|
Post by Brian G on Feb 17, 2015 11:43:59 GMT
Too many teachers bash on Wikipedia, say it's not authoritative, that anyone can change it. Yes, it is, and that is exactly the point. Proponents of Wikipedia argue that, at least in matters of science and medicine, Wikipedia is more current than any textbook, is edited by more people than any textbook, and is easier to read. Prove it to your self. Read your text and power points on diabetic ketoacidosis. How long did you spend and how much do you understand? Now read the Wiki article on the same subject. 10, 15 minutes? Maybe a little more if you followed any of the links for words you didn't understand? (pretty neat feature, huh?) And it makes a whole lot more sense now than the text did. Powerpoints are typically a collection of incomplete bullet statements that don't mean anything. The bullets don't stand on their own. If you use the powerpoint like they are intended-go read and research each bullet statement, you can get something out of it, but doing that takes a LOT of time. I would argue that it is more important to tackle a subject, like ketoacidosis, and learn the pathophysiology behind it. If you understand what is happening, you can figure out what you, the nurse, should be doing about it. This is a much better strategy than memorizing a bunch of facts.
|
|