Community College Selection Process-What A Joke! - page 3

I am one of those middle-aged students who just applied for the Nursing Program at my local college. I was very careful to pick a college that based their selection process on merit. However, the... Read More

  1. by   okikuma
    First thing Tim, It's not the fault of the overseas nurses desire to come and earn more or have a better opportunity for themselves or families. That is not even an issue.

    Second, the hospital I work at pay overseas sponsored nurse the same hourly rate and give the same benefits as an "American" nurse; as they should. To pay less or provide less benefits solely because someone is hired from outside the US is illegal and immoral. If any hospital does that, they will get caught and pay the price.

    My point is your difficulty in becoming a nurse is because they way the system is set up. It's not your fault, It's deefinitely not any of the overseas nurses fault.
  2. by   Sheri257
    Quote from okikuma
    So, since there is a "shortage" of nurses, where do they find some? Well some come from the local nursing school, yes, but most are recruited from overseas. God love 'em, these recruited off shore nurses want to be good nurses, work hard so they can help provide family back home.
    I'm no fan of foreign nurse situation, but to say there's some conspiracy to hire foreign nurses by the BRN is somewhat absurd. Most hires aren't foreign nurses.

    According to the BRN, CA nursing schools put out roughly 7,000 graduates a year. And, in just the last 17 months, 37,000 new RN's have been licensed in California with a lot of those new licensees coming from out of state.

    Meanwhile, only 3,400 foreign nurses apply for licensure here each year, and not all of them stay here. Some of them apply to Cali to get their initial license but then they endorse into another state.

    Estimates vary but it costs a hospital anywhere from $6K to $25K to hire a foreign nurse, with the average cost being somewhere around $15K. So, while they can and do save money with foreign nurses, it may not always be as much as we think it is.

    Quote from okikuma
    The past ten years in California, many Univeristies had dropped their BSN programs. The state BON stop accepting Excelsior College graduates in 2004 (where as 50% of all nursing graduates in California came from Excelsior College alone, the other 50% came from all the ADN and BSN programs within the state combined).
    Again, I think your numbers are wrong. As I recall, the total number of Excelsior students in the state was roughly 5,000. But certainly not all of them were ready to graduate all at the same time.

    Even if you assume half of them did graduate at the same time (which would be a really high number) at 2,500 students, that wouldn't be anywhere near the 7,000 graduates the 100 or so Cali nursing programs put out each year.

    With all of the incentive bonuses and increased pay hospitals have had to offer to attract more nurses, it doesn't make any sense that the hospitals would actually be behind a conspiracy to manufacture the shortage.

    With an average hospital RN vacancy rate of 15 percent, the shortage is actually costing them ... not saving them money.

    :typing
    Last edit by Sheri257 on Dec 7, '06
  3. by   Sheri257
    Quote from okikuma
    Second, the hospital I work at pay overseas sponsored nurse the same hourly rate and give the same benefits as an "American" nurse; as they should. To pay less or provide less benefits solely because someone is hired from outside the US is illegal and immoral. If any hospital does that, they will get caught and pay the price.
    Actually, that's not completely true either. This is how it works.

    Let's say a hospital pays low wages and doesn't want to raise their staff pay. The U.S. Labor Department says those low wages are ok because their data is often out of date by two years or more, and often doesn't keep up with increased market wages in the area.

    The hospital can't hire U.S. nurses at those low wages because the RN's go to the better paying hospitals. So, instead of raising their pay to attract U.S. nurses, that's when you see the hospitals hiring foreign nurses at the low pay rates set by the Labor Dept.

    They are paying the foreign nurses the same as the U.S. staff nurses BUT ... the overall pay at that hospital is still low for the marketplace at large. That's how they save money and keep wages low legally.

    Do all hospitals do this? No. Some hospitals still pay good wages and hire foreign nurses and some hospitals don't hire foreign nurses at all.

    But the hospitals who pay the lowest wages, at least in my area, also tend to be the hospitals that hire the most foreign nurses.

    :typing
    Last edit by Sheri257 on Dec 7, '06
  4. by   sunnyjohn
    Why is it that so many threads seem to turn on "foreign nurses"?

    If I didn't know better I would think tht most US nurses dislike nurses from other countries. (I do know better)

    Because of my of background I know many,many healthcare workers in the US from all over the world.

