[jjjoy]

Originally Posted by traumahawk99

the problem with all of this is that an adn education is sufficient to do the job of bedside nursing.

good point

to argue that we need bsn as entry level to this profession because a 4 year degree is required in business or marketing or engineering is utter tomfoolery. what does this actually have to do with nursing? bartending is a profession, does this mean we should require a 4 year degree to tend bar?

I don't think it's utter tomfoolery, though perhaps somewhat tomfoolerish. Nursing and tending bar aren't exactly comparable professions.

How would you feel about high school teachers not needing a 4-year degree to teach? What about jr high teachers? Elementary? Kindergarten? Pre-school? The only one that doesn't require a 4-yr degree plus credentialling (usually adding a 5th year to one's basic education) is pre-school education. And while teachers don't get rich, they do get substantial raises for furthering their education without having to leave the classroom.

If all RNs needed BSNs (eventually) perhaps LPNs would be utilized even more in acute care and their programs expanded to cover more content and skills. After all, hospitals certainly won't line up to pay more to keep RNs at the bedside and RNs won't line up for crazy hospital work when they're qualified for other not-so-crazy nursing work that their BSN qualifies them for. LPNs would be glad to accept more responsibilities and higher pay.

I don't think a college degree should be required for all nursing jobs, but then I do think the different types of nursing jobs needs to be more clearly defined so that the level of education required for those different jobs is clear and rational. Now I'm dreaming!

[traumahawk99]

the focal point here is where the rubber meets the road. it's bedside nursing. that's where the mandatory bsn in being proposed, and that's where the tomfoolery lies.

and as far as bar tending and nursing being different professions.. that is exactly the point! marketing and business and computer programming and nursing are all very different professions. deciding that nursing should require a 4 year degree because another profession does is mixing apples and oranges and pears and bananas.

[pantheon]

[quote=Susan9608;2810194]Really? Then why all of this?
Helloooooooooo
I NEVER mentioned ADN programs with getting more clinical experience. I stated my particular Diploma program that was 3 years and that the 2nd week of school we were in the hospital. It gave us a huge advantage because we saw all areas of nursing because we had more experience clinically than a ADN or a BSN program. It took a little more time for my BSN friends to catch up to what the Diploma school had already taught us.

I was able to get experience in every field of nsg there is, even home care. I also got to go in the OR and see open heart surgery while the Surgeon explained step by step what he was doing.

This is in NJ and as you know NOT all Diploma programs or any program for that matter are the same. The fact my school is over 100 years old and still going speaks for itself.

Also a lot of people failed out. It was very tough. You had to get atleast an 80 on all nursing exams to pass! I was so prepared from this program that I got the minimum amount of questions on the N-CLEX which is 75 questions. I barely had to study because I was used to the schools high standards. Imagine getting a 79.3 and being told you failed or getting an 80 and being told that's a low "C"!

I'm almost done obtaining my BSN. My Diploma program always recommended getting a BSN, MSN, or even a PH.D so what's wrong with that Susan?

I just don't understand why you are so angry! Really, why are you so mad? If someone says to me your just finishing your BSN now? I don't get angry. I think "Hey I've been doing it better late than never!"

Sometimes when a person says negative things to me it goes in one ear and out the other. Life is too short. I worry more about my friend with Cardiomyopathy (IHSS). That is what's important. Who cares about some snide remark!

[suanna]

Been hearing this for 25 years and so far it ain't so.

[traumahawk99]

Originally Posted by jjjoy

How would you feel about high school teachers not needing a 4-year degree to teach? What about jr high teachers? Elementary? Kindergarten? Pre-school? The only one that doesn't require a 4-yr degree plus credentialling (usually adding a 5th year to one's basic education) is pre-school education. And while teachers don't get rich, they do get substantial raises for furthering their education without having to leave the classroom.

what does this have to do with the argument at hand (bedside nursing, where someone can be trained to do a complete and competent job at an adn level)? why would it matter how i felt about teaching qualifications? again, we are mixing oranges and apples. irrelevant comparison.

Originally Posted by jjjoy

If all RNs needed BSNs (eventually) perhaps LPNs would be utilized even more in acute care and their programs expanded to cover more content and skills. After all, hospitals certainly won't line up to pay more to keep RNs at the bedside and RNs won't line up for crazy hospital work when they're qualified for other not-so-crazy nursing work that their BSN qualifies them for. LPNs would be glad to accept more responsibilities and higher pay.

there is a shortage of those "not-so-crazy" nursing jobs where the bsn's are so desperately needed. in fact, there is already a whopping surplus of bsn's to fill those positions. so you're talking about making the profession smaller, so it can be a more exclusive club?

why do we need such "standardization" (and whose version of it)? we already have a standardized licensing requirement. it is the nclex exam. that some want to require a lot more fluff education in order to allow candidates to sit for this exam just doesn't make any sense whatsoever, giving the shortage of folks willing to work where the need actually is... at the bedside.

make no mistake. this move is a power grab by the self appointed pontificators in the university system. it's failed for the last 25 years, and it will fail for the next 25.

