different rehabilitation settings.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