    A few where taken advantage of by agencies and hospitals when they first came. NONE of them are still working for those cheats.

    As a proud American with a foot in two cultures, it sometimes hurts me.
  5. by   sunnyjohn
    Tim,

    I read your story. I do hope you get accepted very soon.

    If you already have a Bachelor's I would suggest you check out a direct-entry MSN-RN program for non-nurses. You sound like a perfect fit for that type of program.
  6. by   Tim1957
    Quote from sunnyjohn
    Tim,

    I read your story. I do hope you get accepted very soon.

    If you already have a Bachelor's I would suggest you check out a direct-entry MSN-RN program for non-nurses. You sound like a perfect fit for that type of program.
    I am not quite there yet. But I will be back in after the Holidays and working toward my Bachelor's. I came from a family that did not value a college education. So as a consequence, it took me longer than most to get to this point. It has always been my intention to take this beyond an ADN. I had an email from a very close friend that helped me develop some perspective. I am now looking at the entire picture.
  7. by   Tim1957
    Quote from FutureNurse35
    I learned you never put all your eggs in one basket.
    Tim, I hope you get accepted to a program so you can accomplish your goal of becoming a nurse. Good luck to you.
    Good Point!!!

    I did put all my eggs in one basket there for a while. That's not a very good thing to do.
  8. by   Tim1957
    Quote from sunnyjohn
    Why is it that so many threads seem to turn on "foreign nurses"?

    If I didn't know better I would think tht most US nurses dislike nurses from other countries. (I do know better)

    Because of my of background I know many,many healthcare workers in the US from all over the world.

    A few where taken advantage of by agencies and hospitals when they first came. NONE of them are still working for those cheats.

    As a proud American with a foot in two cultures, it sometimes hurts me.
    I think it is out of frustration. I really do not think it is out of a dislike. If those who have the power would invest into our own infrastructure, then we would not be having discussions about it.

    As for myself, I just want to see a better environment for those who aspire to enter this profession. As we have compassion toward those who are in need of care, I believe that our own government needs to have compassion toward us that desire to acheive.
  9. by   PACNWNURSING
    I have to agree that is awful.... I too at 43, have to start all over, I am working full time and have two kids.. There is no way I can compete with a person fresh out of high School with no other responsibilities and expect myself to make an A in every course... The reality is this is not med school or an engineering school.... So what do you do to the person who has an average of 3.0? Shoud we keep them from acheiving their goal and dream. What about the students who have Bachelors or Master degrees already but only had 3.0 overall GPA... Why should they be penalized and have to retake courses all over again? The reality is, 50% of students end up droping out of their nursing programs, the majority of the class having students with 3.5-4.0 averages... Its not because of their inability to do the academic work, but because of the amount of time the nursing programs require between book work and clinicals.... Then you have a good number of students who drop during the first week of clinicals, because they have to deal with sick people, who vomit, bleed, pee and have bowl movements, and they realize shows such as Grays Anatomy, and House are not real... The issue is very complex and I do not think there is an easy solution.... Best of luck to you and all the future nurses !!!!!!
  10. by   Testa Rosa, RN
    It's just counter intuitive that there aren't seats for 3.0+ students within a nursing shortage. But, I don't feel it's some sort of conspiracy. These classes are just plain harder to administrate, staff and teach. Several Bay Area hospitals have subsidized BSN and ADN programs on local extention campuses, so it's clear that the intent is to grow/hire locally.

    As an older prenursing student and a mom of three (3, 7 and 12 years old), I am concerned that nursing school may not be able to afford me the scheduling flexibility I may need.

    Not all students lead simple "live with the parents" lives that allow them to focus completely on school anymore--even the 20 year-olds! This is why I'm not even looking at the accelerated programs. I'm shaking in my boots wondering how I am going to manage a regular 2-3 year nursing program.

    So far I've been able to keep up with the pressure to earn high grades by only taking two or three courses a semester, and allowing myself the rare B when an A grade would have cost too family time.

    Given my maturity, solid professional and academic background, and the fact I've dealt with so many medical issues within my own life, I have a lot to offer the nursing profession. I have a great husband who is my biggest support and cheerleader. I know I have the drive and determination to make it all swing together. But unfortunately it will come at a sacrifice of worry free time with my kids. It will benefit them in the long run, but I wish it wouldn't have to be at such a great price.