[chestrockwell]

personally, I think all nurses should have a bachelors degree at some point. It makes you a more well rounded person. But I disagree that a BSN is necessary as other degrees and majors provide enough liberal arts education.

[hpcat]

Originally Posted by jjjoy

good point



I don't think a college degree should be required for all nursing jobs, but then I do think the different types of nursing jobs needs to be more clearly defined so that the level of education required for those different jobs is clear and rational. Now I'm dreaming!

Good point. One LPN in my class is going to nursing school because his coworkers convinced him to get his RN - they said he's doing the same work as them but not seeing the same pay. I think hospitals et al fuzz those lines a bit to save money. Another case for standardization.

[twotrees2]

Originally Posted by chestrockwell

personally, I think all nurses should have a bachelors degree at some point. It makes you a more well rounded person. But I disagree that a BSN is necessary as other degrees and majors provide enough liberal arts education.

i am quite well rounded now-whole mind, soul, heart , AND body - i dont need a BSN to tell me that. ( before flaming see laughing face ) but serious;ly - i dont need a BSN to feel better.

[jjjoy]

Originally Posted by traumahawk99

what does this have to do with the argument at hand (bedside nursing, where someone can be trained to do a complete and competent job at an adn level)? why would it matter how i felt about teaching qualifications?

My point is that requiring a bachelor's degree (or above) isn't related to the necessary training to be competent at a certain job. A high school physics or English teacher doesn't NEED a bachelor's degree to be able to teach their subject well. An engineer or lawyer doesn't NEED a bachelor's degree to create a foundation for their professional work. But a bachelor's degree today is similar to a HS diploma of the past. A person could be perfectly literate without a HS diploma and someone could be illerate with a HS diploma, but for the most part, a HS diploma usually reflects at least a minimal level of literacy. Similarly, having earned a bachelor's means that the graduate PROBABLY has decent critical thinking skills and a FAIRLY well-rounded education. That's why some think that requiring a bachelor's degree would raise the image of nurses. No one could assume that nurses chose nursing because they couldn't cut it in university level classes! I'm not saying I totally agree, just that that's part of the argument for BSN as entry-level.

there is a shortage of those "not-so-crazy" nursing jobs where the bsn's are so desperately needed. in fact, there is already a whopping surplus of bsn's to fill those positions. so you're talking about making the profession smaller, so it can be a more exclusive club?

I realize that the real nursing shortage is in regard to bedside jobs. That's my main problem with the push for BSN to entry. I think it would make it MORE difficult to fill bedside RN positions. I do think there is a push from within nursing academia to distance itself from the generic staff nurse, instead emphasizing advanced practice and health promotion roles (occupational health, public health, etc). And this push is to the detriment of nursing as a whole. If they continue to leave staff nurses behind, staff nurses will leave (and are leaving) them behind. And LPNs or MAs or some other "new" health professional role may fill in the gap.

why do we need such "standardization" (and whose version of it)? we already have a standardized licensing requirement. it is the nclex exam.

.

Personally, I don't think the NCLEX is a good measurement of a person's readiness to start clinical nursing. And I think nursing school tries to impart WAY too much information in too little time. I just don't think it's possible to prepare a nurse to be ready to work in all of the different nursing specialities out there, even just within the hospital setting. In just two short years, nursing students plough medical nursing, surgical nursing, geriatric nursing, maternal/baby nursing, pedicatric nursing, oncology nursing, psych nursing, etc as well as pharm, pathophys and medical treatments. They may or may not have an LTC or community health experience. So in the two years, they spend about 5-8 weeks on each type of nursing. No wonder they end up having to learn so much on the job!

There are so many jobs that require an RN license and yet don't require acute care bedside nursing skills: a school nurse, a DON in a TLC, a public health nurse, an adult day health center nurse, a Red Cross blood donation nurse, etc. Acute care experience would always help but aren't NECESSARY. Even clinical NP programs aren't all requiring acute care nursing experience.

Some will argue that nursing care is a lot more than bedside care, yet others will argue that acute, bedside is a necessary foundation. There are different KINDS of nursing, right? So I think we somehow need to better differentiate the different kinds of nurses out there and different educational standards might be one way. For example, if a nurse doesn't plan to work in acute care, perhaps then there's a different curriculum than for nurses that want to be trained and qualified to work in acute care. Just not-so-well-thought-out thoughts!!!!

[hpcat]

Originally Posted by jjjoy

There are different KINDS of nursing, right? So I think we somehow need to better differentiate the different kinds of nurses out there and different educational standards might be one way. For example, if a nurse doesn't plan to work in acute care, perhaps then there's a different curriculum than for nurses that want to be trained and qualified to work in acute care. Just not-so-well-thought-out thoughts!!!!

Doctors specialize, maybe nurses should too! I doubt a podiatrist, a gynecologist and a cardiologist get the same training. At least I hope not!