Thanks for all your answers, you have been helping a lot
I tried enough times but didn’t get any better so I decided to post it here:
However, the education (formal and continued) in the sector of health rarely privileges an approach that enables the students and professionals the opportunity of experience actively the learning as knowledge construction, by means of the reflection about its own experiences, as well as the active participation in studies, inquiries and chat forums. On the other hand, the dissemination of new scientific knowledge is little oriented for the practice professional, having also a long period of lag between its production and diffusion and its integration at the health daily services. Of the pedagogical point of view, training programs participants are displayed to the education methods that lead to the passivity and the superficiality, as well as to the absence of creativity, curiosity and comprehension about the case and the lively experiences.
um whats this for? it seems well written to me
Creative Thinking, Innovation, Creativity Training
#1 by commondelicacy on July 30, 2009 - 8:46 pm
Quote
um whats this for? it seems well written to me
References :
#2 by theodora on July 30, 2009 - 9:27 pm
Quote
you`re funny….
References :
#3 by mocatz1 on July 30, 2009 - 10:16 pm
Quote
I think it’s trying to say:
students persuing health education have problems. Like they don’t "actively" learn meaning they just sit in lectures and don’t get the benefits of hands-on expierence. On the other hand, there is new scientific advances that can change the way people learn in the health profession.
Yeah, that was poorly written by some over zealous grad student.
References :
#4 by Canute on July 30, 2009 - 10:28 pm
Quote
Regardless of the subject, and without reference to what has been written previously, could you explain this phrase better?
References :
#5 by Michael H on July 30, 2009 - 10:56 pm
Quote
Its waffle.
using words like dissemination, oriented, diffusion, integration, passivity etc just confuses the whole message.
re-write it in simple English. using long words for the sake of it doesn’t fool anyone.
You should be able to half that text and still get the same message across.
References :
#6 by sacanda_trina on July 30, 2009 - 11:02 pm
Quote
In the health fields of study, both formal and continued education, there are few other approaches that allow the students and professionals to experience the knowledge construction, by means of one reflecting even about that experience itself, as well as the opportunity to participate actively in chat forums, inquiries and studies.
Alternatively, the distribution of new scientific information is hardly geared for the practice professional, having a long interval between its formation and dispersal, and its incorporation at the health daily services.
Of the academic point of view, training program participants are displayed to the education methods that lead to the tameness and the ostentation, as well as to the lack of imagination, inquisitiveness, and understanding about the case and the lively experiences.
References :
#7 by zhrike on July 30, 2009 - 11:17 pm
Quote
Oh … my … god. This was filtered through an online translator service, wasn’t it? I’ll try to rewrite it based on what I kinda-sorta think it means.
First sentence (two attempts):
1- "However, both formal and continuing health education often lack active learning processes; reflection on experience, and participation in studies, inquiries and forums."
Note: What is left? Lecture? If this is what it’s saying you ought to say this:
2- "Health education is delivered via lecture, which is the least efficacious mode of instruction, ignoring cooperative and interactive methods such as group participation in studies (I assume it means group), inquiries, forums, and time for open reflection upon previous experience."
Second sentence: (by the way, the use of "however" to begin the paragraph is dependent upon what lies before, and by using "on the other hand" to open the second sentence it seems that it is objecting to its opening objection.
"New discoveries in scientific knowledge have little relevance to the practicing professional, as the process of dissemination and vetting delays its implementation in daily health care services."
That last sentence … I don’t know what the hell it is trying to say. I’ll try anyway …
"Due to the aforementioned factors, this pedagogical approach leads to a reduction in the critical thinking abilities of participants; they become passive in application, and lack the foundation for creativity, curiosity, and comprehension."
Hopefully you can take this an tailor it to what is attempting to be said … but do not plagiarize!
References :
#8 by booklady on July 30, 2009 - 11:59 pm
Quote
However, formal and continuing education in the health sector (really, don’t use ‘sector of health’!) rarely promotes an approach which gives students or professionals an active learning experience, such as would be gained by reflecting on their experiences and particpating in discussions. (Not sure what your first two categories ‘studies’ and ‘inquiries’ refer to, so I’ve condensed the concept). (I don’t think there’s a contrast, so I wouldn’t use ‘on the other hand’) The dissemination of new scientific knowledge is inappropriate for the practice professional because of the delay between its creation, diffusion, and integration in everyday health care services. From the pedagogical point of view (not ‘of’), particpants in training programmes are exposed to methods of education which lead to a passive and superficial approach and do not promote creativity, curiosity and comprehension of real-life cases.
I’m now getting really curious about which language you’re translating from, by the way.
References :
#9 by Taganan on July 31, 2009 - 12:09 am
Quote
Try this:
However, both formal and continued education in the health sector rarely gives the privelege of an approach which enables the students and professionals the opportunity to actively experience the learning as constructive knowledge, by reflecting upon their own experiences, as well as the active participation in studies, inquiries and chat forums. On the other hand, the dissemination of new scientific knowledge is seldom oriented toward the practicing professional, having a long lagtime between its production, diffusion and its integration into the daily health care services. In the pedagogical point of view, training programs are displayed to participants using methods which lead to passivity and superficiality, as well as to the absence of creativity, curiosity and comprehension about the case and the use of real-life experiences.
—Have no idea what this is about, but it reads smoother. Is English your native language? Hope it helps. Let me know.
References :
Aced creative writing.
#10 by Sleepwalker on July 31, 2009 - 12:58 am
Quote
However, the current education (formal and continued) in the health sector rarely encourages active or reflective learning.
In addition new scientific knowledge is seldom swiftly disseminated to practicing professionals as there is a long period between discovery and integration into general health service practice.
From a pedagogical point of view, participants in training programs generally have passive and unimaginative experiences due to the design of courses that do not encourage curiousity or questioning and rarely test comprehension of the material.
References :
#11 by maestra on July 31, 2009 - 1:36 am
Quote
I feel that the educational system in the sector of health is getting better here in the US. Technology, namely, computer, web, has opened up a whole new area for medical research. yes, active participation by the students by utilising hands on increases student’s knowledge. Students are getting excited in the medical field about their careers.
References :