    It's a shame there aren't more seats within more flexible programs. Let's make a commitment not forget how we felt at this point in time; Maybe one day we can all be part of advocating and creating change with the current feeder system for nurses.

    I for one wouldn't mind becoming a teacher in later years. Sort of what I became within my prior career, so it's reasonable I will follow the same progression with nursing.

    Of course, these are just my random day dreams for now. Will take it one day at a time. Back to the books.

    Is it just me, or does this online forum stuff become very seductive when studying for finals?
  11. by   Tim1957
    Quote from Bertolozzi
    It's just counter intuitive that there aren't seats for 3.0+ students within a nursing shortage. But, I don't feel it's some sort of conspiracy. These classes are just plain harder to administrate, staff and teach. Several Bay Area hospitals have subsidized BSN and ADN programs on local extention campuses, so it's clear that the intent is to grow/hire locally.

    As an older prenursing student and a mom of three (3, 7 and 12 years old), I am concerned that nursing school may not be able to afford me the scheduling flexibility I may need.

    Not all students lead simple "live with the parents" lives that allow them to focus completely on school anymore--even the 20 year-olds! This is why I'm not even looking at the accelerated programs. I'm shaking in my boots wondering how I am going to manage a regular 2-3 year nursing program.

    So far I've been able to keep up with the pressure to earn high grades by only taking two or three courses a semester, and allowing myself the rare B when an A grade would have cost too family time.

    Given my maturity, solid professional and academic background, and the fact I've dealt with so many medical issues within my own life, I have a lot to offer the nursing profession. I have a great husband who is my biggest support and cheerleader. I know I have the drive and determination to make it all swing together. But unfortunately it will come at a sacrifice of worry free time with my kids. It will benefit them in the long run, but I wish it wouldn't have to be at such a great price.

    It's a shame there aren't more seats within more flexible programs. Let's make a commitment not forget how we felt at this point in time; Maybe one day we can all be part of advocating and creating change with the current feeder system for nurses.

    I for one wouldn't mind becoming a teacher in later years. Sort of what I became within my prior career, so it's reasonable I will follow the same progression with nursing.

    Of course, these are just my random day dreams for now. Will take it one day at a time. Back to the books.

    Is it just me, or does this online forum stuff become very seductive when studying for finals?
    Seductive? Maybe. However, I remember how down I was just a few days ago when I started this topic. And all of you have helped me to renew my strength. So yes, I believe it is seductive but also it helps to talk to others that share the same dream. I would say it is a lifeline.
  12. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Anthony Heyes, from the Univ. of London, issued a statistics paper a few years ago stating that a low paid nurse is a good nurse. There are a few threads about that paper here at all nurses.

    http://allnurses.com/forums/f195/doe...re-170851.html

    His points were RIGHT ON THE MONEY, pun intended. All things being equal, if the value of being 'called' is factored into our salaries, it will naturally exclude those that don't hold the value in being called.

    All things being equal . . .

    However, healthcare became 'cost centered' as opposed to 'patient centered' in the '80's. Rooted out of the equation was the time necessary for the average nurse to fulfill their 'calling'. And so, this vocational view of nursing became inadequate to meet the needs of nursing.

    That being the case, and it is, the usual rules apply: higher salaries equal better nursing because it draws more candidates into the profession and allows for competition to create a higher quality student, ultimately leading to a higher quality nurse.

    If you are an administrator and have some control over how community colleges recruit (you are on their boards, or on the board of nursing), AND, you are worried about the changing nature of nursing, slowly moving from a vocation (low pay) to a profession (commensurate pay), then it is vital to continue to cast nursing as a vocation.

    In order to do that, if you can't (or won't) fix the problems in the trenches that is serving to make nurses take a much closer look at the concept of vocational loyalty, then the solution is to tip the balance back towards vocationalism at the training level.

    In order to do that, you have to change the equation so that the schools themselves do not add to professionalism by recruiting only the top notch candidates for entry to the profession. A 'lottery' is the perfect tool to accomplish that goal.

    Lottery systems are merely another attempt to keep nursing vocational in nature and there is real value at stake in that: the ability to continue to pay 'vocational' type wages instead of professional wages.

    Denying opportunity for the best qualified candidates to move forward, in favor of a lottery of minimally qualified candidates, is an attempt to field a caste of nurses grateful for entry at all, and not nearly as committed to the science of nursing that will make our salaries rise.

    The selection process isn't a joke: it's an attempt to keep well qualified candidates, like the OP, out of the process, or at least, randomly subject to the process, in order to keep the balance in nursing AWAY from rising scientific qualifications that would lead to rising salaries, and with it, rising respect. In short, it's a direct attack on the professionalism of nursing.

    That's the bottom line, pun intended.

    The fact that nurses, as education adminstrators, buy into this reasoning either shows their leftest leanings (by instituting a socialism system of recruitment), or they are severely deluded about the rationale for implementing such a system (It's certainly not about 'fairness'). That, in my opinion, calls their very ability and aptitude to teach nursing into doubt. Why they aren't actively resisting and subverting such a system is beyond me except to say, whatever the Ivory Tower is smoking, it's a good thing they aren't subject to random drug testing, like the rest of us.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Dec 7, '06
  13. by   Tim1957
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA
    Anthony Heyes, from the Univ. of London, issued a statistics paper a few years ago stating that a low paid nurse is a good nurse. There are a few threads about that paper here at all nurses.

    http://allnurses.com/forums/f195/doe...re-170851.html

    His points were RIGHT ON THE MONEY, pun intended. All things being equal, if the value of being 'called' is factored into our salaries, it will naturally exclude those that don't hold the value in being called.

    All things being equal . . .

    However, healthcare became 'cost centered' as opposed to 'patient centered' in the '80's. Rooted out of the equation was the time necessary for the average nurse to fulfill their 'calling'. And so, this vocational view of nursing became inadequate to meet the needs of nursing.

    That being the case, and it is, the usual rules apply: higher salaries equal better nursing because it draws more candidates into the profession and allows for competition to create a higher quality student, ultimately leading to a higher quality nurse.

    If you are an administrator and have some control over how community colleges recruit (you are on their boards, or on the board of nursing), AND, you are worried about the changing nature of nursing, slowly moving from a vocation (low pay) to a profession (commensurate pay), then it is vital to continue to cast nursing as a vocation.

    In order to do that, if you can't (or won't) fix the problems in the trenches that is serving to make nurses take a much closer look at the concept of vocational loyalty, then the solution is to tip the balance back towards vocationalism at the training level.

    In order to do that, you have to change the equation so that the schools themselves do not add to professionalism by recruiting only the top notch candidates for entry to the profession. A 'lottery' is the perfect tool to accomplish that goal.

    Lottery systems are merely another attempt to keep nursing vocational in nature and there is real value at stake in that: the ability to continue to pay 'vocational' type wages instead of professional wages.

    Denying opportunity for the best qualified candidates to move forward, in favor of a lottery of minimally qualified candidates, is an attempt to field a caste of nurses grateful for entry at all, and not nearly as committed to the science of nursing that will make our salaries rise.

    The selection process isn't a joke: it's an attempt to keep well qualified candidates, like the OP, out of the process, or at least, randomly subject to the process, in order to keep the balance in nursing AWAY from rising scientific qualifications that would lead to rising salaries, and with it, rising respect. In short, it's a direct attack on the professionalism of nursing.

    That's the bottom line, pun intended.

    The fact that nurses, as education adminstrators, buy into this reasoning either shows their leftest leanings (by instituting a socialism system of recruitment), or they are severely deluded about the rationale for implementing such a system. That, in my opinion, calls their very ability and aptitude to teach nursing into doubt. Why they aren't actively resisting and subverting such a system is beyond me except to say, whatever the Ivory Tower is smoking, it's a good thing they aren't subject to random drug testing, like the rest of us.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Nice spin job there in that piece. I will just offer my opinion. Any system of selection that removes the right of self-determination away from the student and towards a system that uses a selection process based on a lottery for the purpose of socialization is profoundly corrupt and immoral. Any State Chancellor or Nursing School adminstrator who partakes in such an immoral process without a very active opposition has lost all perspective as it relates to professionalism and ethical conduct.

    I fear for the future of Nursing.

close